Readers’ letters: Get rid of those earthquake experts in Groningen

What continues to amaze me about the slow and expensive settlement of the earthquake damage in Groningen for more than 10 years is that the real cause of this slow and expensive settlement is not named, namely that a play is performed by so-called earthquake experts, in fact construction experts, which makes it all take so long and cost so much.

They pretend to be able to tell if a crack or subsidence is earthquake related. They write voluminous reports, in which each crack is described in detail and how to repair it, and it is stated with little substantiation what the cause is: earthquake-related or not earthquake-related (settlements). The fact is that the cause is usually impossible to trace.

The only thing we know is that typical damage (cracks, settlements and subsidence) occurred during gas extraction in a large area, the contour area. Therefore, without further ado, compensate all those typical earthquake damage; a general pardon for Groningen.

As with a fire, damage experts fully determine the extent of the damage, including subsidence. This prevents unnecessary and expensive bureaucracy, frustration among the victims and the settlement of claims can be done much faster. No more haggling over a crack.

So get rid of those so-called earthquake experts and only use damage experts.
André Doorlagvictim, Groningen

Safety standard

Stef Kranendijk and Jeroen Smit argue that the Groningen gas tap must be opened as much as possible in order to combat inflation and thwart Putin. No! Groningers are more than a simple calculation as both authors make: 12 billion cubic meters of gas yields 10 billion euros and you can build 27,000 houses from that. The government has already received that 10 billion through the VAT revenues from the more expensive energy prices.

But more importantly: they don’t say a word about the safety of the people of Groningen. As long as a different safety standard applies to the people of Groningen than to other Dutch people (namely no safety standard in relation to gas extraction) and as long as there is still legal inequality in the settlement of claims (damage to my house was quickly and generously compensated, that of my neighbor is for years in a lingering procedure), there is no discussion about opening the gas tap.
Tabe JorritsmaOostwold

Soil

Stef Kranendijk and Jeroen Smit argue that at least 12 billion cubic meters of Groningen gas per year can be extracted safely (‘code green’). That is not the case. If you produce natural gas slowly the earthquakes come slowly, if you produce faster they come faster, but they come anyway. It is better to inject a cubic meter of nitrogen gas for every cubic meter of natural gas extracted so that the soil remains stable.
David Smuldersprofessor TU/e, Eindhoven

promises

Open the gas tap as far as possible, compensating for the people from Groningen in the process. How naive can you be?

The concept of ‘compensating generously’ has been around for years and was even redefined on 11 July in the ‘Social Charter’, an agreement between all parties involved in the earthquake file, including the government. The charter has also been signed by the NCG, the National Coordinator Groningen, which is responsible for the reinforcements. Time and again, new agreements are made and promises are made, but in Groningen we don’t notice anything.

There are countless examples, they are playing now; residents who have been living in a replacement house for six months and have not heard anything about the reinforcement of their own house; residents who are told that the reinforcement of their house is being moved while the belongings are packed; reinforcement projects that are at a standstill because contractors do not get their money; residents who have already advanced moving and accommodation costs for months; residents who simply do not receive a response from the NCG to letters and e-mails are not called back. It’s quiet on the other side.

And we are not talking about the heritage that is being lost, and certainly not about the social and psychological problems of many residents in the earthquake area.

Despite the parliamentary inquiry into gas extraction in The Hague, nothing has changed in Groningen. The government should be ashamed of themselves. Unfortunately Stef Kranendijk and Jeroen Smit, we don’t believe in it; If the government can’t do it today, it won’t work tomorrow.
Cock PeterseLoppersum

healthcare costs

Healthcare costs too much and politicians have to make choices, says André den Exter. But you can also choose not to undergo expensive life-prolonging treatments. Everyone dies, so that is not a choice, but you determine the cost of death yourself.
Bertus ten BarkeAlmere Haven

Star restaurants

Letter writer Hans van der Geest finds it difficult that de Volkskrant in her comments she writes compassionately and critically about poverty in the wealthy Netherlands, while the Magazine contains a review of a star restaurant.

I have no problem with that. De Volkskrant is also there for me and I like to dine regularly in a star restaurant and I am happy with the reviews. I work hard enough for it and I find it an experience and worth it every time. Welcome to the real world Hans, where these two worlds can coexist without getting worked up about it.
Frans LeliveldAmsterdam

To smoke

In the review of the movie Decision to leave the reviewer describes the meeting between a woman and a man. I quote: ‘Cigarettes would certainly come in handy in their acquaintance. Now all he can do is offer her cream and mints, and treat her to fancy sushi…’

Frankly, I prefer mints and sushi, and I’m far from alone in doing so. Isn’t it time to stop romanticizing smoking in books, movies, and god damn movie reviews?
Els van Lierop‘s-Hertogenbosch

Intuition

Anthropologist Birgit Meyer explains how intuition has helped her and can help science in general. That’s like saying that breathing has helped you and can help people in general.

We always use intuition in our thinking, feeling and acting. But often we are not aware of it and think that we act rationally, both in everyday life and in science. It is advisable to try to be aware that you use intuition and then determine through research and reflection whether that intuition is correct, both in everyday life and in science.
Hans CroneGroesbeek