The aquaculture industry. Traffic. Here is today’s card post.
This is a debate post. Opinions in the text are at the writer’s expense.
Wanted: A more nuanced debate on aquaculture
Should we not work to find solutions for the future rather than looking for problems in the past?
The book “The new fish”, authored by Simen Sætre and Kjetil Østli, tells a story about aquaculture in Norway. The essence of the book is reproduced in Aftenposten on December 22, wearing a language costume we rarely see in the debate columns. Our response is not as poetic, but still carries a message we are passionate about.
Although “The New Fish” points out challenges in industrial food production, we can not close our eyes to the current situation: Approx. 40 percent of global climate emissions are from food production. We need 60 percent more food by 2050. Arable land is under pressure, and we can no longer supply ourselves with the stocks that are naturally found in the sea. That is why we need to grow more seafood.
Today, only 2 percent of the food is produced in the sea. The sea farmers have been involved in a unique development since the beginning of aquaculture in Norway in the 1960s. Now the way forward is being shaped by people who want to create something really big in Norway with global ripple effects.
We call for a more nuanced and constructive debate in which the aquaculture industry’s solutions to welfare and sustainability challenges are given more space. And not least, we want more and better knowledge about wild salmon in Norway and how it is affected by our industry, but also by others.
The authors’ presentation is far from what we see and experience. A new generation is ready to manage this industry further into the future. Sætre and Østli write captivatingly about the origin of the new fish. We who will write the story further, do so with a wholehearted commitment to the climate fight, nature and how the sea – and salmon – represent the solutions.
Janicke Eckhoff, student and podcast host at Hekta at Havbruk, and Kristin Langeland, communications director at Seafood Norway
We can not wait for the Fossum diagonal
Fred A. Mykland from the Norwegian Public Roads Administration writes about the Oslo City Council’s decision based on our citizens’ initiative on Trondheimsveien (Aftenposten 21 December). It is good that Veivesenet wants to discuss measures with Oslo Municipality. They must, because the Storting has also asked the government to take the initiative vis-à-vis Veivesenet about this.
Mykland will move the heavy transport away from Trondheimsveien before it can become a city street. We support Veivesenet’s wish for the Fossum diagonal, but it is far in the future and can not be used as a sleeping pad to do nothing now.
It is possible that full conversion to a city street can not be done without a diagonal. But we must not choose between everything or nothing. We have had an environmental speed limit of 60 km / h in the winter for years and know that this has no negative consequences. Let’s start by making this a speed limit all year round.
In the meantime, other measures can be studied, and the best of them can be implemented. This is how we move towards the goal we and Veivesenet agree on: a city street with less traffic, noise and pollution. We expect Veivesenet to be involved in this since both the Storting and Oslo City Council have made a clear order.
Torstein Winger and Trond K. Botnen, Groruddalen Miljøforum