This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Meeting between Alina-Stefania Ujupan and Landbrug & Fødevarer'.



Ref. Ares(2022)7954903 - 17/11/2022
From:
To:
Subject:
RE: Possible meeting with the Danish Agriculture and Food Council on 2 December
Date:
mardi 30 novembre 2021 06:30:50
Dear Ms.
Thank you for coming back with this opportunity. We are able to meet at 16.00 and will prefer virtual mode.
Do you want me to invite via Teams ?
The participants from our side will be:
Mr. 
Mr. 
Ms.
With kind regards
From: 
 < Sent: 29 November 2021 18:11
To:
@agridan.be>
Cc:
@agridan.be>
Subject: RE: Possible meeting with the Danish Agriculture and Food Council on 2 December
Dear Mr 
On behalf of Mrs Alina Ujupan, I would like to thank you for your message and to transmit her availability for a meeting on December 2nd on the following possible slots: 11:00-11:30 or 16:00-16:30
Please communicate your preference for a suitable hour and also for a video platform you would like to use (due to the sanitary situation, we have a recommendation to privilege virtual meetings therefore Mrs Ujupan would like to propose you this format) .
For transparency purposes, this meeting will be published in the Transparency Register of the European Commission. Please make sure your organisation is duly registered.
The Cabinet does not intend to communicate actively on the content of this meeting. However, in line with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, minutes can be made accessible to the public upon request (without any disclosure of protected interests).
Looking forward to hearing from you.
With kind regards,
European Commission
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
ec.europa.eu
From:
@agridan.be> 
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 10:07 AM
To: UJUPAN Alina-Stefania (CAB-VESTAGER) <
@ec.europa.eu>
Cc:
 (CAB-VESTAGER) <
@ec.europa.eu>;
@agridan.be>
Subject: Possible meeting with the Danish Agriculture and Food Council on 2 December
Dear Ms. Ujupan,
 has suggested I contact you ahead of the upcoming communication on carbon farming, which we understand is foreseen to be published on 15 December.
The issue of carbon farming has been a key priority for the Danish Agriculture and Food Council, which represents Danish farmers and some of the EU’s major cooperatives in the dairy, livestock and feed sectors, such as Arla Foods, Danish Crown, Danish Agro and DLG.
Hence we have engaged with Commission colleagues on this issue for a number of years, contributing with our insights and advise on consultations on the Climate Law, LULUCF, ESR and ETS in particular.
We are happy to see that the ‘new business models’ for carbon farming – wording that was first introduced in the Climate Law – seems to be a key element in the upcoming Commission communication on carbon farming. However, we regret that in a recent last week leak of this upcoming proposal, the
Commission’s primary support focus seems to be incentive and subsidy based – CAP, LIFE and Horizon funds – rather than delivering on the European Parliament’s call (majority of EPP, S&D and Renew Europe) for the Commission to explore the possibilities for a market based approach (future linkage with ETS) to
this new business model.
At the same time, the current draft communication, on its page 5, seems to include a very narrow definition of carbon farming practices that does not include important mitigation elements in livestock production such as feed additives and nitrification inhibitors. We also see that the Commission seems to want to
differentiate between nature based carbon removals and technology based carbon removals, which might lead to a shorter path for the latter towards a possible future inclusion in an ETS removals market, and also open up avenues for support for such technologies from the ETS revenue funded innovation fund.
In the Danish Agriculture and Food Council we have advocated for a common, not separate, approach to nature based and technology based removals, respectively.
However, if the Commission chooses to distinguish between nature based and technology based removals, it is vital that removals options that are both nature and technology based be included in the latter technology category.
In Denmark, the government and private businesses have allocated very significant financial resources towards investments in pyrolysis technology aimed at producing biochar and biofuels from straw residues, powered by renewable electricity. This will create a very stable new removals sink – a supply chain for the
production of negative emissions.
Hence, we hope Executive Vice President Vestager and you will want and be able to support us on this point, slightly widening the definition scope of carbon farming practices and critically including biochar amongst the technologies mentioned.
Please find below a suggestion for possible wordings that could amend the draft Communication in this respect.
On Thursday 2 December, 
 and our
will be in Brussels.
Might it be possible to arrange for a meeting with you at a time of your best convenience between 11h in the morning and 16h in the afternoon on that day?
Thank you in advance for your understanding.
Kind regards,
Danish Agriculture and Food Council, Brussels
1.  Carbon farming practices (page 5 of draft Communication)
Text proposed by the Commission
Amendment
The list of carbon farming practices shall be
amended as follows:
- Farm practices such as feed additives, use of nitrification
inhibitors to reduce the carbon footprint on farm level;
Justification
The list of carbon farming practices on page 5 should be expanded. The Commission is only focusing on management of land and extensive farm practices as examples of carbon farming practices. This a very narrow interpretation of the carbon farming concept. Therefore, “on farm practices” such as feed
additives, nitrification inhibitors etc. included in the list.
2.  3.2 - Creating an internal market for capture, use, and storage of CO2 (page 14 of draft Communication
Text proposed by the Commission
Amendment
The permanent storage of CO2 in geological formations is an option to mitigate industrial
The permanent storage of CO2 in geological
emissions and to remove carbon from the atmosphere when the CO2 is captured directly from
formations is an option to mitigate industrial
the atmosphere – Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) – or from the combustion
emissions and to remove carbon from the
or fermentation of biogenic carbon, also called Bio-Energy Carbon Capture and Storage
atmosphere when the CO2 is captured directly
(BECCS). Depleted oil and gas reservoirs and saline aquifers have the potential to store
from
billion tonnes of CO2 in offshore sites, the binding of CO2 to basalt rocks being another
the atmosphere – Direct Air Carbon Capture and
option potentially deployable at large scale. The Directive on the geological storage of CO2,
Storage (DACCS) – or from the combustion
the so called CCS Directive, establishes a legal framework for the environmentally safe
or fermentation of biogenic carbon, also called
geological storage of CO2 by covering all CO2 storage in geological formations in the
Bio-Energy Carbon Capture and Storage
European Economic Area, and the entire lifetime of storage sites, while the EU ETS
(BECCS). Depleted oil and gas reservoirs and saline
Directive already gives a price incentive for geological storage of fossil CO224 to take place.
aquifers have the potential to store
billion tonnes of CO2 in offshore sites, the binding
of CO2 to basalt rocks being another
option potentially deployable at large scale. Energy
production and storage in biochar can also provide
an option to store CO2 and should be deployed on
a large scale. The Directive on the geological
storage of CO2,
the so called CCS Directive, establishes a legal
framework for the environmentally safe
geological storage of CO2 by covering all CO2
storage in geological formations in the
European Economic Area, and the entire lifetime
of storage sites, while the EU ETS
Directive already gives a price incentive for
geological storage of fossil CO224 to take place.
Justification
Pyrolysis and biochar should be included in the development and deployment of Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS). Some of the carbon in biomasses can through pyrolysis be converted into biochar, which can then be stored by land application, thereby making it a negative emissions technology. The process is
done by converting residual straws and residual fibers from biogas in a pyrolysis process. The residual products turn into so-called biochar, which can be dispersed on land for the benefit of the climate and the environment. Furthermore, gas and bio-oil is produced out of the pyrolytic process. There is also a potential to
produce PtX-energy for e.g., aviation by supplementing hydrogen from green offshore wind power to the process.