[ad_1]
televisionIn urun Sanomat’s review article on 8.7. To put it appropriatelyAgricultural policy reforms must set clear goals to strengthen the future of Finnish agriculture and should consider the effectiveness of subsidies.
About 70-80% of nutrient runoff to the Archipelago Sea comes from agriculture, which effectively means that unless something can be done about agricultural emissions, saving the Archipelago Sea is virtually impossible. Everything else is important, of course, but its impact is secondary.
So far, there have been countless speeches and projects, but unfortunately, very few actual and effective actions.
A very An effective and relatively simple way to prevent agricultural nutrient runoff and support industry-wide efforts to achieve carbon neutrality is to increase the use of organic fertilizers (versus artificial fertilizers) and the on-field application of raw manure. For the purposes of this article, organic fertilizers refer to fertilizer products processed from organic waste streams, such as animal manure.
Research shows that nutrient recycling in agriculture is not currently sufficient and that the biggest barriers to nutrient recycling are limited demand and underdeveloped markets: recycled fertilizers are currently only used in the organic market.
For nutrient recycling and its environmental benefits to truly become more common, ordinary farmers should also be encouraged to use more recycled fertilizers.
these years From the outset, for the first time, so-called nutrient recovery support was given to operators who recycled phosphorus from manure into more highly processed products. The logic itself was indeed good and worthy, but despite the government program’s promise of technological neutrality, the support suffered from a downright catastrophic casting error: support was only given to biogas technology, even though biogasification was not always the most sensible manure treatment technology.
Recycled fertilizers are currently used virtually only in the organic market.
In my opinion, the connection with biogas technology is odd to say the least and does not stand up to objective scrutiny. I will not speculate here on why only the biogas industry is supported, but at least based on my own understanding, it is inappropriate for the government to exclude different technologies and just set a goal – companies and technologies do compete to achieve the best end result.
Archipelago Kalervo Väänänen, the survey officer and honorary school principal, said that efforts should be made to remove 500 tons of phosphorus nets from the Archipelago Sea every year over the next few decades. This goal is ambitious, but entirely achievable.
As a rough estimate, if an average subsidy of 10 EUR/kg of phosphorus is applied, organic recycled fertilizers will also be able to compete with mineral fertilizers. The exact amount of the subsidy is naturally affected by many factors, such as the current price of mineral fertilizers. Therefore, it can be calculated that it would only cost about 5 million EUR to remove 500 tons per year. In any case, we are talking about very small amounts, considering the effectiveness.
For example, with us By investing in new recycled fertilizer plants, Fertilex Oy has the ability to significantly increase production, so we can also sell to ordinary farmers on a commercially reasonable basis, if all technologies are treated equally in the support policy. In this case, a fully achievable goal with our current capabilities is to remove up to 200 tons of phosphorus from the cycle.
Let’s summarizeat least I find it hard to find any other way to save the Archipelago Sea that is as affordable and as important in terms of effectiveness as extending nutrient recycling support to a technology-neutral way. I hope that in this case too reason will prevail and effectiveness will be at the center of the evaluation of support measures.
Henrik Lindgren
Chairman of the Board of Directors, Fertilex Oy
[ad_2]
Source link
