Response to interpellation 2022/23:288 on a strategy to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns a strategy to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture. KD argues that agriculture has a primary task of securing food supply and employment 1. KD emphasizes the need for a holistic view where productivity, innovation, and climate transition work together 1 2. KD considers ruminants to be important for food production and that one cannot focus solely on their emissions 2. KD argues that ruminants have positive effects as grass cultivation binds carbon 3. S argues that agriculture risks becoming the black sheep of climate policy 4. S demands a concrete strategy and clear objectives 4 5. S argues that the Minister lacks leadership 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! Jytte Guteland has asked me what strategy I have to reduce the emissions of methane and nitrous oxide from Swedish agriculture.
I have recently answered a written question on the same theme from Jytte Guteland, and I therefore repeat parts of my answer to that.
As I pointed out there, the primary task for agriculture is to ensure a global food supply for a growing population while managing environmental challenges including climate change and loss of biodiversity. It is also crucial that agriculture provides good opportunities for the development of agricultural enterprises and employment in the food chain. The experiences from the pandemic and the negative security policy developments also clarify the importance of agriculture for a robust food chain.
As I have previously clarified, we therefore need to work from several objectives simultaneously and have a holistic view for a sustainable agriculture and food system. We need to secure productivity, contribute to the climate transition, and meet the need for more food. Furthermore, we need to work with new knowledge and innovations, for example by developing plants that are resistant to diseases, require less fertilizer, or are more resilient to drought.
The Government is working systematically to strengthen Swedish agriculture in a way that contributes to the agriculture's climate transition. This includes measures that specifically contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, such as support for the digestion of manure and support for investments that reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Klimatklivet.
Efforts within the strategic plan for the implementation of the common agricultural policy 2023-2027 are also important, such as investment support, annual environmental support, information efforts, innovation and advice, which contribute to improving the climate efficiency of agriculture, including nitrous oxide and methane emissions.
Furthermore, the government has tasked the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency to, together with among others the Swedish Board of Agriculture, develop proposals on how Sweden can achieve and contribute to reduced methane emissions in order to reach the climate goals and the commitment in the global methane pledge. This assignment shall be reported by September 29, 2023, at the latest.
As was just discussed, the government has also begun an update of the Swedish food strategy to achieve increased profitability and production in the food chain and to realize the food strategy's overall goals. As I have pointed out previously, it is my conviction that this will further strengthen the agriculture's climate efficiency and contribute to the agriculture's climate transition.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker and Minister! Now emissions from Sweden are increasing for the first time in decades. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency says in its spring report that it is uncertain whether the interim targets for 2030 will be met. The concern over where Sweden is heading in climate policy is great, not only within the country's borders among many citizens, organizations, and companies but also outside Sweden's borders.
The emissions of methane and nitrous oxide from Swedish agriculture continue to be high. According to the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, annual carbon dioxide emissions have decreased in several areas since the turn of the millennium, but for agriculture, it remains stagnant at almost 7 million tonnes. At the same time, many organizations say that the world is not doing enough to reduce emissions. The UN climate panel now says with all desirable clarity that the 1.5-degree goal is in great danger of being exceeded as early as the beginning of 2030.
One of the major problem areas is methane and nitrous oxide from Swedish agriculture. In 2005, the total ESR emissions were 43 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents, and 7 million tonnes of them came from agriculture. In 2021, that is many years later, Sweden had succeeded in reducing emissions by one-fifth, but agriculture still accounted for 7 million tonnes.
By 2030, Sweden has a commitment under the burden-sharing regulation to ensure that our emissions are 21 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents, to then reduce them even further. Is the intention here that agriculture is still to account for approximately one-third of the emissions in 2030? Is agriculture to be allowed to be the black sheep in climate policy?
In light of this, I asked the Minister for Rural Affairs what strategy he has regarding reducing emissions from agriculture, but the answer contained no concrete answers. The Minister and the government describe that the issue is being investigated by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, and that there are parts within the common agricultural policy that are to handle this. But my question was about what the Minister for Rural Affairs is doing to reduce emissions in Swedish agriculture now that we have a cuckoo in the nest in the form of Swedish agricultural policy in the climate policy.
