There is little to report from the circus Remkes in this episode of the Nitrogen Mood section. Monday it starts again. Still, there was plenty of other nitrogen and fertilizer news. Henk Staghouwer, usually so inconspicuous, started the week by throwing a bomb. Not only because of his departure from the cabinet, but before that with the announcement that an extension of the derogation for Dutch dairy farming is almost certainly no longer an option.
Staghouwer tried to soften the bitter pill a bit with the prospect of a reduction scheme. This is accompanied by a small compensation (per company) with presumably flat-rate payments per farmer. It is all not final yet, but between the lines it is indicated that the cards in the 'secret committee' (in the House of Representatives this is the committee for the intelligence services, in Brussels the Nitrate Committee) have already been shuffled.
From customization to the blunt axe
The agricultural sector already knew that severe weather was imminent, but was still dismayed. Because instead of all kinds of customization to limit the mineral load of the groundwater and focus on forms of circular agriculture, the Nitrates Directive will soon be a blunt ax and the use of fertilizers will also get a boost. Those who already wanted a smaller herd might not care, but they will.
Scope may not be overlooked
The day after Staghouwer left, the Council of State issued a special ruling. It was about low-emission stables, but it seems that the real news was packed between the sentences about those stables. And given the way in which the verdict was written, the judges at the Kneuterdijk may not have understood the meaning of their own words. This should not be surprising, because the nitrogen problem has become so complicated that parties sometimes pull things out that they had not foreseen at all. It even seems to have happened to the drivers of the case.
Importance of practical measurements
Many lawyers and, in the days that followed, judges have noticed it. What did the Council of State say? She emphasizes the importance of practical measurements versus the theory of models when it comes to emission reduction. A quote: "The emission factors .... have not been established on the basis of measurement protocols." And that is important, because 'The Minister of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality and the State Secretary for Infrastructure and Water Management have indicated to the House of Representatives that measures are being taken to ensure that emission reductions are not only achieved in theory, but also in practice. takes place'. There are more places to point out in the statement.
The ruling may refer to low-emission barns, but the fact that emissions reductions also take place in practice should not also apply to other calculation models. For example for Aerius? Many experts have started to ring a bell. Perhaps also with MOB and the Environment Association, who have brought the matter up, but they have not said anything about it yet.