Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Policy and solutions => Topic started by: kassy on November 13, 2019, 03:41:41 PM

Title: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 13, 2019, 03:41:41 PM
I think it will be interesting to report on the current situation in the Netherlands.

For a long time we were not really doing to much to help the climate. Politicians preferred paper solutions to real hard caps because well that is easier for them. Then someone fought the specific law and the law in general won.

1 Nitrogen policy

A while ago, around 2015 IIRC they had to craft a new law to protect nature from nitrogen pollution. This was required because of a European Union law that had to be translated into national law.

Our genius politicians wrote a law were current emissions were compensated by fictitious future gains in controlling the pollution. This would not work as the EU law states that you actually have to do something and that is not the same as kicking the can down the road. We have some institute that advises about laws and they said then that the law was not good enough but it still got voted into an official law.

A lawsuit followed and off course the dutch government lost.

The courts decision meant that most nitrogen permits for building were invalid.
This meant that all kind of building projects can not start so this costs tons of money.

And the real solution is not easy.

They appointed a commission with Remkes as chairman. He is VVD (right liberals, dominant party now) and a former interior minister.

Some of the proposed solutions they came up with:
1) Big reduction in cattle breeding. We are very big in this. Worldwide number 2 exporter for some products which is ridiculous since we are so small. Or if you look at it in a different way that means we are hugely succesfull and efficient at it. It also makes us a lot of money.

Meausures could include buy outs of the less efficient (old) farms.

The farmers felt threatened so they went to the Hague to protest on the Malieveld (veld is field and malie is an old game, it is basically croquet-field and now the place were big protests go).

The CDA our christian centrist party which is also the traditional farmers party and the one with the minister of agriculture hated this off course.

2) A reduction of the speed limit. It is (or was but we get to that next post) 130 km/h for no good reason and reducing it is a sore point for the VVD. They got to raise the speedlimit as a reward for an election victory while it only costs money for new signs and killed some more people and contributed to more congestion overall. Lowering it is seen as a defeat. They should just frame it as finally doing something sensible.

Some weeks ago the construction workers also collected at the Malieveld for a demonstration.  And since not building costs a lot of money and leads to big problems later since much of the projects are for sorely needed housing something needed to be done. And they did lower the speed but more about that in the next post.

*

Just lowering the speed limit is probably not enough so we will have to do something with farming too.

But there are many other developments at the same time.

2

The court case of the kids vs the dutch government
is in the appeal stage. Dutch government lost the first round. They are appealing because they think they need some freedom to solve issues. You can read above how well that goes so it would be nice if they lose the appeal too.

Currently i have no idea about the timeline off that.

3

Closing the gas fields.


After years of extraction the earthquake damage in Groningen lead to the early closure of the big gas fields. This means we will have to compensate (NAM is already scouting small fields) and we will have to change much of our infrastructure. Basically almost everyone is on the gas net and we use it for heating and cooking.

We will have to build the new houses differently and we have to adapt many of the old ones.

There will be test areas and one of them should be near me.

4 Something with PFAS 

This is sort of the same problem as the nitrogen thing with a EU law an a local norm iirc but i will get back to that.

5) Adapting the grid

The grid is built to where the power was needed historically which means that it is not strong enough in the periphal regions to tie up all solar projects that people want to develop.

*

I have quite a collection of newspaper articles and reactions by the readers so i will have to sort them by time and by issue.

All kinds of interesting things pop up. For example at the german side of the border they get a subsidy to convert from coal to gas while on the dutch side we are removing the gas.

It will be interesting to see how the debate goes in this stamp of a country.
Plenty of action (hopefully helpful) up ahead.


 
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 13, 2019, 04:01:56 PM
Speeds limits are set to be reduced by almost 20mph on Dutch roads in an attempt to cut emissions, the Netherlands’ government has said.

From 2020 the current the current top speed of 81mph (130kph) will be reduced to to 62mph (100kph) between 6am and 7pm.

Overnight however, the old limit will remain in place.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/netherlands-national-speed-climate-change-crisis-pollution-a9201051.html

So this is a pill to swallow for the VVD. It is not nearly enough so there will also be measures to reduce cattle farming. Taking out the most inefficient ones should be a no brainer. Then again even more might be needed.

*

Long ago the maximum speed was 100 km/h on highways then it became 120 in the late eighties. In 2012 that became 130.

If you would drive from north groningen into the boot of Limburg that would be 260 km maybe. And not all roads are with that speed limit i think. The whole 120 to 130 change never made sense.

You spend money on new signs. People can drive a bit faster which ultimately leads to more deaths by worse accidents and more pollution for those living next to the road.

All driving 100 km/h should solve a bit of our congestion problem because it reduces the speed difference quite a lot.

It is a pity that they did not make the limit absolute but the VVD needs a bit of face saving here.
Not a total rout, just a practical one.

EDIT

"De ideale snelheid is 95 kilometer per uur. Dan is de wegbenutting optimaal. Als je langzamer gaat rijden, gebruik je de wegcapaciteit niet optimaal. Als je sneller rijdt, zorgt het voor meer opstoppingen, omdat je automatisch meer afstand neemt als je harder gaat en er dus minder auto's op de weg passen."

The ideal speed is 95 km/h. At that point the use of the road is optimal. If you are slower you are missing capacity, if you are quicker there are more congestions due to a bigger distance between cars so less fit on the road.

https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/5998958/verkeerskundigen-sneller-thuis-bij-verlaging-maximumsnelheid.html
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: El Cid on November 13, 2019, 05:45:59 PM
I think you should rename this thread to "Policy and solutions FOR the Netherlands", because by 2100 there will be no Netherlands. One third of your country is already under the sea level. If I were you I started packing. Seriously, real estate values by 2050 in one half of your country (the low part) will collapse, and the other half will go up (as everyone is going to move there)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: NeilT on November 13, 2019, 07:15:49 PM
The Dutch are very good at water engineering.  They recognised the need to barricade off inland and Channel the water through to the sea more than 2 decades ago.

Also the Netherlands has a flourishing market in floating houses. I worked in an ABN datacentre, which was already floating, back in 2000.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: El Cid on November 13, 2019, 08:49:39 PM
Also the Netherlands has a flourishing market in floating houses. I worked in an ABN datacentre, which was already floating, back in 2000.

All right then, problem solved
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 13, 2019, 09:01:51 PM
Netherlands is a top supporter of electric vehicles, on par with Norway.  Recently the Tesla Model 3 became the best-selling passenger car of any type in the country, beating the gas-powered VW Polo. 

I find the Danish government has said it wants to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 and hybrid vehicles from 2035, but Amsterdam city has taken even more aggressive action:

Quote
Cars and motorbikes running on petrol or diesel will be banned from driving in Amsterdam from 2030. …
From next year, diesel cars that are 15 years or older will be banned from going within the A10 ring road around the Dutch capital.

Public buses and coaches that emit exhaust fumes will no longer enter the city centre from 2022. By 2025, the ban will be extended to pleasure crafts on its waters, mopeds and light mopeds.  All traffic within the built-up area must be emission-free by 2030 under the Clean Air Action plan.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/03/amsterdam-ban-petrol-diesel-cars-bikes-2030

September: One Fifth Of Car Sales In The Netherlands Were Plug-Ins
https://insideevs.com/news/375048/september-one-fifth-car-sales-netherlands-plugins/

Tesla Model 3 Is Now #1 Selling Car In The Netherlands
https://teslamotorsclub.com/blog/2019/09/18/tesla-model-3-top-selling-car-netherlands-2/
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: be cause on November 14, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
One hell of a lot of emissions needed to go 'emission free' .. b.c.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on November 14, 2019, 04:41:39 PM
Thank you for that view b.c. :)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 15, 2019, 03:25:25 PM
In this case it is mostly about the journey being interesting.

A little background on CO2 from traffic. This should improve next year with the lower speeds and better traffic flow that should provide.

Quote
Het wegverkeer was in 2018 verantwoordelijk voor 17 procent van de totale hoeveelheid kooldioxide (CO2) die in Nederland werd uitgestoten, blijkt uit cijfers van het Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (CBS).

De totale CO2-uitstoot van het wegverkeer in 2018 lag ruim 2 procent hoger dan een jaar eerder. Vergeleken met 1990 is de uitstoot met ruim 28 procent toegenomen.

Personenauto's namen 62 procent van de CO2-uitstoot van het wegverkeer voor hun rekening. Zware vrachtvoertuigen en bussen waren verantwoordelijk voor 20 procent.

https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6011057/wegverkeer-verantwoordelijk-voor-17-procent-van-co2-uitstoot-in-2018.html

Dutch traffic in 2018 was responsible for 17% of dutch CO2 emissions.
This was 2% up from 2017 and 28% up compared to 1990.

Breakdown to car type:
62% personal cars
20% heavy trucks and buses.

I guess the other 18% are the small vans and cabs.

The article also mentions the kids vs gov case.

Quote
Voor het einde van volgend jaar wordt 23 procent minder broeikasgassen - waarvan CO2 het belangrijkste gas is - uitgestoten ten opzichte van ijkjaar 1990. Om aan de uitspraak van de Urgenda-zaak te voldoen, moet de afname minstens 25 procent zijn.

Duurzaamheidsorganisatie Urgenda dwong de overheid in 2015 via een rechtszaak zich te houden aan het zelfopgelegde klimaatdoel om in 2020 minimaal een kwart minder CO2 uit te stoten ten opzichte van 1990. Dit is een afspraak uit het in 2013 gesloten Energieakkoord.

So in 2013 the dutch government committed to emit 25% less greenhouse gasses in 2020 then in 1990. Then failed to actually do that and got taken to court.

The predicted value for the end of next year is 23%.

They should buy out a whole lot of cattle farmers quickly. The most inefficient ones in general and anything that is not up to standards near the nature areas because distance seems important there. This is due to the model they use (will get back to that in a later post). Depending on the pattern you might be able to salvage some areas by closing enough nearby sources.

If you then plan forwards and extend the nature areas there you keep on capturing carbon.

Probably won´t be our governments solution but we will see.

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Neven on November 18, 2019, 01:07:38 PM
Thanks for this topic. I left the Netherlands with my family almost 12 years ago, climate change and the way it is handled/talked about being one of the reasons. I stopped reading Dutch news a while back as well, so it's nice to have an overview of the current situation.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 20, 2019, 03:16:44 PM
Your welcome.

The nice thing about the current situation is that the government has finally been forced to act.
Much of the debate is ofc still cringe-worthy.

A VVD member suggested to cut down the number of nature reserves which is maybe not possible but that depends on EU law which i don´t know the specifics of. And some guy wrote in a letter to the newspaper that ´Since the judges now tell the government what to do the separation of powers (trias politica) has clearly failed.´

*

In Drenthe, Groningen en Zuid-Holland gaan vijftig waterstofbussen rijden in het openbaar vervoer.

...

Op een volle tank kan een bus 400 kilometer afleggen.

"Nu zijn er nog weinig tankstations voor waterstof, maar dat is natuurlijk een kip-eiverhaal. Deze vijftig bussen gaan straks allemaal tanken. Dat kan net het zetje in de rug zijn dat rijden op waterstof nodig heeft", aldus de minister.

Op dit moment rijden in Nederland acht bussen op waterstof. In totaal zijn er zo'n vijfhonderd bussen die rondrijden in Nederland zonder emissies uit te stoten.

De overheid heeft als doelstelling dat na 2025 elke nieuwe bus emissievrij gaat rijden en vanaf 2030 moeten alle bussen in het openbaar vervoer emissievrij rijden.

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6012199/kabinet-en-provincies-investeren-in-vijftig-waterstofbussen-voor-ov.html

50 hydrogen powered buses will be deployed in Drenthe, Groningen and Zuid-Holland

Map here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinces_of_the_Netherlands

The bus runs 400 km on a full tank.
There are very few hydrogen stations and they hope this will help build up the network.

Currently we have
8 hydrogen buses
about 500 emission free buses , so electric ones.

Current targets:
2025 every new bus needs to be emission free
2030 whole fleet should be emission free

Costs are 22,5 million euros but i have no idea what the worth of the same contract for old dirty buses would be. No mentions of specific investments in the hydrogen stations but it would be logical to put them at the bus stations (the depot one).
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 20, 2019, 03:28:08 PM
A request for our german members.

Recently there was a vote on the maximum speed on german roads and that got voted down.
What was the background of this vote and why did the vote go the way it went?

Also.

We are changing from gas to electric while currently the area next to the dutch border is transitioning to gas. Is nat gas just a (temporary) solution for the areas using coal? What is your national energy transition policy?

Thanks in advance!
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: GrauerMausling on November 21, 2019, 07:12:20 AM
A request for our german members.

Recently there was a vote on the maximum speed on german roads and that got voted down.
What was the background of this vote and why did the vote go the way it went?

Also.

We are changing from gas to electric while currently the area next to the dutch border is transitioning to gas. Is nat gas just a (temporary) solution for the areas using coal? What is your national energy transition policy?

Thanks in advance!