That is why I asked if there is a strategy, objectives, will, and if the Minister is concerned. But there is no trace of concern from the Minister in this matter. The climate is to be managed, together with many other important areas. This is obviously not a matter of life and death for the Swedish government. We hear remarks that we need to work from different objectives and have a holistic view for a sustainable agriculture - but come on! That is what people have been saying for a thousand years. It is clear that we all want it to be sustainable. But where is the concrete strategy, where are the objectives, and where is the will from the Minister? And above all: Is the Minister concerned?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! A holistic perspective is required in the agricultural climate transition. We cannot isolate a single issue such as methane and nitrous oxide emissions and handle it in isolation. In the Swedish food strategy, we have a clear foundation and a holistic approach. We shall increase the total production of food while simultaneously reaching environmental goals, creating growth and employment, and contributing to sustainable development throughout the entire country.
Both in Sweden and globally, ruminants are important for food production, but also for many other values and functions. One cannot simply get stuck on the climate emissions from ruminants. Many people want to be able to eat meat from ruminants and dairy products such as cheese, and I believe that as consumers, people should be able to do so in the future as well. Swedish food production has an important role to fill, with good and sustainable food from an agriculture that is at the forefront when it comes to both competitiveness and climate transition.
We naturally need to continue developing methods to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture, but we must be aware that these are biological processes that are a prerequisite for food production. Changes in feed composition, new feed additives, and breeding work are important pieces of the puzzle to strengthen the agriculture's climate efficiency. We see, for example, interesting results from additives with algae, which appear to be able to significantly reduce methane gas from ruminants.
We cannot rest, but we need to improve productivity, provide opportunities for innovation and renewal, and continue to strengthen competence throughout the entire food chain. This is absolutely crucial for improved productivity and resource efficiency. One reason for lower climate emissions from milk production in Sweden is the high yield, which has resulted in fewer animals and less land being needed for the same production. In Sweden, we also have systematic work to improve efficiency in manure management and reduce nutrient leakage, which contributes to reduced methane emissions.
The government has begun the work of preparing a new climate policy action plan. As part of this, we have had round-table discussions with representatives for agriculture and other important parts of the business sector. It is important that the measures we implement to enable the climate transition in agriculture take into account the possibilities for conducting agricultural and food production and the perspectives of agricultural companies. It is important to me that we have agriculture and the farmers with us in the steps we need to take in the climate transition. Every entrepreneur knows their company best, and we shall take advantage of the commitment and the developmental power that Swedish farmers have.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! We receive once again a description of how the situation looks within agriculture. It is an explanation as good as any of what is happening within agriculture.
I and my party are the first to agree that there are many good initiatives among Swedish farmers and within agriculture in Sweden. There are many passionate souls and many competent entrepreneurs who make well-considered and wise investments. There is also a will for innovation when it comes to changing Swedish agriculture and a desire to take on this. We notice this when we are out on farms and meet farmers all around Sweden. We see that an enormous amount is being done, so I want to give praise to the work that is being done.
But with that said, it is extremely important that a country is governed with clarity when it comes to tackling global warming. There is also a need for objectives and a will to coordinate, help, provide conditions, and be clear about what goals Sweden has within different industries so that we can manage global warming. It is not something one takes on just because it is fun, but in the end, it is about the worn-out expression that without a planet, we have nothing to cultivate from.
Farmers around the planet have unfortunately already experienced that land that has been cultivated for generations is no longer arable due to new conditions - difficulties with drought, water shortages, or other things that change the conditions. We do not want Sweden to reach that point, even though we are already seeing problems with the climate and the conditions changing. One of the major reasons behind the price changes in the grocery stores is that many crops have had more difficult conditions in several parts of the world.
With all this said, it is important that the Minister for Rural Affairs and the government demonstrate how agriculture shall contribute to reducing global warming. It must be extremely important to feel that clarity. It is clear that there are certain emissions within agriculture that it is difficult to completely avoid. In that case, it is a matter of whether this shall be compensated and in what way. A clear plan needs to be established for which areas we will need to compensate for, within which areas in agriculture we expect a decline, what we can offer in support, what the direction is, and how we can coordinate.
What kind of conversation is taking place at the round table discussions that the Minister for Rural Affairs invites people to? It cannot just be a loose, observational approach from the government's side.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I can state that we have a triple challenge that we need to manage. At one and the same time, we need to ensure global food security for a growing population, meet the climate challenges – including climate change and loss of biodiversity – and provide the opportunity for a good standard of living for farmers and those employed throughout the entire food chain.
Meat and milk from ruminants are something that people in many parts of the world get too little of in their diet. Meat and dairy products contain a number of nutrient and protein compositions that are important for us, which are largely achieved through forage crops and natural pasture.
