News Nitrogen
Rabbinge: 'Shrinking livestock as a goal is incredibly stupid'
Nitrogen emissions can be reduced by 2030% by 70, even without forced reduction of livestock. That is what Rudy Rabbinge, professor emeritus, former senator and member of the Remkes Committee, said in an interview with Boerenbusiness† Closing agricultural businesses costs a lot of money and, according to Rabbinge, results in little emission reduction. "Reducing livestock as a goal is incredibly stupid."
Recent Explorations who should provide the new cabinet with guidance for nitrogen policy, argue that techniques such as separation of manure and urine are not yet profitable and developments are not moving fast enough. According to the reports, a sharp reduction in the cattle population is therefore unavoidable.
How do you assess the scope of these explorations?
"That is complete nonsense. If you implement a policy and are prepared to co-invest, it can go very quickly. I am convinced that by 2030 there can be at least a 70% reduction in nitrogen emissions. In arable farming they are already making large Emission-free arable farming is already being practiced here and there. It requires investments for dairy farming. You simply have to move towards systems that avoid emissions. You have to look for the solution mainly in the stables, but also in the entire business operation. stable, you have to separate manure into a solid and liquid phase. You can spread the solid phase earlier, urine later in April, May. There are studies showing that it works, but you have to look at precursors. For example, only the precursors keep air scrubbers work well with them. They work very well."
Special floor systems that separate manure and urine are very expensive. Who should pay that?
"That costs about 1.000 euros per cow. 250 cows means an investment of 250.000 euros. Half can pay farmers, the other half the government. You can also say: banks must also contribute, because they are partly to blame for all things they have taken place. They pretend not, but they have social responsibility in this. But the question of blame is less important than the solution."
Is shrinkage of the livestock not necessary at all?
"I do not exclude autonomous shrinkage, as has happened in recent years. In the past 30 years, the number of pigs and dairy cows has decreased by 30%. We have gone from 2,4 million to 1,6 million cows, mainly due to productivity development. For now, there is still room for development."
"The measures that are now being announced are not efficient and effective. The approach presented by the Remkes Commission last year is the best: balanced, for every sector, including aviation and mobility. Nitrogen oxide emissions from industry are often ammonia emissions mainly come from dairy farming In the past mainly from intensive livestock farming, now 70% from dairy farming and 25 percent from arable farming You can close a small number of agricultural businesses, but that will cost a lot of money and yields little in terms of emissions."
What does a great deal of reduction in nitrogen emissions mean then?
"A Minas 2.0 (the one suggested by the Remkes Commission) Accountable Fabric Balance, ed.) can mean a continuation of the emission reduction. Minas (Mineral Declaration System) was introduced in the 90s. That has worked very well. Nitrogen emissions decreased until Minas was abolished in 2006. Nothing was prescribed by the government, but entrepreneurs were only judged on the basis of results. A levy on surplus. Make sure you measure, that is also very good. You will be rewarded if you do it right. Minas was settled at farm level, not per hectare, which made it susceptible to fraud. It should be done with measurements so that fraud can be prevented. Instead of adjusting that, the whole system has been abolished and a completely resource-driven approach has been taken. This is the result of PAS (Nitrogen Approach Programme). 60% of the reduction has occurred with the Minas system. The fact that it has not been prosecuted has led to inefficiency and much irritation among the farmer. In the past there was resistance to Minas, but now almost all farmers want it."
The party for which you were a senator and member of parliament, the PvdA is also in favor of reducing livestock and a switch to nature-inclusive circular agriculture. How do you view that?
"I think that's very stupid. But well, I can't do much about that. I will address the new agricultural spokesperson (Joris Thijssen ed.) about it. With Minas 2.0, combined with autonomous shrinkage, forced closure is not necessary. livestock as a goal is very stupid I hope the new cabinet is sensitive to that I have the impression that D66 party leader Sigrid Kaag knows that too, but if De Groot gets his way ... The number of animals has become the goal, because the canal belt determines that. They want Ot and Sien agriculture."
Linda van Eekeres
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.