For the speed limit, that was a bill introduced by the Green Party and was voted down by the 'Große Koalition' that is the three parties forming the government (CDU/CSU and SPD) plus the FDP (liberal democrats) and of course the AFD, the right wing (or extremist) party which is denying climate change anyway.
The speed limit in Germany is something like guns in the US. I have got the impression that although probably a majority would support a speed limit - there a some polls indicating this - that the opponents are far more outspoken (not sure it this is the correct term). They dominate the public discussions and forums.
Our minister for transport commented on one study which promoted a speed limit, that a speed limit is against 'common sense'.....

For the transition to renewables, I don't see any plan at all, installation of new windmills is dropping like a stone, I think it is -80 % this year compared to the best years, new legislation is making it even harder to find a new place for a windmill as it has to have a minimum distance of 1000 m to the next 'community' which is a group of at least 5 houses. For off-shore wind the building of new power lines is still slow and private PV is still a disaster as it involves a lot of tax issues - usually you have to become an entrepreneur to install PV and feed the surplus electricity into the grid.

So, I in my opinion the current policies in Germany are really, really bad!

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on November 21, 2019, 07:36:52 AM
^^
Great post - and "outspoken" is precisely the correct term. :)
Terry
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: El Cid on November 21, 2019, 08:00:40 AM


...... Is nat gas just a (temporary) solution for the areas using coal?

It never is, it never can be. Building the necessary infrastructure is a huge investment which is not planned for just a few yeasr and once it is built, people will use gas (it is very cheap and convenient) for decades! electricity is much more expensive for heating. once you have gas you are stuck with it
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: RikW on November 21, 2019, 10:44:54 AM
Well, in the Netherlands we are going off-grid with gas.

If I remember correctly since a couple of years it isn't obligated anymore when building a new houses to connect it to the gas-grid and in 2050 the gas-grid should be gone and everything should be done electric. So the gas network will be written off in 30 years.

Though it's weird our neighbours (germany f.e.) are transition to gas - which is better than what they currently have, but still weird.

We have too much people for the area of land we have/ are too efficient in using things/ are too rich compared to other countries thus our emissions are relative high, even though we are also relative clean. And the focus is too much on nations and not on continents/globally.

When we close steel factories in IJmuiden and the coal-power-plants, our emissions drop significant, but global emissions will probably be rise, because we need to buy our energy elsewhere and there still is demand for steel.

So I want us to give the good example and take action, but it shouldn't make the global situation worse. So which is the lesser evil to choose from? Do nothing or do something, but increase global emissions...
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 21, 2019, 05:51:16 PM
Thanks GrauerMausling...it´s only slightly worse then i thought...  ;)

And RikW yes it is very complicated so it is interesting to see what solutions will come up.

It would be great if the EU actually made up some really sensible policies but so far they have failed. Allowing burning biomass to be counted as green fuel is wrong.
A case could be made for a select group of biomass to be used, lets say the part of municipal green maintenance waste that you can´t compost or use otherwise but that should be a small stream.

Of course this is a ploy to use the old plants.
It serves someones interest but not that of the planet or the interest of the people in the Netherlands. Sadly our politicians are still stuck in the past.

Wiebes snapt zorgen over biomassa, maar vindt energiebron verdedigbaar

...

Het komende jaar steekt het kabinet in totaal 11,4 miljard euro aan subsidie in biomassacentrales die belangrijk zijn voor het bereiken van de klimaatdoelen. Maar er bestaan veel vragen over de mate van duurzaamheid en de bijkomende luchtvervuiling.

"Hoe voorkomen we dat we biomassacentrales subsidiëren die niet duurzaam zijn?", vroeg D66-Kamerlid Matthijs Sienot aan Wiebes. Nu kunnen namelijk biomassacentrales zonder vergunningen en normen worden gebouwd voor de verwarming van bijvoorbeeld zwembaden of voor kleine wijken van zo'n twaalfduizend huizen.

...

Die centrales stoten CO2, stikstof en fijnstof uit. Dus met die duurzaamheid valt het wel mee, vindt D66.

...

Volgens Wiebes is er onder wetenschappers consensus dat biomassa nodig is om de klimaatdoelen te halen.

...

Onlangs kondigde Wiebes aan dat de subsidie voor de kleinere biomassaketels en pelletkachels vanaf volgend jaar wordt beëindigd. Het idee was om zo minder broeikasgassen uit te stoten, maar de luchtkwaliteit lijdt er te veel onder.

Overigens wees Wiebes er in het debat nog op dat barbecues en open haarden de grootste luchtvervuilers zijn. "Maar daar durft niemand zijn handen politiek aan te branden."

https://www.nu.nl/politiek/6012416/wiebes-snapt-zorgen-over-biomassa-maar-vindt-energiebron-verdedigbaar.html

I guess they had a debate.

We are about to invest 11,4 billion euros into subsidies for biomass while it causes particulate pollution and does not help the co2 problem either.

At the moments biomass burning plants can be build without permits or specific norms for heating swimming pools or up to 12000 houses.

Wiebes says there is a concensus among scientists that biomass burning is needed to hit the climate targets. (Bet there is some selective shopping there, you could try some ambition & empathy with the future generations, K ).

Next year the subsidy for small biomass kettles and pellet heaters will be removed. The idea of the subsidy was to decrease greenhouse gas emissions but it increased particulate matter pollution too much.

BBQs and open hearth are the biggest PM polluters but no one wants to make laws for those because it is political suicide.

...so that´s not to hopeful. Lets hope we get some severe restrictions on the type of biomass but i am not counting on that because there is so much they need to do and as ever they prefer the easy way out.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on November 22, 2019, 09:36:03 AM
Thank you Kassy and RikW on giving your perspective on the Dutch policies regarding AGW.
I now live in live in California for the past 28 years, but I was born an raised in the Netherlands, and my heart will always be in the low lands.

I remember Holland being a pragmatic nation, no-nonsense, two feet on the ground, finding innovative solutions for real problems, in many ways similar to the line of thinking here in California.

But when RikW writes this here, I start to have some doubts :

Well, in the Netherlands we are going off-grid with gas.

If I remember correctly since a couple of years it isn't obligated anymore when building a new houses to connect it to the gas-grid and in 2050 the gas-grid should be gone and everything should be done electric. So the gas network will be written off in 30 years.

Heating homes with electricity ?
This does not seem smart at all, especially since most electricity in the Netherlands is still generated from ... wait for it ... natural gas !

So who came up with this idea to eliminate the "gas-grid" in the Netherlands ?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on November 22, 2019, 09:56:45 AM
FWIW
Southern California and Las Vegas shut down fireplaces decades ago because of the particulate problems, (and an inversion layer) I don't recall much political blowback.


Good luck with the biomass, so many seem blinded to the emissions & it's the same with wood/pellets.
Terry
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Neven on November 23, 2019, 12:00:50 AM
IMO, if a house is well-insulated, it's fine to use electricity or biomass to heat it.

And the good thing about a gas grid, is that you can use it to store energy in it. There was talk about doing this in Germany, but I don't know if it's still a thing.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 23, 2019, 11:13:47 AM
So who came up with this idea to eliminate the "gas-grid" in the Netherlands ?

We are winding down the exploitation of some big gas fields sooner then planned because they cause earthquakes and damage to houses in the Groningen area. From 2018 on we import more gas then we export.

As you can see there is quite a lot of bad energy sources that will need to be replaced:
https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2019/16/energieverbruik-gedaald-in-2018

It is not going to be easy but we cannot turn back.

It will be interesting to see what we will do with the old gas grid. We will use the places where the grid needs to be serviced due to age as areas to change to the future style housing first. One such area is part of Overvecht in Utrecht but that is only a proposal now, albeit a good one. It is one of the few test areas in big cties and thus a good learning experience.

Parts of the gas grid might be repurposed possibly for hydrogen but i think those plans are very much in their infancy. 
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: blumenkraft on November 23, 2019, 01:09:17 PM
outspoken (not sure it this is the correct term).

Well, not a native speaker myself either but wouldn't that imply some kind of substance to the arguments?

I would replace 'outspoken' with 'lound'.

Ansonsten i agree. :)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: pietkuip on November 23, 2019, 02:08:34 PM
The Netherlands should work on adaptation.

Sea level rise is probably the most pressing problem. There is growing awareness: the weekly Vrij Nederland had an article earlier this year, also in English (https://www.vn.nl/rising-sea-levels-netherlands/), with interesting maps for the year 2300.

One proposal there is to teach more German in school.

But the Dutch still seem to be underestimating the problem. What if there is no power for the pumps? What if Antarctic ice cliffs start to collapse?

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on November 23, 2019, 05:37:29 PM
But the Dutch still seem to be underestimating the problem.

That is an understatement ;).

Not so long ago we still had leadership, ideals and long term views such as "Deltawerken".
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: What is the problem on November 23, 2019, 06:34:31 PM
Sea level rise in the Netherlands is constant in the last 128 years (https://www.clo.nl/indicatoren/nl0229-zeespiegelstand-nederland-en-mondiaal). NO acceleration. Sea level rise was 1.9 mm per year of which 0.2 mm subsidence.
These measurements are considered very accurate and in my opinion better then general worldwide measurements / estimates. Expectation of a 10 mm rise or more per year until the end of the century is highly speculative and not based on any data.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on November 24, 2019, 07:36:41 AM
So who came up with this idea to eliminate the "gas-grid" in the Netherlands ?

We are winding down the exploitation of some big gas fields sooner then planned because they cause earthquakes and damage to houses in the Groningen area. From 2018 on we import more gas then we export.

As you can see there is quite a lot of bad energy sources that will need to be replaced:
https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2019/16/energieverbruik-gedaald-in-2018

Exactly.

Natural gas is ideal (near 100% efficient) for heating so that would be the LAST thing to replace. Not the first !

I mean, if you want to reduce carbon emissions, then you should start replacing the least efficient, heavy stuff (coal for electricity generation) first, and the medium stuff (oil for transportation, natural gas for electricity) next, before you get to replace the most efficient, lightest stuff (nat gas for heating).

Your graph of Netherlands energy use (shown below) shows that your "overige energiedragers" (which is everything non-fossil) in 30 years did not even grow as large as you are still powering with coal today !

So I think the Netherlands needs to get serious about getting a lot of "overige energiedragers" (wind, biomass, nuclear, solar) online before you should be talking about shutting down your gas fields which the Netherlands completely depends on right now.

But that's just my opinion.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on November 24, 2019, 11:08:06 AM
While I was aware that the Netherlands was cutting gas exports, I'd no idea that they were now net importers. Will all gas production end, or only the portion that is for export?


Is the import of both electricity & gas expected to continue indefinitely? Are the electrical imports vetted as being relatively "clean", or is it more a case of purchasing whatever surplus is available at the time that electricity is required?


In the depths of winter natural gas can be an efficient heat source.
Terry
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 24, 2019, 01:06:15 PM
2030 was already the end date for the gas field. This has now been pulled forward to mid 2022.

The field will not be dismantled so we can use it if needed in a very cold winter in the 2020s.

At least we acknowledged that we cannot use this resource for much longer then 2030 for a long time. On paper we were committed but nothing much happened but increased earthquake damage forced the politicians hand...then again russian nat gas should be coming soon and that could have factored in but it is not something they talk about.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 24, 2019, 01:18:18 PM
Quote
Varkenshouders in het zuiden van het land krijgen als ze overgaan op sanering veel meer geld per varken dan bedrijven in het oosten. De subsidieregeling voor het uitkopen van varkensboeren, 'warme sanering' genoemd, is in het leven geroepen om de stankoverlast en stikstofuitstoot van de sector te verminderen. Het ministerie van Landbouw maakte de tarieven van de subsidieregeling donderdag bekend.

Iemand die in het zuiden van het land tot sanering overgaat, ontvangt 151 euro per varken. In het oosten van het land ligt de vergoeding per varken een stuk lager: op 52 euro. De vergoeding per varken is berekend door Wageningen University & Research.

De reden voor het grote verschil in prijs per varken is een verschil in vraag en aanbod: in het oosten kan een varkenshouder nog volop varkensrechten kopen, in het zuiden zijn ze juist nog amper te krijgen. Het is voor boeren niet mogelijk om varkensrechten uit de andere regio te kopen.

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6012556/varkenshouder-in-het-zuiden-krijgt-bij-sanering-veel-meer-geld-per-varken.html

also see
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/veehouderij/duurzame-varkenshouderij/subsidieregeling-sanering-varkenshouderij

180 million euros are reserved for a buy out of pig farmers. The program is voluntary and the compensation depends on which of the two main areas the farmer is in. The prize in the south is higher because you cannot buy new pig farming rights for the area.

The aim is to reduce nitrogen emissions and smell problems too.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on November 24, 2019, 02:36:52 PM
^^
That's an amazing loss of quality protein!
What is expected to fill the gap. What source would emit fewer emissions, and what will it taste like?
Won't prices for pork spike? What will the less affluent eat?