The natural grasslands are packed with biodiversity. Grass cultivation provides many positive effects in Sweden and is important in the entire cultivation system. It binds carbon in root systems, which is a large carbon sink. Land with year-round grazing reduces nutrient losses. It is positive for the soil structure, and it sanitizes from crop rotation diseases, which is a particular problem in intensive cultivation of legumes and protein crops.
It is important that agriculture remains competitive in its climate transition. All sustainability perspectives must hang together. It does not help the climate if we reduce the climate-efficient agricultural production in Sweden and the EU and replace it with imported food.
The Environmental Goals Secretariat and the previous government have clarified in the bill on the climate framework that there will need to be remaining emissions in the form of methane and nitrous oxide from the agricultural sector for us to be able to carry out food production in Sweden at all.
Production growth in Sweden has over the last 25 years been higher than the average for the EU's member countries, while Swedish agriculture is reducing its environmental impact as the use of energy, water, and fertilizers has become increasingly efficient. An updated food strategy with a focus on innovations and competitiveness, I see as very important for the agriculture's climate transition.
Under the chairmanship, we are leading the negotiations on a revised industrial emissions directive, where the issue of livestock farming is an important part, among other reasons because it contributes to methane emissions, which are to be limited. In March, we achieved a general direction that will contribute to more equal production conditions in livestock farming within the EU, which is important.
Biogas production leads to reduced emissions, primarily of methane but also of nitrous oxide from both storage and spreading of manure, while the nitrogen utilization rate increases. The interest in building new biogas plants for the digestion of manure is at a record high. This positive development is unfortunately currently facing a major setback as the EU tribunal has overturned Sweden's tax reduction for biogas, but we are working hard to ensure that this is changed.
I believe that many farmers watching this debate are taking to heart what you say, Jytte Guteland, when agriculture is described as the black sheep and a cuckoo. I believe that many react quite strongly to this, and so do I. Swedish agriculture is at the forefront. We must safeguard it, and we must reduce the import of inferior food products to Sweden. Farmers are generally very concerned with maintaining a high level of circularity and safeguarding their fields and the soil, because that is what they live off.
Jytte Guteland (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister must have misunderstood. It was not the farmers who were the odd one out or the black sheep, but they are more likely to be found in the Minister's corridors.
Out on the farms, there are many with strong innovative power and a will to take on the climate challenge, but it is difficult to do this when one does not know which objectives apply. It is difficult for an individual farmer to know what their own conditions are and what opportunities exist if the environment they operate in is unclear, and I mean that is what the minister's leadership entails.
The Minister looks out over the agricultural policy and is satisfied with what is being presented, but he forgets that the whole does not deliver and that the difficulty right now is that precisely the agricultural sector is stuck with its emissions while other industries are reducing theirs.
There are areas within agricultural policy, for example methane emissions, that may need to be compensated for, but it is important that we know what the conditions are and what the objectives are. Is something to be reduced? How much is intended to be compensated for? What is the equation in agricultural policy?
If it continues as it is doing right now, agriculture risks accounting for a third of the emissions in 2030 and will probably continue in that direction, and then it does not contribute at all to the distribution of responsibility that Sweden is to stand for. In the common agricultural policy at the EU level, one is also clear about wanting to see a reduction of emissions from agriculture.
The Minister speaks a lot about the importance of a global food supply. I believe that the global food supply depends largely on whether we manage global warming.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I thank you for this debate and for the member's commitment to these issues.
Even though ruminants emit methane, primarily through their burps when the grass has been processed in their stomachs, they have many positive effects - not only through the products we get from them, such as food, but above all through what they de facto eat: grass. Grass cultivation binds carbon in the root system, and when the ground is covered with vegetation year-round, the risk of nutrient leakage is also reduced, as I mentioned in my previous post. There are many positive effects of cultivating grass, but we will only do that if we have cows.
One can be a bit concerned about how the debate has developed recently, as cows have been criticized for pretty much everything. I would like to quote the member's former party leader Göran Persson, who stated that it is not the cows' fault that we have a climate crisis. Cows were here long before cars, airplanes, and other things. That is not where the big problem lies. They contribute food, they contribute nutrients, and they are part of what we can grow here in the country. They are part of our food culture and tradition.
When it comes to reducing methane and nitrous oxide from agriculture, there are no simple solutions. For me and the government, it is obvious that we need to work towards several objectives simultaneously. Globally, we need to produce more food with fewer resources. We need to increase the climate efficiency of agricultural products, but we also need to meet the need for more food.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.