The controversial question of how Sweden should be able to sequester more carbon dioxide in forests and land and thus live up to the EU’s climate goals in the LULUCF sector is currently being dealt with by the Environment Committee. On behalf of the government, the members – who come from all parties in the Riksdag – must come up with proposals on how to achieve the goal.
SVT has seen a draft with proposals for measures to increase carbon storage. It concerns, among other things:
That’s how high the compensation will be
The compensation for those who wait to harvest is proposed to be SEK 400 per ton of stored carbon dioxide. According to the secretariat’s calculations, for an average Swedish forest, this would mean approximately SEK 2,700 per hectare and year, with a variation depending on where in the country the forest is located.
Skogsägarföreningen Södra tells SVT that they see a risk that it will only be forest owners who had intended to let the forest stand anyway who will conclude an agreement with the Forestry Agency.
They also believe that it is not the responsibility of private forest owners to ensure that Sweden complies with LULUCF.
– It is Sweden as a nation that has committed to this and then solutions must be found that do not burden the forest owners, says Jessica Nordin, sustainability manager at Södra.
The parties disagree until the end
On Wednesday, one of the Environmental Goals Committee’s last meetings was held, and the disagreement about what Sweden should do to reach LULUCF remains strong, according to several members.
– The local acceptance and Sweden’s competitiveness are decisive. It is about many small forest farmers and supporting industries that risk ending up in the bullet hole. I will not accept bad proposals on uncertain grounds, says Carl-Wiktor Svensson, member of the Christian Democrats.
The purpose of the Environmental Goals Committee is for all parties to agree on long-term political solutions in the climate and environmental area. But it is still unclear how many of the parties will stand behind the proposals that have been developed.
– Some parties want nothing, so there is a big risk of watered-down compromises, but we are discussing. In the Green Party, we try to push on and improve as much as we can, says member Maria Gardfjell (MP).