I'm amazed, and somehow disturbed.
I need more time to consider this.
Terry
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on November 24, 2019, 05:22:14 PM
I think we are here discussing another highly intelligent social mammal. My sensitive morality toe plays up again, giving me signals.  :'(


Bruce, these industrial pig 'farms' are not comparable to your farm.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Bruce Steele on November 24, 2019, 06:36:58 PM
I am lucky that I can keep the pigs outdoors , even during the rain season the pigs can get under cover or go out in the mud. But rain season is short and it all dries out and honestly it doesn’t smell like a hog barn confinement farm.. Keeping pigs indoors is a stinky business .
 I have about a dozen sows ready to farrow and so I maintain a vigil going out at 11:00pm then 4:00am to check on them and turn on lights for heat when the piggies arrive. It is the only time the sows get a shed to sleep in but they can go in or out when they want till the piggies come off their nest. The sheds don’t stink cause the pigs know their bed isn’t a toilet.
 Around here farmers don’t have anything like “ pig growing rights “ or permits necessary to grow pigs because the economics make it about impossible to be a pig farmer. No profit, problem solved. Marketing a very rare pig into ethnic markets in Los Angeles and the west coast means I can sell into niche markets at high prices. Otherwise pigs in Calif. come from Iowa or somewhere with corn, soy and cheap labor.  The Netherlands will import their pork , export the smell and methane issues, and increase the carbon costs of transport. There may not be crops profitable enough to replace the pig businesses and in the end you will have fewer farmers also.
 If more people kept a couple pigs , a garden, and an orchard in their backyard it would obviate many of the “ moral “ concerns about confinement farms. We have chosen to keep our hands clean but our farm animals have suffered without a kind hand to keep them. 
 
 
 
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on November 24, 2019, 07:35:03 PM
Wow Bruce, thank you very much my friend for that information and advise :).

"I am lucky that I can keep the pigs outdoors"
I think especially the pigs are lucky being kept by someone like you.

A second thanks for giving them a relatively (in captivity) good life. I really mean that Bruce because I have strong feelings concerning the destiny of a pig.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on November 25, 2019, 12:53:47 AM
I'm very fortunate for having a small pork producer that sells at a farmers market just blocks from my door. His pigs are (lovingly)? cared for with access to the outdoors should they desire it. He keeps pig families together as matriarchies until the day when all the siblings go squealing into the night.
He offers tours of his facilities, and though I haven't taken the tour others have told me that the photos on his fliers are representative.


In the past I've stayed with two different families that kept pigs as pets, and eventually as food. They were clean, no more odor than a dog, and their personalities resembled that of outdoor dogs.


Nice companions
Terry


Are the GHGs emitted really a matter of concern? I'm aware of the problems that cattle present, but this is the first I'd heard of pig emissions.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Bruce Steele on November 25, 2019, 03:23:02 AM
Terry, I think it is whether you have anaerobic or aerobic conditions . Ponds or wallows or any wet area will get nasty cause pigs pee in the wallow. So you need to dry out the wallow and move it around. If everything is wet all the time you will have problems. Stinky problems which are in part methane .
 I bet this is useless information ! 
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on November 25, 2019, 06:27:12 AM
^^
Only in the sense that I've a broad, if not particularly up to date understanding, particularly regarding anaerobic digestion.


Both of the "pet" pig families I knew were on hobby farms with no standing water or streams. Sandy soils both in Southern California & in Southern Oregon precluded wallows, I recall the one in Oregon (George by name) regularly frisking and rolling in the sand. The pork producer here has a traditional Mennonite farm, most of which have had any naturally swampy areas and boggy patches drained a hundred years ago.


While Methane has no odor, other products of both aerobic and anaerobic digestion certainly do.


I assume you've looked up some of the sites with DIY instructions for methane capture, and found them wanting for some reason.


Dependant on soil composition to some extent, they offer the odorless (almost) digestion of pig pee and droppings while producing plenty of gas for heating, cooling (using gas fired AC), cooking, and allowing the surplus to be flared off. Compressing gas for transportation use is a seperate, and much more complex project, though firing a stationary generator might be relatively easy.
A few days with a backhoe, a modified septic tank and a load of 2"& 4" PVC is enough to heat your home and cook. Changing out your AC is an additional expense, and a month or so to designing a system to fit your needs is one of the major joys of such a project.


If you don't digest their waste and capture/burn the methane, the gas will still be produced and will find its way into the atmosphere. It's not just free energy for your use, it's a net benefit for everyone.


Damn, I sound like a salesman for Mother Jones, or whatever publication now publishes such plans.
My apologies to all


I've no financial interests in such systems. Just an abiding hatred of the regulators that once charged me with 68 felony counts for developing and selling enzyme based septic tank additives. Additives of the type now available in most rural country stores.
Terry
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 25, 2019, 02:45:33 PM
^^
That's an amazing loss of quality protein!
What is expected to fill the gap. What source would emit fewer emissions, and what will it taste like?
Won't prices for pork spike? What will the less affluent eat?


I'm amazed, and somehow disturbed.
I need more time to consider this.
Terry

TerryM don´t worry.  :)

Quote
Nederlandse export landbouwproducten in 2018 ruim € 90 miljard. In 2018 is voor een bedrag van € 90,3 miljard geëxporteerd aan landbouwgoederen. Dat is een lichte groei van 0,2% ten opzichte van 2017 (€ 90,1 miljard). Nederland is de op één na grootste landbouwexporteur van de wereld, na de Verenigde Staten.
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/actueel/nieuws/2019/01/18/nederlandse-export-landbouwproducten-in-2018-ruim-90-miljard

Dutch agricultural export was worth 90 billion euros in 2018. We are the second biggest exporter worldwide after the US...and we are about 230 times smaller.

This does not include pig farming but the overall idea is the same. We export stuff so we can export less. In the netherlands we only eat choice parts of the animal. We don´t really do organ meat much so that was sold to france/southern europe. And recently we got export permission to export pigs again to China where they use all parts of it so you can sell all the other parts too them.

https://edepot.wur.nl/464128

The link above is a report on animal farming. For pigs see page 43.
It´s in dutch but google translate should work.

There are several ways to argue about this. One is the claim that we are actually efficient in emissions compared to most other countries and this is true but that still does not mean we have to produce their food or at least not as much as we do now.

As for pork prices...there is a huge ASF problem and there is not enough pork in the world for the chinese so we will see what that does in the short term for prices.

PS: the earlier concept version of the law had 120 million earmarked for buyouts and 40 million for ´innovation´. The 120 million is enough to buy out about 40 pig farms.

https://www.brabantsemilieufederatie.nl/nieuws/bmf-pleit-voor-verplicht-oplossen-stankoverlast-varkenshouderij/


Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: gerontocrat on November 25, 2019, 03:37:28 PM
But if the defences against African Swine Fever fail.....

It's in Poland, only 70 km from the German border.
UK pig farmers are holding their breath.

And the world demand for pork (since China had to slaughter most of their pigs) is greater than world supply.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 25, 2019, 04:59:53 PM
Yeah if it is in Germany it might do the same thing as in Poland because that just relates to bad practices in the sector. And then that would put it next to our swine sector number 2 but as soon as that gets hit the whole country locks down.

I wonder what the current remedy is. In many scenarios they would just cull the animals and start over.

Oh the joys of monoculture...  :(
 
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Bruce Steele on November 25, 2019, 05:33:44 PM
Biosecurity and best practices , Wash and disinfect all trucks and trailers , chlorox tires, after every trip to slaughterhouse. Wear plastic or rubber boots at slaughterhouse, chlorox. Change clothes and wash before wearing around home herd.
 Never feed scraps ! Feed or what feed is transported in can spread disease from one farm to another as feed truck fill multiple farms feed bins, tires need washing and chlorox between farms, truck driver shoes need disinfecting between farms. People can move disease between farms on their shoes or clothes. Birds can move disease on their feet. Wild pigs and feral pigs are one of the biggest problems , double fences so domestic pigs and wild pigs can’t touch nose to nose.

Conventional hog confinement.
 Confinement with filtered air and double door entry/ exit . Shower in and change clothes on entry or between separate barns. Hog barns can be cleared of hogs and sterilized.

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on November 26, 2019, 08:40:44 AM
Quote
Varkenshouders in het zuiden van het land krijgen als ze overgaan op sanering veel meer geld per varken dan bedrijven in het oosten. De subsidieregeling voor het uitkopen van varkensboeren, 'warme sanering' genoemd, is in het leven geroepen om de stankoverlast en stikstofuitstoot van de sector te verminderen. Het ministerie van Landbouw maakte de tarieven van de subsidieregeling donderdag bekend.

Iemand die in het zuiden van het land tot sanering overgaat, ontvangt 151 euro per varken. In het oosten van het land ligt de vergoeding per varken een stuk lager: op 52 euro. De vergoeding per varken is berekend door Wageningen University & Research.

De reden voor het grote verschil in prijs per varken is een verschil in vraag en aanbod: in het oosten kan een varkenshouder nog volop varkensrechten kopen, in het zuiden zijn ze juist nog amper te krijgen. Het is voor boeren niet mogelijk om varkensrechten uit de andere regio te kopen.

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6012556/varkenshouder-in-het-zuiden-krijgt-bij-sanering-veel-meer-geld-per-varken.html

also see
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/veehouderij/duurzame-varkenshouderij/subsidieregeling-sanering-varkenshouderij

180 million euros are reserved for a buy out of pig farmers. The program is voluntary and the compensation depends on which of the two main areas the farmer is in. The prize in the south is higher because you cannot buy new pig farming rights for the area.

The aim is to reduce nitrogen emissions and smell problems too.

Just like the "policy" to switch home heating to electricity, this "policy" of emission reduction by eliminating pig farms does not make any sense either.

First of all, if the Netherlands doesn't produce these pigs, some other country will.
And probably causing more emissions.

Also, can't you catch the methane emissions from the manure (for cows as well) ? :
https://ww2.kqed.org/quest/2013/08/29/harnessing-the-hidden-power-of-cow-manure/
Would also compensate a bit for the lost gas after you shut down the gas wells :)

Finally, it seems that you are killing these pig farms not because of methane, but because of NOx emissions.

But aren't diesel/gasoline engines a much bigger contributor of NOx than pig manure ?

Do you have a link to that study from the University of Wageningen you refer to ?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on November 26, 2019, 10:58:28 AM
Perhaps cars emit mainly N2O (GHG) and the pig farms mainly NO and NO2 (air pollution)?

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOx :
"Nitrous oxide plays hardly any role in air pollution, although it may have a significant impact on the ozone layer,[4] and is a significant greenhouse gas. "

"NOx gases are usually produced from the reaction among nitrogen and oxygen during combustion of fuels, such as hydrocarbons, in air; especially at high temperatures, such as occur in car engines.[1][2][3] In areas of high motor vehicle traffic, such as in large cities, the nitrogen oxides emitted can be a significant source of air pollution. "
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: RikW on November 26, 2019, 04:19:26 PM
The problem with the pigs isn't only the CO2, but also nitrogen which pollutes our (human-planned...) nature. Almost all pigs produced in those large farms are for the export and probably also with european subsidy. So f.e. China buys our cheaps pork meat, we have the pollution and pay for it also by subsidy's.

The heating should be done by heat pumps. I think the idea is that heat pumps are more efficient than burning fossil fuels, because you also need better isolation. And burning fossil fuels in large plants is most of the time more efficient than doing it at home.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on November 26, 2019, 05:02:00 PM
The buyout is mainly for nitrogen and smell pollution (this was the original reason the law was already in the works). Remember these are big modern farms.

Of course there is technology to combat that but i guess that implementing that makes the pigs too expensive. 

First of all, if the Netherlands doesn't produce these pigs, some other country will.
And probably causing more emissions.


Ah yes but the nitrogen problem needs to be solved in the country because that is a EU law we signed on to and then not properly implemented. This is about our own emissions, our pollution.

So technically if someone across the border started a huge pig farm that would not be a problem.

But aren't diesel/gasoline engines a much bigger contributor of NOx than pig manure ?


The maximum speed for cars will be lowered, see first 2 posts of this thread.

Do you have a link to that study from the University of Wageningen you refer to ?

This one?

https://edepot.wur.nl/464128
The link above is a report on animal farming. For pigs see page 43.

The one on agriculture is linked under ´documenten´ on the first link.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on November 27, 2019, 08:35:50 AM
Perhaps cars emit mainly N2O (GHG) and the pig farms mainly NO and NO2 (air pollution)?

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOx :
"Nitrous oxide plays hardly any role in air pollution, although it may have a significant impact on the ozone layer,[4] and is a significant greenhouse gas. "

"NOx gases are usually produced from the reaction among nitrogen and oxygen during combustion of fuels, such as hydrocarbons, in air; especially at high temperatures, such as occur in car engines.[1][2][3] In areas of high motor vehicle traffic, such as in large cities, the nitrogen oxides emitted can be a significant source of air pollution. "

According to that wiki page, NOx includes NO and NO2, and often also includes N2O, and that NOx is mostly emitted by burning hydrocarbons in car engines.

Also NOx emissions from pig farms (or agriculture in general) is minor compared to NOx emissions from car engines. See below a picture of the sources of NOx, from this reference :
https://www.rivm.nl/stikstof

Which shows that the vast majority of NOx still comes from traffic (even though it is much better than a few decades ago) and the energy industry (burning fossil fuels), and that NOx emissions from all of agriculture are still minor. Closing pig farms because of their minor NOx emissions is thus silly.

In fact, when above we talk about "stikstof" emissions from pig farms, it appears that we are talking about ammonia. Ammonia gets emitted from pig manure, and agriculture is the main source of ammonia emissions, as you can see in the second image below, from the same link.

