Forest Lands: Renewable electricity should not come at the expense of other production

Response to Discussion Article The LRF should monitor the energy issue strategically Written by Ulf Gobaker, Project Manager at Energy.

When you write a column, you want to provoke thought, and maybe even a little debate. So I’m happy with Ulf Jubaker’s thinking. Ulf responds that the LRF, rather than monitoring, should view the entire energy issue as a strategic issue. We are in complete agreement there.

However, I think that from a strategic perspective, the question can be a little more difficult for LRF than for other business organizations, which can mainly focus on the importance of providing affordable and stable electricity supply, and the potential for change under long-term conditions.

For LRF members, there is also an opportunity for greater energy production than is available to some other entrepreneurs. I mean that in the enthusiasm to contribute to the provision of more renewable electricity to the community, and to create conditions for members who want to produce energy, the LRF must never forget that this must not happen at the expense of profitability and competitiveness in the production of energy raw materials. Food and purposes other than energy. It must also not be done in a way that creates the kind of broad scope that transfers power over issues from LRF members. Poor profitability in food production can, and should not, be offset by profitable energy production.
It is of utmost strategic importance that these aspects are taken into account and weighed when the LRF addresses the energy issue. I think we completely agree that the energy issue contains more opportunities than problems for LRF members as a group.

Peter Boring
Farmer, scanning.