Denmark to impose world’s first carbon tax on farmers : Low-Carb War Zone Forum : Active Low-Carber Forums

#1 ^

Thu, Aug-22-24, 05:45

Demi

Choose Your Hard!

Posts: 27,295

Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/152/160 Female 5'10"

BF:
Progress: 110%

Location: UK

Denmark to impose world’s first carbon tax on farmers

I've only just heard of this, and I'm rather shocked!

What will this mean for the meat eaters in Denmark? And, what could it mean for the rest of us when other countries follow suit?

To me, this is nothing more than a move to push us towards a plant based diet and hyper-processed foods.

Quote:

Denmark to impose world’s first carbon tax on farmers

Copenhagen announces CO2 levy equivalent to €100 a year per cow alongside reforestation subsidies in effort to stem environmental damage

Denmark has announced a plan to impose the world’s first carbon tax on farmers and create an area of new forest the size of Dorset as it seeks to cut emissions to 30 per cent of 1990 levels by the end of the decade.

As other European governments such as Germany and France struggle to appease their agricultural lobbies, Copenhagen intends to introduce an ambitious package of reforms that will include €4.5 billion in “rewilding” subsidies and a CO₂ levy equivalent to €100 a year for each cow in the country.

“This is a historic change, because we are giving land back to nature for the first time in 200 years,” Stiig Markager, a professor of marine ecology at Aarhus University, told the public broadcaster DR. “It will cause a huge change in the landscape.”

While the relative importance of Denmark’s agricultural sector has declined to the point where it accounts for about 2 per cent of the workforce and a little over 1 per cent of GDP, the country remains one of the continent’s largest pork exporters and produces three times as much milk per capita as the European Union average.

If current trends continue, farming is forecast to make up 46 per cent of Denmark’s total CO₂ emissions by 2030.

Nitrogen pollution from fertilisers also makes a significant contribution to the ecological collapse in its coastal waters, particularly in the Baltic Sea. One Danish marine scientist recently estimated that it could take as long as 400 years for the effects to be reversed.

The “green tripartite” plan was thrashed out over five months of negotiations between representatives of the government, the private sector and conservation groups.

The involvement of the farming lobby appears to have resulted in a more consensual approach than the strained relations that environmental measures have led to in other European states.

The scheme will be phased in from 2030 if it is approved by the Danish parliament. Its centrepiece is an effective tax rate of 120 Danish krone (£13.50) for every tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent that farmers’ livestock are estimated to emit, once deductions have been factored in.

From 2035 that sum will be more than doubled to 300 krone, although it will still be significantly lower than the CO₂ prices levied on some industrial companies.

It also envisages a subsidy programme to create 618,000 acres (250,000 hectares) of forest, at least 250,000 acres (100,000 hectares) of which must be left untouched by the forestry industry. The hope is that turning intensively farmed fields into woodland will help to reduce the amount of nitrogen they leak into the sea.

Mette Frederiksen, the Danish prime minister, said she hoped the deal would provide a template for other countries. Stephanie Lose, the economy minister, described it as a wholesale “realignment” of the country’s food production.

Critics, however, argue that it will curtail much-needed investment in modernisation and food security.

https://www.thetimes.com/world/euro...rmers-bn0qcmvlp

Sponsored Links

#2 ^

Thu, Aug-22-24, 07:22

Calianna

Senior Member

Posts: 2,177

Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63

BF:
Progress: 50%

It's not just the livestock farmers and supply of animal foods that would be affected:

Quote:

Nitrogen pollution from fertilisers also makes a significant contribution to the ecological collapse in its coastal waters, particularly in the Baltic Sea. One Danish marine scientist recently estimated that it could take as long as 400 years for the effects to be reversed.

So there should be no fertilizing field crops without penalty either.

Quote:

Stephanie Lose, the economy minister, described it as a wholesale “realignment” of the country’s food production.

Critics, however, argue that it will curtail much-needed investment in modernisation and food security.

This would mean far less food of all kinds available.

Thankfully, at this point it is only a plan, a proposal:

Quote:

Denmark has announced a plan to impose the world’s first carbon tax on farmers

Quote:

Copenhagen intends to introduce an ambitious package of reforms that will include €4.5 billion in “rewilding” subsidies and a CO₂ levy equivalent to €100 a year for each cow in the country.

Quote:

The scheme will be phased in from 2030 if it is approved by the Danish parliament.

I can't imagine it will be approved exactly as proposed.

ETA: Wow, did I ever mess up the quotes! Hopefully fixed now.

#3 ^

Thu, Aug-22-24, 13:14

Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is online now

Senior Member

Posts: 19,894

Plan: atkins, carnivore 2023
Stats: 225/224/163 Female 5'8"

BF:
Progress: 2%

Location: Massachusetts

Im very disturbed by this.

Cattle are carbon sequestering. Look ay the whole picture. What does grass do? Collect carbon. Makes into leaves. Cattle eats grass. Converts to meat and releases some carbon. That carbon feeds the grass.

Over a two year cycle, what is the net carbon????

The meat has carbon. Its a carbon collector.

When will people address the real cause. Use of fossil fuels.

#4 ^

Sun, Aug-25-24, 13:05

Calianna

Senior Member

Posts: 2,177

Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63

BF:
Progress: 50%

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ms Arielle

Im very disturbed by this.

Cattle are carbon sequestering. Look ay the whole picture. What does grass do? Collect carbon. Makes into leaves. Cattle eats grass. Converts to meat and releases some carbon. That carbon feeds the grass.

Over a two year cycle, what is the net carbon????

The meat has carbon. Its a carbon collector.

When will people address the real cause. Use of fossil fuels.

I suspect the real reason they're pushing for cutting back on livestock is that it's much easier to do that than drastically cutting the use of fossil fuels.

In order to cut fossil fuel use, you'd need to have most fossil fuel dependent power plants, heating systems, and transportation switched over to renewable energy sources. It's not just the power plants - many are already hydroelectric, nuclear, wind, or solar powered, or using those methods in conjunction with renewable sources.

I don't think that forcing home owners and business owners to replace their gas, oil and coal fueled heating systems with a renewable energy source would go over well either - that's a huge expense, and many home owners would not have the resources to cover that expense. Many businesses (especially family owned businesses) would need to go into debt or raise the price of their goods to afford replacing all heating equipment with heating systems that run on renewable energy.

We have electric cars now, but I don't think forcing every driver to abandon their gas or diesel cars and buy an electric car is going to go over well either. Not everyone who drives a gas powered vehicle has the funds to buy an EV. If you're trying to eliminate use of fossil fueled vehicles, you don't want to just sell them to someone else who will use fossil fuels in them. Another option is public transportation instead of a privately owned vehicle, but in far too many areas, public transportation (which is also fossil fuel powered) is so minimal that it could take all day just to get to and from the closest grocery store, good luck getting to a doctor that's miles away from a bus route. Not to mention that if you want to effectively eliminate the reliance on fossil fuels, the power source for EV chargers will need to be from a renewable source of energy. There are vast areas that still don't have any charging stations yet, although that's improving.

Relatively speaking, passing legislation that results in reducing the amount of Animal based foods available will result in achieving a goal of less livestock a lot faster than eliminating the use of fossil fuels.

I certainly don't think it's a good idea at all to eliminate animal proteins - we need animal proteins, whether they want to admit it or not.

But for those who buy into the idea that it's methane from cows that's largely responsible for climate change, then from that perspective, it's easier to change the food source than it is to change all the things that are affected by fossil fuels.