Incidentally, ammonia is not a greenhouse gas, and the Netherlands is not exceeding its maximum ammonia quota yet, so that can't be the reason to close these pig farms either.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on November 27, 2019, 08:48:42 AM
Do you have a link to that study from the University of Wageningen you refer to ?

This one?

https://edepot.wur.nl/464128
The link above is a report on animal farming. For pigs see page 43.

I actually was looking for that study that determined the compensation per pig for closing the farm : "In het oosten van het land ligt de vergoeding per varken een stuk lager: op 52 euro. De vergoeding per varken is berekend door Wageningen University & Research."

But your link above is also a really good report, with lots of very interesting information.
Thank you !

For example, I found the graph of the CO2eq emissions from all of agriculture very informative.

It shows that methane emissions from farting cows are about as bad as the CO2 emitted from burning natural gas to heat all these greenhouses that sustain the Netherlands' miracle indoor agriculture. Now if we could only find a way to capture the methane from the cows and use it to heat the greenhouses :)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Hefaistos on November 27, 2019, 01:41:31 PM
I was reading a very interesting paper and discussion between three climate professors on the so called tropical 'hot spot' at 'Climate dialogue', which is/was a platform based in the NL.

Seems there was some conflict around this platform, it had governement funding up until 2015 which was then withdrawn, and the platform ceased to be active.
Anyone from NL knows what it was all about?

Climatedialogue.org
https://www.mwenb.nl/climate-dialogue/
https://www.mwenb.nl/the-missing-tropical-hot-spot/
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on November 29, 2019, 09:04:28 AM
I was reading a very interesting paper and discussion between three climate professors on the so called tropical 'hot spot' at 'Climate dialogue', which is/was a platform based in the NL.

Yes, I remember that platform.
In fact, the first 'dialogue' there was about Arctic Sea Ice :
https://www.mwenb.nl/melting-of-the-arctic-sea-ice/

Both Neven and me posted comments there, which resulted in discussions by experts further down. Those were the good days !

The forum was not able to attract many scientists, and stated that :
Quote
In every discussion, at least one of the participating scientists was someone perceived to be a climate sceptic.
https://www.mwenb.nl/final-evaluation-report-of-climate-dialogue/

This concept givens an undue weight to skeptics and creates a false sense of disagreement about the facts. A sense that scientists are still arguing about AGW and its causes.
While in fact, the scientific discussion has long been settled.

The Dutch government must have realized that at some point and pulled the plug in 2015.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on December 02, 2019, 08:01:06 AM
First of all, if the Netherlands doesn't produce these pigs, some other country will.
And probably causing more emissions.


Ah yes but the nitrogen problem needs to be solved in the country because that is a EU law we signed on to and then not properly implemented. This is about our own emissions, our pollution.

So technically if someone across the border started a huge pig farm that would not be a problem.

Thanks Kassy.
Yet, you are just moving the problem over the border with this "policy" of closing pig farms.

Also, which exact EU law is the Netherlands implementing here ?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 03, 2019, 03:40:56 PM
I don´t know the proper name of EU the law but there are two things.

1) The EU countries agreed to appoint 17% of each country as a protected nature area (Natura2000 areas). I think this is an agreement and not a law in itself. So far the Netherlands has only 13% which basically means we are one of the lowest in Europe but our problem is that we are a small and very much of the area is in some economic use.

2) The EU law relates to protecting the Natura2000 areas from pollution. The main problem for us is the nitrogen pollution because we just emit too much of it. The only real world solution is emitting less but they tried a bookkeeping solution where damage now was compensated by future efficiency gains. That got shot down in court and rightly so.

So it is a local problem with a local solution.

This also means we are not moving the problem over the border. There is no requirement for other countries to produce the extra pigs. There is of course an incentive but that is something else and in reality it will be all dwarfed by the fall out of the ASF epidemic (prices are good).
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on December 03, 2019, 05:47:45 PM
Let's close all industrial (large scale) pig farms. Close them on the grounds of morality.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 09, 2019, 05:32:20 PM
The nitrogen budget fixing emergency law is going through the motions. It should be or already has passed the Tweede Kamer (Second Room). Those are our directly elected representatives. The current ruling coalition has a majority there.

They do not have one in the Eerste Kamer (First chamber, based on votes by provincial colleges so they are indirectly elected. Their job is to check laws on general principles). So they are negotiating over extra votes there.

*

In a measure not aimed at climate change but maybe helpful:

Quote
Het kabinet komt met een verbod op het recreatief gebruik van lachgas. Uit onderzoek is gebleken dat het aantal ernstige gezondheidsincidenten toeneemt en dat mensen "veel overlast door zwerfvuil" ervaren als gevolg van rondslingerende lachgaspatronen.

...

Volgens Blokhuis is het dan ook de bedoeling dat de eigenlijke aanbieders van lachgas, zoals groothandels, detailhandels, horeca en gasproducenten, zo min mogelijk geraakt worden door het besluit. Daarom zullen er gesprekken met deze aanbieders gevoerd worden.

So finally the recreational use of laughing gas or nitrous oxide is banned again.

It used to be banned but then there was some EU law that unbanned stuff that did not have strict medical uses. The N2O is sold in metal cannisters for whipped cream.

The main reasons to act are more related health problems and the nuisance. They quote the pollution problem (which is bad, discarded aluminium (?) cannisters plus 1 kg of the shit equals 298 kg of CO2 so please just smoke weed).

Also they want to regulate it in a way that does not hurt wholesale or retail etc. So not ure if it is going to work at all.

PS: These assholes also drive shortly after. One nearly wiped me out but then skidded onto the big road and nearly went into the buildings on the other side (it was summer).
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on December 09, 2019, 05:48:47 PM
I think I was wrong on the harmful effects in an earlier post. Apologies for my error kassy.
"just smoke weed"
Good advise :)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on December 10, 2019, 04:15:10 AM
2030 was already the end date for the gas field. This has now been pulled forward to mid 2022.

The field will not be dismantled so we can use it if needed in a very cold winter in the 2020s.

At least we acknowledged that we cannot use this resource for much longer then 2030 for a long time. On paper we were committed but nothing much happened but increased earthquake damage forced the politicians hand...then again russian nat gas should be coming soon and that could have factored in but it is not something they talk about.

Russian gas comes with strings attached.
Ask Ukraine how it went to cut these strings.

Austria is another example of a nation that got hooked on Russian gas, especially under FPÖ rule (2017-2019) :
https://www.worldoil.com/news/2019/3/7/gazprom-s-natural-gas-supplies-to-austria-increase-33-in-2019

Austria can't cut these strings any more.  They are hooked on Russian gas until Austria starts to rely on their OWN (renewable) energy resources.

Ask Neven when that will happen.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on December 17, 2019, 07:49:04 AM
I'm sorry guys. I'm a Dutch, but living abroad, so I'm not very familiar with Dutch policy and politics. I am an engineer, and as such I'm really curious how the Netherlands plans to implement the pledge to the Paris agreement.

If you look at the world map, the Netherlands is joining the rest of the EU in the lead to reduce CO2 emissions by 40%.

(https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjA2MDQ3NC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTU4MDQzOTE3M30.cInglTQITKD6bHkqrLRLDb6oU6jovKqvuKy7CtqV0gM/img.png?width=980&height=734)

Other countries like China and the US have insufficient pledges, and there are even countries like Russia, Turkey and Iran that did not even bother to pledge anything, so the EU is clearly in the lead here.

But even with that, how is the Netherlands going to reduce CO2 emissions by 40% ?

Clearly closing some pig farms is not going to do it, and importing Russian gas is not helping either.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 17, 2019, 01:55:14 PM
I will be reporting when they figure it out.

https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/klimaatverandering/klimaatbeleid

It seems that the Urgenda appeal is already done and the government lost that so at the end of next year we have to be 25% below the 1990 emissions. I think we were only going to end up a bit short (something like 23%).

They are possibly closing some extra older coal or gas based energy plants.

I am curious how soon the EU can come up with an effective collective strategy...we will see.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on December 17, 2019, 04:50:17 PM
Biomass is pushed massively as a 'solution' and is counted as zero emissions. Those coal plants have to keep burning biomass (our government helping the big polluters with our money and policies to stay afloat). The idea is to cut foreign trees, turn them into pellets, ship them to The Netherlands and burn them to heat water into steam.

Re: EU/NL. I don't believe in pledges and commitments anymore until I see some real action. 4% per year reduction is nowhere on the horizon and is much too weak anyway imo.

Rob, I don't know what your engineering field is but maybe you have a better view on what the necessary adjustments to our dykes have to be, our protection from the seas, in a hypothetical situation of 2 meter SLR by 2100 and much more severe and frequent storms.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on December 18, 2019, 10:36:28 AM
Thank you Kassy and Nanning.

I understand that the Netherlands does not have many "renewable" options.
There is no altitude, so no hydro power.
There is no geo-thermal hot spot, so no geo-thermal power.
The Netherlands latitude is high, and the sky often cloudy, so solar power is not that popular either, even though I think it would complement wind very nicely.

Tidal and wave energy are a joke, so the only native (non-fossil) energy sources remaining are wind and nuclear.

I understand that the Dutch don't like nuclear too much, so there is only wind, I guess ?

You are not doing bad there :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_Netherlands

But the rate of increase from 14% to 16% renewables from 2020 to 2023 is dreadfully slow. At that rate, you will be getting to the target 40% reduction in about 60 years.

Biomass is pushed massively as a 'solution' and is counted as zero emissions. Those coal plants have to keep burning biomass (our government helping the big polluters with our money and policies to stay afloat). The idea is to cut foreign trees, turn them into pellets, ship them to The Netherlands and burn them to heat water into steam.

I thought that planting trees and growing them would be a much more effective way of reducing carbon emissions than chopping them down, transporting them over long distances, and then burning them.

But that's just my opinion.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 18, 2019, 11:08:07 AM
Yeah that biomass law must be revised (on the EU level, it is a EU law).

The emergency law against nitrogen pollution has been passed.
One of the more concrete measures will be altered feedstock which contain less nitrogen (or as another article stated it will be feedstock with less excess protein).

That measure if succesful could be used elsewhere.

There will also be a better form of registration of the actual pollution.

https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/meerderheid-voor-spoedwet-stikstof-in-eerste-kamer~b87271a0/


Most of the rest is watered down:
Zo zal er geen sprake zijn van een ‘generieke krimp’ van de veestapel, worden boeren niet gedwongen te stoppen en worden de drempelwaarden voor stikstof regionaal geregeld.

https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/kabinet-en-boerenorganisaties-sluiten-akkoord-over-stikstofmaatregelen~b50e85c6/

No generic shrinking of the total lifestock, no forced closures and the treshholds will be handled at a regional level.

In Noord Brabant they still want to get rid of a whole lot of farms , not sure what they want to do in the eastern intensive zone.

Basically the politicians once again chose short term gains over actual solutions.

We should examine the whole chain again and then future proof it.

No subsidies for factory farming.
Subsidies for ecological farming. Grow the food for the animals locally, eat them locally.
Possibly a system to work out how much soil gets restored over time and pay the farmers for that.

The current system is not really fun farming (lots of stress about debts) nor is it sustainable.

Maybe we need to visit them and talk about the issue. Is this sustainable for your lifetime? The kids? Grandkids?

A group of 12 farmers who borrowed to enlarge and or modernize their farms rather recently so in the time that the nitrogen issue was bound to surface as a problem is suing the Rabobank for not doing their due diligence. The banks have an obligation to not give out bad or unsustainable loans so they figure that Rabobank should not have lent them the money to modernize.

It would be good if they won that because that would make the Rabobank much more critical about these type of loans and they are the big lender to the farmers. The BO in RaBo stands for Boerenleenbank.

No link for the last bit since that was a short article in one of our newspapers.

PS: As to the dykes that came up earlier this year in another thread and we have quite a bit of margin. Can´t recall which thread.

If actual SLR from climate change overshoots the 2 meter mark the next question is how much more meters are coming over the next century after that and since the rise could accelerate after that building bigger dykes might not be an option. Yes we could build higher dykes but the salt water intrudes in land while in the same time frame we lose most meltwater inputs into the big rivers so they will mostly dry which means a loss of freshwater pressure.

We will move into Germany and then we can sell diving trips to the former Red Light district.

The whole choice is keeping this world in a holocene range or we go straight for the dumbassic as A-team coined it.

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on December 18, 2019, 11:11:19 AM
Rob, I don't know what your engineering field is but maybe you have a better view on what the necessary adjustments to our dykes have to be, our protection from the seas, in a hypothetical situation of 2 meter SLR by 2100 and much more severe and frequent storms.

I'm sorry Nanning. I'm an Electrical Engineer. Mostly IC design.
Not much use for assessing Dutch dykes.
But you have excellent engineers who can do that, and you have the monetary means to address these issues.

So I'm not that concerned about Holland and SLR specifically.

More concerned about global SLR and global climate change, and long term energy security for the planet (including long term energy security for the Netherlands).
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: NeilT on December 18, 2019, 02:39:15 PM
Over a decade ago I read that NL was planning for both sea level rise and management of inland water flow from the East and how to pass it through the country and out to sea.

I didn't follow it up but I expect it has continued.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: pietkuip on December 18, 2019, 03:03:43 PM
I didn't follow it up but I expect it has continued.

