Effect of the 122 plans for climate alarming

It looked like a skit from Jiskefet. Minister Rob Jetten who is being questioned in the House of Representatives about his plan to achieve a saving of 122 megatons of CO22 emissions with 2 climate measures. Jetten has an amount of €28 billion available for this. When asked by a Member of Parliament what the result of this astronomical amount will be, Jetten replied with a look and a grin on his face. Which shows that he realized very well how ridiculous it sounded: preventing the earth's temperature from rising by 0,00036 degrees in 2050. To quickly follow up with a memorized lesson about why his plans are absolutely necessary to save the earth.

For most of those 122 measures, it is not yet known what they will yield. Even worse, the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) performed a quick scan of Jetten's additional climate plans. The outcome is terrifying. Only 12 of the 82, or 14%, of the measures studied are effective in advance. The outcome of the other measures is debatable to say the least. For the agricultural sector, these measures include a tax per head of cattle and a CO2 tax on meat, dairy and fish, which also indirectly affects the sector's wallet.

So why continue with the plans? Is it Jetten's will that the Netherlands become the world's climate leader at all costs? After all, he has said before: "that he no longer wants to hear that it must remain 'feasible and affordable'". Everything to achieve at least 55% and preferably 60% less CO2 emissions in 2030. There is no doubt that he wants to be the best boy in the class, but I also think that the following aspect plays an important role.

Huge bag of money promoting innovation
I think that's based on what I know as the spaghetti strategy; you throw a plate of spaghetti against the wall and see which strings stick and which fall down. With his huge bag of money, Jetten wants to mobilize the business community to develop new techniques. Then we will see which innovations yield something and which remain stuck in their good pretensions. Such a tactic is often sold with the argument that we can build a green economy in the Netherlands in this way, from which the business community can develop a new revenue model. History has shown that this unfortunately usually does not work.

Thinking about innovations, my mind wandered to the low-emission floor at livestock farms. Once recommended by the government as a good innovation to help solve the nitrogen crisis without reducing livestock. Farmers had to invest in this themselves, without knowing whether the technology would work or whether it would hold up in court. According to a ruling by the Council of State, our highest administrative court, it is doubtful whether new low-emission livestock houses actually reduce ammonia emissions. This is based on the results of scientific studies by Statistics Netherlands and Wageningen University that the environmental performance of low-emission stables lags behind their pretensions.

Better destination with better climate result
Nice for the companies that sold all those floors, but bad for the farmers who see their investment go up in smoke and it doesn't help to reduce emissions either. I see many similarities with Jetten's plans, but it is very naive and unprofessional to roll out plans that we already know will not work and then spend € 28 billion on them. Think that many farmers know a better destination with a much better climate result for that money.

Kasper Walter

Kasper Walet is a former board member of the agricultural futures market. He has now been working under the name Maycroft for years as an independent adviser on energy and climate to governments and companies from all over the world.

© 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.