Climate and circularity

This pillar of RoadMap 2025 is primarily focused on reducing our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To do this, we utilise science-based targets to set our ambitions for reducing emissions through energy efficiency programs and sustainable ingredient sourcing, incorporating lifecycle assessment methodologies as well as utilising new ingredients.

We also address the responsible use of natural resources, biodiversity and ecosystems in compound feed ingredients. In this section, we will discuss the dilemmas, the opportunities and the partnerships we have in place to ensure we can reach our ambitious targets.

Our targets and progress

Committed through ScienceBased Targets initiative (SBTi) to a reduction of 30% of scope 1 and 2 emissions compared with 2018 baseline

Progress

23% increase (explanation and disclosure in following pages)

Committed through ScienceBased Targets initiative (SBTi) to a reduction of 39% of scope 3 emissions compared with 2018 baseline

Progress

16% increase (explanation and disclosure in following pages)

Increase renewable energy use in our operations

Progress

54.7% of electricity is renewable, increasing from more than 40% in 2021

As early adpoters of Science Based Targets, in 2020 we committed to reduce our emissions on scopes 1, 2 and 3.

Skretting's total carbon footprint

The following tables present, for the first time, the carbon footprint numbers for our scope 1 & 2 and 3 emissions from 2018 to 2022. The tables also show the carbon footprint numbers for the two largest business units (BUs) - salmon and Latin America.

Looking at total carbon footprint first, we see that the absolute carbon footprint over all three scopes has increased over the past years. However, the specific carbon footprint per tonne of feed produced has decreased by approximately 5%. This means that efficiency has increased while, mainly due to increase in production, these gains are being outcompeted by business growth in absolute terms. This is a dilemma, because a reduction to our product footprint numbers needs to be achieved but in addition, a decoupling of growth from impact needs to be realised to bring the absolute footprint down.

Graphic of global average: Footprint per tonne of feed produced-5% 2018-2022

Graphic of BU Salmon: Footprint per tonne of feed produced-7% 2018-2022

Graphic of BU LatAm: Footprint per tonne of feed produced +4% 2018-2022

When we examine our business units with highest production and as highest contributors to our carbon footprint, we see different developments. In our salmon business, both the absolute (ktonne CO₂e) and relative carbon footprints (tonne CO₂e/tonne feed produced) have reduced significantly over all three scopes between 2018 and 2022. This is a very positive direction that we need to continue in the years to come. While part of this reduction is due to a slight reduction in volumes, it shows a significant reduction effect, for example caused by different raw material sourcing (scope 3) and increased energy efficiency (scope 1 and 2).

In Latin America, the numbers look different. Due to significant business growth in Ecuador, the feed volumes increased driving the increase to our carbon footprint numbers. The increase is mainly caused by this volume growth, given the specific carbon footprint per tonne of feed produced increased by only 4% over the same time period. This growth also causes the overall increase of the absolute carbon footprint for Skretting as a whole.

We need to actively address the dilemma outlined and find solutions to decouple growth and impact.

Despite the numbers heading in the wrong direction compared to the baseline year 2018, we see that even with significant growth between 2021 and 2022, the scope 3 carbon footprint stagnated or even slightly decreased over this past year for our business in Latin America. This shows that footprint reductions can be achieved despite increasing the production volumes.

We need to actively address the dilemma outlined and find solutions to decouple growth and impact. Analysing and learning from the improvements made in the salmon business, for example, and creating synergies within the other business units will help us doing this. We believe that improving the data, analysing it, and drawing the right conclusions based on it are crucial to reducing Skretting’s overall carbon footprint.

At the same time, awareness must continue to be raised within the company and across all business functions, which will be a clear focus in 2023. The data and transparency improvements already made in 2022 will support us on this journey.

Global scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions graphic

BU Salmon scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions graphic

1 /

Skretting’s total carbon footprint at factory gate including scope 1, 2 and 3 CO2 e from 2018 to 2022 — Skretting’s total absolute carbon footprint at factory gate including scope 1, 2 and 3 from 2018 to 2022 (ktonne CO2 e)

Skretting’s BU salmon and BU Latin America carbon footprint at factory gate including scope 1, 2 and 3 CO2 e from 2018 to 2022 — Skretting’s BU salmon and BU Latin America absolute carbon footprint at factory gate including scope 1, 2 and 3 from 2018 to 2022 (ktonne CO2 e)

Next: Scope 1, 2 & 3 emissions

Despite numerous hurdles over the past year, Skretting managed to keep a focus on energy efficiency activities and CO₂e reduction. Since 2018 our mature OpCos, like BU Salmon (Australia, Canada, Chile and Norway) and BU Southern Europe (France, Italy, Spain and Turkey), made significant reduction in CO₂ emissions and energy (both specific and absolute terms).