Yes, it is continuing, there was an article about this in Politico this week:
https://www.politico.eu/article/when-will-the-netherlands-disappear-climate-change/

Awareness is growing, but there is also denial of the fundamental problem that 410 ppm means many meters of sea level rise.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 20, 2019, 02:37:13 PM
The appeal i wrote about in post 55 was actually today.

English link

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-netherlands/dutch-court-says-government-must-cut-greenhouse-gases-faster-idUSKBN1YO12A?rpc=401&

Basically similar to what i wrote above.
The 2030 target is 49% below the baseline.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on December 20, 2019, 04:42:56 PM
Thank you kassy.

From the link:
"AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - The Dutch High Court upheld on Friday a ruling ordering the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions faster than planned and to ensure they are at least 25% below 1990 levels by the end of 2020.

The court said the government had not done enough to protect its citizens from the dangerous effects of climate change, which can “threaten their lives and wellbeing”.

Emissions in the Netherlands were 15% lower than in 1990 last year, and are expected to be reduced by around 23% in 2020, the government’s environmental advisory body PBL said last month. "


I wonder about their accounting methods. The stated numbers are hard to believe because energy use has gone up in an accelerating fashion for decades and renewables (without creative accounting) are not an important part of the whole Netherlands energy situation.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: gerontocrat on December 20, 2019, 08:16:31 PM
Thank you kassy.

From the link:
"AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - The Dutch High Court upheld on Friday a ruling ordering the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions faster than planned and to ensure they are at least 25% below 1990 levels by the end of 2020.

The court said the government had not done enough to protect its citizens from the dangerous effects of climate change, which can “threaten their lives and wellbeing”.

Emissions in the Netherlands were 15% lower than in 1990 last year, and are expected to be reduced by around 23% in 2020, the government’s environmental advisory body PBL said last month. "

I wonder about their accounting methods. The stated numbers are hard to believe because energy use has gone up in an accelerating fashion for decades and renewables (without creative accounting) are not an important part of the whole Netherlands energy situation.
So I went into the Netherlands Statistics Bureau and got it to tabulate 1990 & 2018 energy data (in Peta Joules ?) https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/en/dataset/83140eng/table?ts=1576859247811

I still can't figure how they get to 15% less CO2 emissions than 1990 in 2018 unless renewables have gone zooming up, because
- in 2018 less than 10% of domestic energy consumption came from renewables
- a good deal less than coal that has declined by almost nothing,
- and domestic total energy consumption has risen, though slowly.

But who am I to question how the EU / Netherlands massage adjust the data?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Rob Dekker on December 21, 2019, 08:56:02 AM
Thanks gerontocrat. Good overview of fossil fuel emissions in the Netherlands, and it is clear that fossil fuel burning did not reduce much (at all) since 1990.

However, that CBS overview does not include various non-CO2 GHG emissions.
This report presents a more complete overview :
https://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/2019-0020.pdf

In the graph below, you can see that most gain since 1990 was caused by reduction of non-CO2 GHG emission reductions, such as N2O, methane and F-gases. It may even be 15%.

It is unclear how the Netherlands can reduce GHG emissions by any meaningful (like the 40% pledge) way beyond this without seriously moving away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: NeilT on December 21, 2019, 02:58:30 PM
I read, a while back, that power to the UK, from the FR interconnect, was designated as CO2 free.  But reality is that it sometimes comes from NL and BE Coal peaker plants through their interconnect lines to France.

Hard to work out how they calculate it.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 21, 2019, 05:10:06 PM
I had a look around the CBS site (our Central Bureau of Statistics) and i found this:

Quote
In 2018 bedroeg de uitstoot van broeikasgassen in Nederland 189,3 miljard CO2-equivalenten. Dit is 2 procent lager dan in 2017 en 15 procent lager dan in 1990. In 2018 was de Nederlandse economie bijna 80 procent groter dan in 1990. De bevolking nam met 15 procent toe.
....
Dat meldt het CBS op basis van nieuwe emissiecijfers die door RIVM/Emissieregistratie vastgesteld zijn.

In 2018 stootte de industrie 30 miljardCO2-equivalenten minder uit dan in 1990. De sectoren gebouwde omgeving (stoken van aardgas voor verwarming) en landbouw realiseerden allebei een reductie van 6 miljard CO2-equivalenten. Bij de elektriciteitsbedrijven en in de sector mobiliteit (binnenlands verkeer en vervoer) was er een toename van 6 miljard en 3 miljard CO2-equivalenten. Alle vijf sectoren zijn omvangrijker geworden.

In 2018 is al een reductie van 30 miljard CO2-equivalenten bereikt. Slechts 16 procent van deze reductie komt door een kleinere CO2-uitstoot. De andere 84 procent komt voor de helft door een steeds kleinere methaanuitstoot door afvalstortplaatsen, voor een kwart door het uitbannen van fluorhoudende gassen (eind jaren negentig), en voor een kwart door een kleinere lachgasuitstoot bij de salpeterzuurproductie (in 2008). Hierdoor is het aandeel van CO2 in de industriële broeikasgasuitstoot toegenomen van 63 procent in 1990 naar 87 procent in 2018.

https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2019/37/lagere-broeikasgasuitstoot

Translation

2018 emissions are 189,3 billion CO2-equivalents.
This is 2 percent lower then 2017 and 15 percent lower then in 1990.
In 2018 the dutch economy was 80 percent bigger then 1990. Population increased with 15 percent.
....
Reported by CBS based on emission numbers produced by RIVM/Emissieregistratie.
(so the numbers are calculated by the RIVM which is the Rijks Institute voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu or the Government Institute for Public Health and Environment. Emission registration is just a subgroup of them, K)

In 2018 industry emitted 30 billion CO2-equivalents less then in 1990.
The sectors build environment (or natural gas used for heating) en agriculture both realized a 6 billion reduction in CO2eq.
For electricty and mobility (traffic and transport) there was a gain of respectively 6 and 3 billion CO2eq. All 5 sectors grew.

Now here come the tricks (and it gave me at least 1 aha moment)

In 2018 a reduction of 30 billion CO2eq was reached.

Only 16 percent of this reduction is actual CO2-reduction.

The other 84 percent reduction is:

Half is reduction of methane emissions by garbage dumps
A quart is the banning of CFK gasses (at the end of the nineties)
A quart by lower NO2 emissions in the production of nitric acid (in 2008).

The percentage of actual CO2 in industrial emissions has isen from 63 percent in 1990 to 87 percent in 2018.

So that was the trick, of course this 25% free reductions from the Montreal protocol are in the numbers of every country.

This also proves in hindsight how amazing the effect of that protocol was. Even though it fooled us into thinking or governments were actual rational humans....  ::)


PS: NeilT lets get rid of the peaker plants that does wonders for the calculation.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 21, 2019, 05:14:52 PM
RIVM/Emissieregistratie has a website with maps and other stuff:
http://www.emissieregistratie.nl/erpubliek/erpub/default.nl.aspx?submodule=kaarten

CBA to look at it now but looking at the maps should give a broad idea.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on December 21, 2019, 08:15:51 PM
Is the court demanding real reductions, or will it accept the same distorted data for their 25% reduction from the 1990's?
Terry
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: NeilT on December 21, 2019, 08:22:56 PM
No problem with that kassy, but in order to stop drawing on them we need to track where the power ends up and make them account for burning it.

Only then will everyone be held accountable correctly. At which point they can be made to stop doing it.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: gerontocrat on December 21, 2019, 09:53:36 PM
Before the court made the judgement...

Quote
The Dutch government has set a target of 6,000 MW of onshore wind power by 2020 and 4,450 MW of offshore wind power by 2023. This will contribute towards the Dutch target of 14% renewable energy use out of total energy use by 2020 and 16% by 2023.
Wind power in the Netherlands - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Wind_power_in_the_Netherlands

Lots of MW but not much as %, which when you look at the map looks a bit pathetic. (https://globalwindatlas.info/)

Solar power is also increasing
Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_the_Netherlands
Solar power in the Netherlands has an installed capacity of around 4,300 megawatt (MW) of photovoltaics as of the end of 2018. Around 1,397 MW of new capacity was installed during 2018, the second highest figure in Europe for that year.

Quote
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/11/04/netherlands-to-reach-27-gw-of-solar-by-2030/
Netherlands to reach 27 GW of solar by 2030
The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency expects the nation’s solar generation capacity to have increased by another 5 GW by the end of next year, from around 4.4 GW at the end of 2018. By the end of 2023, installed PV capacity is predicted to reach approximately 15 GW.

But I am surprised they have not gone for wind power in a much bigger way. A vast shallow inland sea just asking for it. Maybe because Germany already sometimes has wind power generation greater than demand?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on December 22, 2019, 04:31:23 PM
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/duurzame-energie/windenergie-op-zee

Do check map on the link. You see that our ´vast inland sea´ is not that big. We also call it the IJssellake.  :)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: gerontocrat on December 22, 2019, 06:27:18 PM
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/duurzame-energie/windenergie-op-zee

Do check map on the link. You see that our ´vast inland sea´ is not that big. We also call it the IJssellake.  :)
But surely big enough, and beyond it the North Sea is pretty shallow (and sea level rise might make it much bigger - unless loads of wind power for even bigger pumps?)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on January 15, 2020, 04:33:43 PM
For some context the ´climate stripes´ for the Netherlands as calculated by the KNMI:

https://www.knmi.nl/over-het-knmi/nieuws/klimaatstreepjescode-warming-stripes

https://cdn.knmi.nl/system/updates/image2s/000/002/724/xlarge/Klimaatstreepjescode_DeBilt.gif?1578305450

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on January 15, 2020, 04:39:10 PM
Also so many pig farmers signed into the stopping subsidy program that they ran out of subsidy.
The ministry refuses to give numbers but 1 company doing consulancy for farmers have filed 425 applications for the prgram to date.

The total amount of money was 180 million euros. Maybe we should expand that for a quick gain (because we need houses more then ag exports).

A Rabobank research bureau estimates 7-10% of ´pig rights´ to be taken out of the market.
Historically this is the first ever reform which actually reduces the amount of farm animals...
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on January 21, 2020, 06:49:38 AM
I had this saved and wanted to post it just for our Netherlandic readers because it's in Netherlandic.

It is about the vulnerability of our infrastructure, about the vulnerability to collapse from our national coordinator for anti-terrorism and safety (NCTV (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationaal_Co%C3%B6rdinator_Terrorismebestrijding_en_Veiligheid), https://english.nctv.nl/):
(apologies for this off-topic interesting post)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on January 25, 2020, 10:09:39 AM
Quote
Nederland maakt van alle lidstaten van de Europese Unie het minst gebruik van duurzame elektriciteit, zo blijkt vrijdag uit cijfers van Eurostat. 7,4 procent van de Nederlandse energie kwam in 2018 van hernieuwbare bronnen, terwijl dat percentage dit jaar 14 zou moeten zijn.

https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6026230/nederland-gebruikt-minste-duurzame-elektriciteit-van-alle-eu-landen.html

In 2018 the Netherlands was last of all EU countries in the amount of renewable energy used at 7,4%. We should be at 14% at the end of this year. Lets see if we make that.

The Renewable energy in the EU in 2018 shows share of renewable energy in the EU up to 18.0%:
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/10335438/8-23012020-AP-EN.pdf/292cf2e5-8870-4525-7ad7-188864ba0c29
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: rboyd on January 26, 2020, 12:24:15 AM
With the Groningen field closing in 2022, and production already down by nearly half, would be in the interests of the Dutch to move to renewables as fast as possible. The alternative is a high degree of dependency upon LNG and Gazprom.

Output at Europe’s giant Groningen gas field plunges in Dec, dents Dutch stocks

https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/output-at-europes-giant-groningen-gas-field-plunges-in-dec-dents-dutch-stocks/ (https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/output-at-europes-giant-groningen-gas-field-plunges-in-dec-dents-dutch-stocks/)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on February 02, 2020, 11:35:31 AM
http://news.trust.org/item/20200131163953-u6n1q/
  by Reuters

Climate change activists block Shell headquarters, 30 detained


THE HAGUE, Jan 31 (Reuters) - Environmental activists chanting "keep it in the ground" blocked the entrance to Shell's headquarters in The Hague on Friday, protesting at the energy company's role in climate change, until police dragged them away, detaining 30.

Some of the environmentalists from the Extinction Rebellion and Shell Must Fall! lobby groups wedged themselves between the glass front doors of the building. Others held banners and splashed a black liquid on its front steps, chanting slogans including "ExxonMobil, BP, Shell: take your oil and go to hell!"

"Shell is one of the biggest polluters," said one woman who had glued herself to a railing outside the building. She declined to give her name. "If we want to have a chance for stopping climate change, Shell is one of the first companies that has to go."

In a statement, the groups said they were motivated by what they said was hypocrisy by Shell.

"Shell claims regularly that it is 'part of the solution' to the climate crisis, but at the same time the company announced its intention last year to increase its tens of billions of (dollars in) investments in fossil fuels."

Police spokesman Stefan van Sande said 30 activists had been detained because they did not have a permit.

In a reaction to the protest, Shell said it respects the activists' right to demonstrate.

"We ask only that they do so within the law and with their safety and the safety of others in mind".

The company said that its strategy is in alignment with international climate treaties. "In that sense we have the same goal as the activists. We only disagree about the methods."

(Reporting by Toby Sterling; Editing by Andrew Cawthorne)
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on February 03, 2020, 02:04:42 PM
Quote
Netherlands' $515 billion pension fund to accelerate cuts to fossil fuel investments

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - The Netherlands’ biggest pension fund, ABP, said on Monday it aims to reduce the carbon footprint of its asset portfolio by 40% from 2015 levels by 2025.

ABP, which already set a target to cut the carbon footprint of its assets by 25% from 2015 levels by this year, follows moves by other leading funds - notably Norway’s $1.1 trillion sovereign wealth fund - to divest heavy polluting energy companies from its portfolio.

...

It plans to exit coal and tar sands investments, with some exceptions, by 2030, it said

Full details:
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-climate-change-netherlands-abp/netherlands-515-billion-pension-fund-to-accelerate-cuts-to-fossil-fuel-investments-idUKKBN1ZX1AK
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on February 04, 2020, 02:32:22 PM
Quote
Het kabinet trekt ongeveer een half miljard euro uit om boeren vrijwillig uit te kopen en om boeren die willen blijven te helpen hun stallen te verduurzamen. Er is ook de hoop dat provincies en marktpartijen op termijn financieel bijdragen. Eind deze week worden de plannen naar verwachting gepubliceerd, laten Haagse bronnen dinsdag weten aan NU.nl.

Het kabinet maakt zo'n 350 miljoen euro vrij om de zogenoemde 'piekbelasters' vrijwillig uit te kopen. Het gaat om boerenbedrijven die veel stikstof in de buurt van Natura 2000-gebieden uitstoten. Omdat de provincies nauw betrokken zijn bij dit proces, is de hoop van het kabinet erop gevestigd dat ook die overheden meebetalen aan de regeling.

Deze uitkoopregeling is een stuk kleiner dan de vrijwillige sanering van varkensboeren uit het regeerakkoord. Vanwege de beperkte omvang is er ook geen toestemming uit Europa nodig wegens de staatssteunregels.

Dat geldt ook voor bedrijven als het zogenaamde extern salderen mogelijk wordt gemaakt. Als een onderneming door middel van een verbouwing of uitbreiding extra stikstof uitstoot, kan die uitstoot op een andere plek worden gecompenseerd. Bijvoorbeeld door een boerenbedrijf in de buurt op te kopen en die stikstofrechten over te kopen.

Daarnaast wordt er een kleine 200 miljoen euro vrijgemaakt voor boeren die willen blijven. Dat geld wordt ingezet om stallen te verduurzamen.

https://www.nu.nl/politiek/6028355/kabinet-steekt-half-miljard-euro-in-opkopen-en-verduurzamen-boerenbedrijven.html

The government has reserved 0,5 billion Euros for a voluntary buy out of farmers and for improving the stables/sheds.

350 million to buy out peak emitters near Natura 2000 areas.
They are hoping the provinces will also chip in moneywise. I guess that is on top and pretty likely for Brabant.

This measure is smaller in scope so no EU permission is needed.

I think that the previous measure was for all farmers in the whole country and this is targeted to very limited areas.

Then there is something about external offsets. You can increase the farm then but you need to buy out other nitrogen rights. This bit will hopefully become clearer in the next few days.

Another 200 million is reserved to improve the sheds in the remaining companies.

Full plans will be released on friday.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on February 04, 2020, 07:00:16 PM
The speed limit on the freeways has been changed from 120/130 kph (74/80 mph) to 100 kph (62 mph) as a measure to bring down air pollution and GHG emissions.

Domestic gas use had a transport costs that were the same regardless of the amount you used. That has been changed this year so users pay per cubic meter of gas used.
For me this is good news because I don't use any gas but still had to pay for the transport costs before.

kassy, have I put this correctly you think? I can't find the links right now.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: blumenkraft on February 04, 2020, 07:39:24 PM
I wish it was like that in Germany also.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: TerryM on February 04, 2020, 10:08:12 PM
nanning


Both lowering speed limits and charging for natural gas based on the amount of gas used are examples of good governance. I'm envious.


In the US they lived quite happily with a maximum speed of 55MPH. Happy that is but for those who depended on tow trucks, ambulances, or auto body repair for a livelihood. ;D


Here in Ontario it's still possible to rent an apartment with utilities included. No financial incentive to conserve at all. :(


Terry
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on February 05, 2020, 10:38:32 AM
A bunch of links on the speedlimit are on page 1.

There have been some changes in the energy bill with some taxes like general energy tax + reuseable energy tax* going up and the tax refund per household also going up.

The idea is that this stimulates using less energy.

Can´t see anything about transport cost per se. Possibly it might be a divide between small and big energy users.

Nanning, i think the easiest way for us to find out is to see what your next energy bill says about the transport costs. Would be cool if they came to zero. :)

*this is a tax to pay for the transition to renewable energy
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on February 05, 2020, 01:56:51 PM
Thanks kassy.
I may have mixed up costs.
My energy bill lists an estimated preliminary gas use which is not zero. I have to call the provider. Again. I have called several times and they should know I use no gas. If I find out more about NL domestic energy policy I'll post it here.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on February 06, 2020, 02:18:42 PM
Quote
Dierenpopulaties Nederland sinds 1990 gehalveerd, herstel mogelijk

Populaties van wilde dieren in zowel open natuurgebieden als in het agrarisch landschap, zijn sinds 1990 gehalveerd. Wel kan de schade nog worden hersteld, schrijven onderzoekers in het Living Planet Report Nederland, dat donderdag door het Wereld Natuur Fonds (WWF) is gepubliceerd.

...

Volgens het rapport is de hoge stikstofneerslag, die grotendeels wordt veroorzaakt door de veehouderij, de grootste oorzaak van de halvering. Vooral de dierenpopulaties in de heidegebieden gingen er de afgelopen dertig jaar op achteruit. In bepaalde heidegebieden is de omvang van dierenpopulaties zelfs met zeventig procent afgenomen.

Door een te hoge stikstofneerslag worden bijzondere plantensoorten, die belangrijk zijn voor vlinders en insecten, overwoekerd door snel groeiende grassen die van stikstof houden. De insecten die deze planten nodig hebben verdwijnen, wat weer een negatieve invloed heeft op insectenetende dieren, zoals vogels.

https://www.nu.nl/dieren/6028711/dierenpopulaties-nederland-sinds-1990-gehalveerd-herstel-mogelijk.html

Report (in dutch) :
https://www.wwf.nl/globalassets/pdf/wwf-living-planet-report-nederland-2020-natuur-en-landbouw-verbonden.pdf


Populations of wild animals in open nature and agrarian spaces have halved since 1990.
The damage can be fixed. But it will cost some money and it requires that we fix the nitrogen pollution.

They blame nitrogen mainly by farming.
Decline is especially bad in heather landscapes (up top 70%).

The nitrogen pollution promotes the growth of grasses which crowd out the specialist plants important for butterflies and insects.

The populations in varied forests is doing well as the forests gets more diverse and forests where nitrogen pollution went down there was a 24% recovery.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on February 15, 2020, 01:37:50 PM
Quote
Garnalenvissers hebben het aantal uren dat zij in beschermde natuurgebieden mochten vissen in zowel 2017 als 2018 fors overschreden, meldt de NOS zaterdag op basis van verkregen documenten. Er zouden geen straffen zijn uitgedeeld aan de vissers.

Het gaat om de Waddenzee en Noordzeekustzone, waar een limiet van 130.000 uur geldt. In beide jaren zou er meer dan 200.000 uur gewerkt zijn. Door capaciteitsproblemen bij de Nederlandse Voedsel en Warenautoriteit (NVWA) bleven de vissers echter onbestraft.

Drie personen zouden verantwoordelijk zijn voor de controles van ruim tweehonderd schepen. Technische middelen waarmee vissers zichzelf kunnen controleren, blijken al vijf jaar niet goed te werken.

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6031003/beschermde-nederlandse-natuurgebieden-fors-overbevist-boetes-blijven-uit.html

This is how our environmental protection works...

There is a limit of 130k hours of fishing for two coastal zones. In 2017 and 2018 both zones saw more then 200k hours of work (shrimp fishing).

No penalties were handed out because only 3 persons have to check in the 200 ships.
The technical aids the fishermen can use to control themselves don´t work properly.

So this is yet another example were the economic needs win over environmental concerns. This is basically normal which is also why we ended with the agricultural sector we have now.

Basically the only thing you need is constant location data which ships have anyway?

So the rules are simple. Location on. Timing starts from you going into the zone.
If the location beacon inexplicably fails you return to port to fix it.
Ignoring this rule should lead to an automatic one or two month grounding. No sailing no fishing.

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: pietkuip on February 20, 2020, 01:03:56 AM
A saw this interesting paper on ASLR's thread:
In this regard, I provide a second link to a Dutch reference on how they address adapting to uncertain rates of SLR due to the risk of Antarctic ice mass loss.


M Haasnoot et al (2020), "Adaptation to uncertain sea-level rise; how uncertainty in Antarctic mass-loss impacts the coastal adaptation strategy of the Netherlands", Environmental Research Letters, Volume 15, Number 3, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab666c

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab666c
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab666c/pdf

Abstract: "Uncertainties in the rate and magnitude of sea-level rise (SLR) complicate decision making on coastal adaptation. Large uncertainty arises from potential ice mass-loss from Antarctica that could rapidly increase SLR in the second half of this century. The implications of SLR may be existential for a low-lying country like the Netherlands and warrant exploration of high-impact low-likelihood scenarios. To deal with uncertain SLR, the Netherlands has adopted an adaptive pathways plan. This paper analyzes the implications of storylines leading to extreme SLR for the current adaptive plan in the Netherlands, focusing on flood risk, fresh water resources, and coastline management. It further discusses implications for coastal adaptation in low-lying coastal zones considering timescales of adaptation including the decisions lifetime and lead-in time for preparation and implementation. We find that as sea levels rise faster and higher, sand nourishment volumes to maintain the Dutch coast may need to be up to 20 times larger than to date in 2100, storm surge barriers will need to close at increasing frequency until closed permanently, and intensified saltwater intrusion will reduce freshwater availability while the demand is rising. The expected lifetime of investments will reduce drastically. Consequently, step-wise adaptation needs to occur at an increasing frequency or with larger increments while there is still large SLR uncertainty with the risk of under- or overinvesting. Anticipating deeply uncertain, high SLR scenarios helps to enable timely adaptation and to appreciate the value of emission reduction and monitoring of the Antarctica contribution to SLR."

Extract: "The Netherlands has adopted an adaptive plan that allows for adaptation over time depending on how the future unfolds. Recent SLR observations and projections have raised concerns about the plausibility of an uncertain strong acceleration of SLR after 2050 due to rapid mass-loss of the Antarctic ice sheet, which is not accounted for in the current adaptive plan."
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on February 28, 2020, 06:49:59 AM
Wind turbine parks to generate electricity for electrolysis to generate hydrogen as non-GHG fuel.

https://tweakers.net/nieuws/163972/windparken-op-noordzee-moeten-waterstoffabriek-in-groningen-voeden.html

my translation:
Planned large windpower parks in the North Sea called 'NortH2' will start generating 3-4 GW from 2030. To be expanded to 10 GW by 2040.
In Eemshaven, near the northern German border an 'elektrolyser' will be build to generate hydrogen from the windpower using electrolysis. This will be part of a north western Europe network to generate 800000 tonnes of hydrogen [per year I presume].

Related: In the northern province of Fryslân some trains running on hydrogen are tested and used in stead of the diesel/electro trains.
44s video:
https://www.omropfryslan.nl/nijs/942464-fideo-earste-wetterstoftrein-yn-nederlan-wurdt-test-yn-ljouwert

edit: finished post after site crashed yesterday whilst writing
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on March 02, 2020, 02:29:42 PM
Quote
Winderig februari leidt tot recordaandeel hernieuwbare energie

Het aandeel van energie uit hernieuwbare bronnen bereikte in februari een record. Vorige maand kwam 10,3 procent van de totale verbruikte energie uit hernieuwbare bronnen, blijkt maandag uit cijfers van energieopwek.nl.

De groei van het aandeel hangt voornamelijk samen met de harde wind in februari, waardoor windturbines in staat waren meer energie op te wekken.

Ruim 32 procent van de hernieuwbare energie kwam voort uit windturbines op het land en in de zee. Dat is een groot aandeel: normaliter ligt het aandeel van windenergie rond de 10 procent.

...

Storm Dennis leverde de meeste energie aan het net: op 22 februari werd in totaal ruim 4 gigawatt aan energie opgewekt

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6034484/winderig-februari-leidt-tot-recordaandeel-hernieuwbare-energie.html

Some background numbers.

February was so stormy renewables were up to 10,3% of all used energy sources.
32% was wind power where 10% is its normal part in the mix.

Storm Dennis was good for 4 GW.

*

I will  have to look up a newspaper article critical of the hydrogen production.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on March 02, 2020, 03:12:44 PM
Also need to add a bit about the powers of the city vs the laws of the land because they are very much the core of this thread.

The city and the laws of the country part 1

The city of Utrecht tried to change the way paper door to door advertisements and free local ´papers´ are handled.

Those local papers are usually just disguised adds with only some newslike crap on page 1 (picture of major visiting couple that has a golden marriage level) maybe some more on page 3.
Some have a bit more but it is not your critical press more a local thing.

The thing we have generally is stickers. You can get one that says No Yes which is no door to door paper adds but yes to the newspapers (who have their own folded in advertisement folders).

Or you get the No No variant which gets rid of all of them.

For some reason many people never even get stickers but just the add stuff away (in its plastic wrapper among the other paper recycling stuff which is a nuisance).

So Utrecht wanted to change the system. From this year you needed a YES YES or No YES sticker.

YY for all the crap NY for just the paper.

This was challenged by the free newspaper organistions and they won that over a freedom of press thing. Which is ironical because they write about local stuff and usually not the local politics either more like regional events.

Not sure if they are going to fight it in court.
Maybe a different approach would be in order.

The whole problem is that many people just get the crap and then throw it away.

Maybe we should organize a volunteer force and ring every doorbell of every door without a sticker then ask peope for their choice and put the sticker there.

Alternatively you could handle this on a national level but our national politicians are to lame for that.

Of course this is ´small beer´ compared to global warming but it is a small battle on waste.

*

In part 2 the city of Utrecht needs to find a way so everybody in Overvecht gets to transition from gas to electricity. The local gas network is nearly 50 yo so it needs replacement and Utrecht applied for a grant to the national government to test the transition (i think it was the only application from one of the big cities). The whole neighborhood needs to switch but how do you get everyone along? You don´t want to maintain a network for a couple of people.

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on March 05, 2020, 03:02:23 PM
Dutch Government doubles renewable energy subsidies to €4bn

The Dutch Government has announced it will double the amount of money available under its renewable energy subsidy programme to €4 billion (£3.4bn) in 2020, in a bid to meet its obligations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by the end of 2020.

The government previously planned to offer a total of €2 billion (£1.7bn) in clean energy subsidies.

Eric Wiebes, Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy said: “The extra money is intended to help the country meet its promise to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

“There are a large number of projects that can offer a cost-effective contribution.”

https://www.energylivenews.com/2020/03/05/dutch-government-doubles-renewable-energy-subsidies-to-e4bn/

Good news. When you don´t have original ideas throw money at it. That is not bad but if i were in  the government i would also directly invest into upgrading the grid.

Having better connections to the parts where there is relatively little energy use but lots of land will allow us to build additional solar or wind power. We can already build that but we cannot get the energy to where it is needed.

Upgrading takes years but the government could improve that. Basically have more people on these projects. At least in government so they can do their response times a lot quicker.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on March 23, 2020, 04:18:45 PM
The dutch government earmarked 200 million to connect 55.000 rental houses to local or regional warming grids (warmtenet). So max 5000 per house. Can also be used tfor houses that are connected to the warming grid but still use gas for cooking/warming water. Subsidy available from may this year.

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6039620/kabinet-maakt-200-miljoen-vrij-voor-aardgasvrij-maken-van-huurwoningen.html
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on April 03, 2020, 12:31:26 AM
Quote
Het kabinet wil de energieproductie van drie overgebleven kolencentrales, twee op de Maasvlakte en een in de Eemshaven, dit jaar flink terugschroeven. Dat kan eventueel gepaard gaan met sluiting. Zo moet het CO2-doel uit het Urgenda-vonnis alsnog worden gehaald: voor het einde van dit jaar minimaal 25 procent minder uitstoot van broeikasgassen vergeleken met 1990.

De inzet van het kabinet is dat de capaciteit van twee centrales wordt teruggeschroefd tot 25 procent van de totale capaciteit, in combinatie met de sluiting van de derde centrale.

...

De kolencentrales zijn relatief nieuw, ze werden in 2015 en in 2016 opgeleverd.

https://www.nu.nl/politiek/6042191/kabinet-schroeft-productie-kolencentrales-terug-voor-klimaatdoel-urgenda.html

I like this one.

Because of the Urgenda case we are turning down the coals output.

We have 3 coal plants. 2 in Rotterdam , 1 in Groningen. Two of them will run at 25% capacity and a third will be closed. They are all rather new and at least one was opened on some scheme to possibly do carbon capture but they never got round to that (not that the VVD cared but basically it was fraud or a really crap way to make those kind of arrangements).

I think they will close 1 in Rotterdam because there is quite a lot of industry around Eemshaven so it makes sense to keep that.

 

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on April 13, 2020, 12:41:58 AM
More of a consequence but lets note this:

Quote
Nederlandse zonnepanelen wekken de afgelopen dagen recordhoeveelheden elektriciteit op. Zaterdagmiddag steeg de piekproductie tot bijna 5 miljard watt en was zo'n 40 procent van de elektriciteit in Nederland afkomstig van de zon. Dat dit aandeel zo groot is, komt mede doordat we door de coronacrisis iets minder elektriciteit gebruiken.

https://www.nu.nl/klimaat/6044230/zonnepanelen-breken-records-in-zonnig-april-terwijl-stroomvraag-zakt.html

It was 4,96. Since the day is already half an hour longer current production is way up.

Last year solar grew by 50%.
They now provided 11% of our energy needs compared to half that last year.

Numbers will go up with a peak in june.

Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on April 25, 2020, 01:55:59 PM
GOV’T READY TO SLASH CO2 EMISSIONS; ACTIVISTS CRITICIZE NITROGEN PLAN

On Friday, Ministers Erik Wiebes of Economic Affairs and Climate and Carola Schouten of Agriculture presented how they plan to reduce CO2 and nitrogen emissions. One goal is to reduce carbon emissions by 25 percent by the end of this year, compared to 1990, and thereby comply with a Dutch Supreme Court ruling in a case brought by sustainability foundation Urgenda. This goal will likely be achieved in 2020 solely due due to external factors like the mild winter and the coronavirus crisis, according to the PBL Envirionmental Assessment Agency which looked at the impact of both a short-term and long-term crisis caused by the pandemic.

However, the reduction in emissions from the crisis is not expected to continue beyond 2021, and the Cabinet would rather put a system in place to comply with the Urgenda ruling now and remove future barriers to economic recovery, Wiebes said in a letter to Parliament on Friday. The biggest decrease in emissions would then come from cutting coal-fired electricity. The government plans to implement an emissions cap on its remaining coal-fired power plants, with penalties in place if the plant exceeds that limit.

The Economic Affairs Ministry had also been investigating the possibility of shutting the country's last coal power plants. However, Wiebes wants the plants to be able to provide a higher energy output should there be a shortfall in supply. The situation with coal will be re-evaluated later in the year, but in the meantime, Wiebes has allocated four billion euros to get more sustainable energy projects up and running, which can then increased the country's power supply.

The government is also taking on a number of recommendations made by Urgenda. This includes a subsidy scheme for LED lighting and energy efficiency in greenhouse horticulture. Those who replace their old refrigerators and freezers with more efficient models by trading them in with the purchase of a newer model will also qualify for at least 35 euros cash back from the government.

Subsidy schemes will also be introduced for making homes energy-neutral and for solar panel installations, but this will likely only affect emissions in the coming years. More resources will also be made available to combat the illegal trade in fluoridated gasses.

continues on:
https://nltimes.nl/2020/04/25/govt-ready-slash-co2-emissions-activists-criticize-nitrogen-plan

or

Dutch officials reveal measures to cut emissions after court ruling

The Dutch government has announced measures including huge cuts to coal use, garden greening and limits on livestock herds as part of its plan to lower emissions to comply with a supreme court ruling.

Climate litigation activists described the move as “an enormous win”. The small non-profit Urgenda Foundation, which filed the initial legal challenge in 2013, said this and earlier compliance measures totalled about €3bn euros, which confirms the impact of the world’s most successful climate lawsuit to date.

Under the new package, coal-fired power stations will have to scale back or close completely , cattle and pig herds will be reduced, subsidies will be provided to home owners to use less concrete and more plants in their gardens, and industry will have to find alternatives for several polluting processes.

and much more on:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/dutch-officials-reveal-measures-to-cut-emissions-after-court-ruling
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on May 06, 2020, 09:57:05 AM
Living in the Netherlands, I provide here my monthly energy bill to show that I am being punished for having a low electricity use and no gas use. Punished because I pay a high price for electricity/KWh and pay an infinite price for gas.

I only use electricity, which is 4.83 euro's without tax (BTW). I use no gas at all.
What do you think of this?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: oren on May 06, 2020, 10:25:52 AM
 I don't know details about the Netherlands but in many places the cost of providing the service (infrastructure, connectivity, maintenance, managing the customers, billing) is actually higher than the cost of generation. This will become even more true with renewables, where the marginal cost of kwh ia often zero.
Question: can you disconnect from the gas network, since you're not using it at all?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on May 06, 2020, 01:53:52 PM
Technically you can get rid of the gas connection and associated costs but at a cost. They charge about 600 to remove it so that only pays of after 5 years or so.

This would be fine if you are the owner and plan to stay for a while or if you made it a gasless house on purpose.

In this case there might be more people in the building with some maybe using gas?

The entry that surprised me most was the actual ´voorschot gas´. Did you change energy providers recently?
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on May 07, 2020, 04:39:47 AM
Thanks for the replies.
kassy is right about the disconnection costs. As I understand it, my provider, and I think they're not an exception, cannot charge me for 0 m3 gas use but they have to charge me a minimum usage amount in order for their computersystem to make me pay the transport costs which is compulsory when you have a connection. It is not allowed to disconnect because these appartments don't have any other means of heating. And as kassy stated, even if it would be allowed it is too expensive for me as a poor renter.

I posted it to show that The Netherlands is in no way progressive with handling individual 'green behaviour'. It is preposterous that I have to pay for stuff I don't use at all!
This is an incentive in reverse, it is a barrier: Lower CO2 emissions = higher price per unit of energy, & Lower energy use = higher price per unit of energy.
So much for 'policies and solutions' in The Netherlands.


Another thing that's happening here is that our government plans on giving 2-4b euro's to the air line KLM. 2-4b euro's go to a very large carbon footprint generator in private hands.
I scratch my head and think "for that money we could have nationalised KLM and have complete control over it.
The same should happen with all public transport otherwise you cannot make 'green' policy without handing large amounts of money to private companies.

It's as if there still is no long-term view but just stumbling along over every unanticipated bump and pothole. Reactionary and chaotic. Dear governments, it is high time you stopped listening/submitting to the rich old families behind the scenes.

The metaphoric (ingrown) neo-liberal iron ball around the ankles of policy makers: Can the ball be cut loose and give us free rein to lower our collective carbon footprints in time?
Perhaps start with making it a criminal offence to externalise costs. Take the whole picture of all consequences.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on May 07, 2020, 02:56:33 PM
They have a rather crappy system if that is the case.

It is preposterous that I have to pay for stuff I don't use at all!

Not really, that is what taxes are for. Although of course you pay very little tax.
Some things i pay for which i am not using: education (no kids), health care (did not need it so far this year), roads between towns (i cycle), bijstand (did not need it so far this year). And yes that is a bit of a charged way of putting it to underscore the general principle.

Of course you only need a little patience since the gaslines will be removed eventually.

As for KLM not sure if you could nationalize it for that amount or should want to but basically carbon costs should be priced into flights but that cannot be done at a country level.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on May 07, 2020, 04:33:29 PM
Dear kassy, I don't get my (virtual) gas from the government but from a private corporation. I don't use their product. Therefore it is preposterous that I should pay for it. The only tax that applies here, as it says on my bill, is BTW. But I don't use any product. The bill states gas costs but I use no gas.
I understand what taxes are for.

Regarding the KLM, our oldest air line, the future looks bleak (emissions) and cuts will have to be made in air travel. Therefore it is better to have control over our future, especially if you're giving away (our tax money) 2-4 billion euro's.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on June 10, 2020, 03:11:19 PM
There is a new advice on nitrogen policy from the specialist group looking at the nitrogen problem.

The report is called ´Not everything can be done everywhere´ which is a surprisingly short and to the point title.

Some key finds:
1) We have a 5 billion euro 10 year buyout for farmers which is not ambitious enough. This will result in a 26% reduction by 2030 while at least 50% is needed.

2) The governments proposals so far not only lack ambition but they lack commitment.

Remkes: often i read ´the governemnet strives to´ The commitments should be put into a law. ´We do not want an obligation to try but an obligation for results.´.

Goals should be set at provincial level and the provinces can handle it from there.

3) Most important is that agriculture as 40% emitter should be reduced more. The proposed plan for voluntary reductions is not enough.
What is needed is aimed buy outs of farms close to the Natura 2000 areas.

These measures actually work together. Lets say some farmer quits because he has no heirs is not sure of the near and long term future but he is in an area with lots of room. A farmer that is near a nature area but who wants to keep on farming could move to the other farm and go on there.

4) Shipping needs to be greener

5) Peak emitters heavy industry or Rotterdam Harbor, Schiphol Airport also need extra measures.

6) Temporary emission rights can be used for stuck infrastructure projects if above is realized in a goal driven way.

From AD paper 9th june. Italics my comment.

Basically Johan Remkes´role is to play a devils advocate to the government to make sure they don´t stall to much and he is doing a good job.


Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on June 24, 2020, 03:01:01 PM
So by 2030 we should have green energy.

The country has been divided in 30 energy regions. The idea is that they work out the local measures. The first round of plans has been completed and here are some trends.
Goal is 35 TWh of solar and wind (which is only 30% of what we use).

1) The regions prefer solar to wind which is much more expensive adding a billion of costs.
Solar is more expensice then wind and it requires more investment in the grid.

There is much more resistance to wind parks from people. Solar roofs should be a big gain mainly for urban areas.

Wind:Solar is now 60:40 and with the plans shifts to 20:80.

2) Wind yields three times as much energy for same installed power.

3) One reason for the choices is that the regions don´t feel the costs or efficiency of the overall system so they mainly decide on what is popular with the people and how they think about using public space. Last sentence is a literal translation and it is obtuse in dutch too. Just reads like no windmills in our backyard, frontyard or general vicinity used twice.

So maybe there should be a little more central planning (it´s a small country anyway) but we will get to that hopefully.

From Regio´s verkiezen due zonne-energie boven wind NRC 15 july 2020 paper edition. Story was not free on their web edition.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on July 03, 2020, 02:30:32 PM
Schouten houdt vast aan veevoerplan voor stikstofreductie

https://www.nu.nl/politiek/6062049/schouten-houdt-vast-aan-veevoerplan-voor-stikstofreductie.html

Dutch minister of Agriculture plans to regulate by law the amount of protein that can be added as animal feed. The farmers hate this but they did not come up with workable plans to reduce nitrogen pollution in time.

They are protesting now but there are no options left: We need the reduction to be able to build houses and roads the minister said.

Reducing proteins in the animal feed reduces the amount om ammonia in urine and feces.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on July 11, 2020, 09:11:47 AM
https://www.omropfryslan.nl/nijs/975605-flylan-wekket-tefolle-enerzjy-op-stroom-moat-oars-brukt-wurde

In Friesland in the North we have a very shallow sea, the Wadden sea, and a series of small islands.
On the island of Vlieland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlieland) (ca. 30Km from the coast) there is so much renewable energy generated that it overloads the cable connecting it to the main land.

The, privatised, electrical infrastructure company "Liander (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liander)" says it will cost too much (€15 million) to upgrade the cable. They even say that the tax payer has to pay for that. Then why hasn't the cable been upgraded already?

This is the same company that is responsible for many black-out's lately. Also through incompetence and/or cost cutting imo.

One would expect an (monopoly) infrastructure organisation to plan long-term and be aware of developments. The amount of electrical energy generated on that island is not happening all of a sudden but they did not see this coming and there is apparently no oversight and coordinated planning. Another example of incompetence imo. The reason is likely cost cutting or in other words: profit maximisation. Cost cutting leads to lack of maintenance, lack of redundancy, lack of long term vision and planning and less professional/scientific thinking and incompetence. No doubt the board room is filled with rich people.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on July 11, 2020, 06:19:32 PM
Upgrading the grid should be tackled at a national level and we will get there eventually just not soon enough.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on July 12, 2020, 07:38:54 AM
You are right kassy, but the problem with privitisations is that this in no longer in the governments' hands. Government has no control over 'national level' and apparantly didn't have long term planning and oversight either.

They have lost control with the privitisations and now have to talk to and hand over loads of our money to the privatised infrastructure companies. The same situation applies to e.g. the busses where you can't make them all electric if that is government policy because they there is no government control and it has to hand over loads of taxpayer money to the individual companies.

I presume that re-nationalisation of infrastructure is out of the question in all the neo-liberal countries.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: blumenkraft on July 12, 2020, 09:36:30 AM
IMHO, everything that is public infrastructure should be in public, not private hands.

This is something to fight for in the EU! Please vote accordingly (i.e. no neoliberals or conservatives).
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on July 14, 2020, 05:10:37 PM
NETHERLANDS STILL PUSHING €8 BILLION INTO FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY ANNUALLY: ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

...

The over 8 billion euros in state aid to the fossil fuel industry listed in the report includes direct subsidies, but also tax advantages and price support. The largest part, almost 5 billion euros per year, goes to aviation and shipping, industry, power plants and agriculture.

42 percent of the total amount is for the aviation sector - airlines receive billions of euros in benefits. And this excludes coronavirus support. There is no VAT on kerosene, which means there is no tax on airline tickets. Because there is VAT on all other forms of transport, this leads to an uneven playing field, the environmental organizations said. "It is absurd that you pay more VAT for your tram ticket than for a plane ticket to Bali."

According to the organizations, the government also indirectly supports fossil energy projects abroad. For example, Dutch companies receive government support for building refineries in Oman and oil platforms in Mexico. "The Netherlands exports the climate crisis through our fossil support," they said. "Poor countries in particular become more dependent on oil and gas." And it is the people in these countries that are hit hardest by the climate crisis.

The industry also enjoys major tax advantages. "The big polluters from heavy industry receive millions in tax benefits, which are coughed up by households and small entrepreneurs," Milieudefensie director Donald Pols said.

...

https://nltimes.nl/2020/07/14/netherlands-still-pushing-eu8-billion-fossil-fuel-industry-annually-environmental

So on the the upside there is plenty of money to liberate for the transition.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: gerontocrat on July 14, 2020, 09:46:40 PM
You are right kassy, but the problem with privitisations is that this in no longer in the governments' hands. Government has no control over 'national level' and apparantly didn't have long term planning and oversight either.
Is there a regulator?
Privatisations of Government owned utilities usually required legislation.

If you want anything to happen you have to do your homework & find out what levers Government have over these greedy arseholes.

Then you have to embarass your National & Local elected representatives with the aim of threatening their prospects for reelection. And the regulator can always be made to feel uncomfortable.

& to do this you have to give yourself a time budget. Three times I have had to launch a campaign on behalf of myself and some friends to fight injustice. I gave myself 2 hours a day to start with and then just 1 hour a day to make the scumbags life a little less pleasant. A strict time limit avoids getting obsessed.

& you may well get absolutely nowhere. I got one success, one failure and one 50-50, and got very tired.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: nanning on July 15, 2020, 06:29:39 AM
You really are a great fighter for the good cause gero imo.

Thanks for the tips for engaging and setting a self-protecting time limit on ones efforts. I love self discipline.

I gather that this has to be done via the media, preferably national media, and I have no idea how to start that because I am alone without any credentials or contacts. And I don't have money to spend on it.

I am a long time member of the Socialistische Partij SP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Party_(Netherlands)). Perhaps I can use that channel but all things that smell of socialism are not high up on our media's priorities and our neo-liberal dominated politics. Socialism has been effectively demonized.

Perhaps an organisation that fights for our environment would have more chance, such as the "milieudefensie (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milieudefensie)" organisation kassy mentioned. I'll have to think about it. It has to have a massive reach for it to be effective. Perhaps kassy has some further ideas...

edit: change "discipline" into "self discipline"
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on August 19, 2020, 03:38:38 PM
Schouten houdt vast aan veevoerplan voor stikstofreductie

https://www.nu.nl/politiek/6062049/schouten-houdt-vast-aan-veevoerplan-voor-stikstofreductie.html

Dutch minister of Agriculture plans to regulate by law the amount of protein that can be added as animal feed. The farmers hate this but they did not come up with workable plans to reduce nitrogen pollution in time.

They are protesting now but there are no options left: We need the reduction to be able to build houses and roads the minister said.

Reducing proteins in the animal feed reduces the amount om ammonia in urine and feces.

A couple of month later.

https://www.nu.nl/politiek/6071851/minister-schouten-schrapt-veevoermaatregel-vanwege-beperkte-stikstofreductie.html

Skipping the dutch quote but basically they cancelled it.

The reason is that it would not reproduce enough reductions. Of course that means the whole reduction gap will still need to be plugged but there are elections coming up so they will kick that can fully up the road even though that is basically contrary to the outcome of the lawsuit.

Maybe they figure there will be no further litigation or that they can at least hide behind covid. Practically it´s up to the next government.

A more practical background: one big problem was that the additional feed comes on top of grass but the yield for grass has been exceptionally low because it was so sunny which took out a big part of the budget. The yield was estimated from 2018 which is a recent warm year so that does not bode well for the future.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on August 27, 2020, 07:21:04 PM
Anderhalve dag per week thuiswerken kan 3 miljard autokilometers besparen

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6073497/anderhalve-dag-per-week-thuiswerken-kan-3-miljard-autokilometers-besparen.html

Not policy yet but we could use this:

Quote
Working from home 1.5 days a week could safe 3 billion car travel kms


If 1 in 8 employees works from home for 1.5 day per week its saves 3 billion car travel kms and
353.600 tons of CO2.

The number is based on two thirds travelling by car.

Other savings 632 tons of nitrogen and 11 tons of fine particulate matter.

It would save 1,7 billion euros of costs. 78 million hours of travel saved , more productivity and less pollution costs.

Savings for less maintenance needed for infrastructure is not included in this number.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: Sciguy on February 03, 2021, 12:53:49 AM
A greenhouse nursery using geothermal heating to save more than 25,000 tons of CO2 won the EZK Energy Award in 2020.  Other nominees included a farm producing renewable natural gas from cattle manure and a technique to recycle Styrofoam into building insulation.

https://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/greenhouse-operator-utilising-geothermal-wins-prestigious-government-sustainability-award-in-the-netherlands/ (https://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/greenhouse-operator-utilising-geothermal-wins-prestigious-government-sustainability-award-in-the-netherlands/)

Quote
Greenhouse operator utilising geothermal wins prestigious government sustainability award in the Netherlands
Alexander Richter
29 Jan 2021

Dutch greenhouse nursery company Amerlaan wins prestigious EZK Energy Award 2020 by the Netherland's Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate (EZK). The company was awarded for its sustainability efforts saving more than 25,000 tons of CO2 annually by using geothermal energy in its greenhouses.

Quote
The following three companies have been nominated by the jury for the EZK Energy Award 2020:

- Dairy farm Stokman Koudum – The Stokman family business produces green gas by fermenting cattle manure. With this, homes in the Koudum are heated sustainably.
- PolyStryreneLoop BV – PolyStyreneLoop develops a sustainable recycling technique with which polystyrene foam can be used as an insulation material in construction.
- Kwekerij Ammerlaan – Kwekerij Ammerlaan saves more than 25,000 tons of CO2 annually by using geothermal energy in its greenhouses. Ammerlaan was chosen as the winner by the jury because of the connecting role that the company has played in the region. In addition to its own greenhouses, 24 other growers, apartments in Pijnacker-Noord, Stanislas College, a sports center and a swimming pool make use of geothermal energy.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on February 26, 2021, 10:20:48 PM
Some findings from our pilot to make homes gas free.

At this early stage there are some areas where homeowners can get subsidies to get of the gas net. You can choose not to participate either because you do not want to or because you want to but the costs don´t add up.

https://www.nu.nl/wonen/6118382/aardgasvrij-maken-van-proefwijken-legt-volgens-planbureau-knelpunten-bloot.html

The first pilot projects for making homes gas free revealed some structural problems which made it harder to speed up the procees according to the PBL (Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving or Planning Bureau for the Environment where environment is the human one).

The way we do it now the process needs a lot of detailed tailoring. Every house is different.
There are no standards for cost sharing and it is also unclear who is responsible.

2050 should be the end date for gas warmed houses.
So by 2030 the first 1,5 million of houses should be disconnected.
Until may 2020 8000 houses were decoupled. Targets should be 50k this year and 200k per year in 10 years time.

TNO assumes targets will not be met unless there is more national coordination. Processes are hindered by European rules for aquisition and the cities are waiting for a new law on Warmth which should help build up new types of grids.

Practical details:
Houses and wishes of occupants differ.
Every house is a case of it´s own. Even if the houses were similar initially they might end up different to what people end up doing to them.
´
In the current set up just one home owner who is not interested makes things more expensive but then agian that is obvious and only a result of the stage we are in.

One practical detail: it is easier to change naighbourhoods with lots of corporation houses (rentals).

There is a flaw in costs. Gas is too cheap because the damage is not priced in. Because it is artificially cheap it also makes the cost balance on decoupled homes look worse.

TNO came up with another plan to accelarate the program. While the cabinet aimed for changes per neighbourhood controlled by cities (who determine the order) it would make more sense to look at all types of houses build the same way. This mostly comes down to the time the houses were build but it is a much better way to coordinate it. If you do this nationally it is also clearer for home owners.

About 80 to 90% of dutch homes can be grouped like this. If you are upgrading about 15,000 houses at the same time you could even make money on it.

https://www.nu.nl/wonen/6118382/aardgasvrij-maken-van-proefwijken-legt-volgens-planbureau-knelpunten-bloot.html

In general we need to plan this on a national scale, in fact we need to do a lot of this on a national scale like changing the grid and deciding what we build where. That should be obvious but it is contrary to the trend enabled by 10 years of liberalist vandalism.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: interstitial on February 27, 2021, 03:56:48 AM
I do not know much about the Netherlands but hopefully they banned new gas connections first.
Title: Re: Policy and solutions in the Netherlands
Post by: kassy on February 27, 2021, 03:46:05 PM
New houses should not be connected but there is a delay from the planning stage. In 2018 about 10% build that year still had them.

https://www.nu.nl/economie/6118912/tienduizenden-extra-technici-gezocht-klimaatdoelen-lijken-anders-onhaalbaar.html

The transition also needs an extra 23000 to 28000 extra technically skilled workers.