Report: if all farmers innovate optimally, ‘an enormous emission reduction’ can be achieved. ‘Livestock reduction remains necessary,’ says the professor

Ammonia emissions and therefore nitrogen emissions from agriculture can be reduced by almost 50 percent, provided that all agricultural companies use the best techniques and measures that are or will become available within five years to limit emissions. This reduction, compared to five years ago, can mainly be achieved by dairy farmers. If all innovations are introduced everywhere, all provinces can achieve their nitrogen targets. That shows an investigation from Wageningen University on behalf of the joint provinces. The report was presented on Monday by the Interprovincial Consultation and sent to the House of Representatives.

Coincidentally, the results appeared shortly after the cabinet established a ministerial nitrogen committee. The reason is a ruling by the Council of State last month, which stipulates that less nitrogen may be emitted than previously determined. Moreover, politicians in The Hague are anxiously awaiting the verdict on Wednesday in a lawsuit by environmental organization Greenpeace, which demands that the government do more quickly to reduce nitrogen.

62 innovative measures were examined for their effectiveness. This is particularly significant in dairy farming

Agriculture causes a large part of the emissions in the Netherlands. According to the report from Wageningen, in theory, ammonia and methane emissions can be reduced by 61 to 72 percent, but “practically feasible” is a reduction of ammonia emissions by 41 to 50 percent. According to the researchers, this decrease can mainly be achieved through innovations in stables, in the storage of manure and the ‘administration’ of manure in the soil.

The costs of innovations to reduce ammonia in stables amount to 270 million euros per year, according to the study. In addition, the costs for other innovations, such as manure, are added. These amount to a maximum of 127 million euros per year. Previously, Minister Femke Wiersma (Agriculture, BBB) allocated a maximum of 2.5 billion euros for innovation. “That money will soon run out,” said Wim de Vries, professor of environmental systems analysis at Wageningen University, who explained the report on Monday.

The researchers examined 62 innovation measures for effectiveness. This is especially significant in dairy farming. The report is “an eye-opener,” says Overijssel deputy Gert Harm ten Bolscher (SGP) on behalf of the provinces. “With all the caveats you can make, it appears that you can achieve a huge reduction with innovation, more than by buying up or halving the livestock.”

Livestock

Despite the possible gains through innovation, according to the researchers, it remains necessary to reduce the livestock population. “The chance that you can get away without reducing herd size is not too great,” says Wim de Vries. According to him, assuming that everyone will participate in the innovations is “a somewhat overly optimistic assessment.” Moreover, the question is whether the innovative farmers do exactly what is necessary.

In short: “In practice, it is virtually impossible to correctly implement a wide range of measures everywhere, so it is realistic to indicate that a partial livestock reduction is necessary to achieve the national targets,” the researchers say.

The question is also whether all provinces and The Hague want or can implement innovations. Jan Willem Erisman, professor of environment and sustainability at Leiden University, is sceptical. “Such reductions are often disappointing, especially if you do not make innovations mandatory, but only encourage them and have them implemented on a voluntary basis.”

Politics is needed to ensure that the agricultural sector is enthusiastic about this

“The variation in results is also often large,” Erisman explains. “The same measure can have completely different results. Some farmers do not receive clear information or receive inconsistent advice. Moreover, some farmers ignore the rules and are looking for a way out. Take the end of the manure derogation: farmers are allowed to spread less manure. And now some are building a temporary manure storage facility on their own property, in anticipation of a new derogation.”

Erisman himself expects more from measures such as administering less concentrates to dairy cows. “More concentrates means more protein, which means more nitrogen. A sharp reduction in that feed is effective.”

Goals

Requiring farmers to innovate is not the best method for reduction, according to North Holland deputy Jelle Beemsterboer (BBB), chairman of the Rural Area administrative advisory committee of the cooperating provinces. “Politics is needed to ensure that the agricultural sector is enthusiastic about this. And farmers must be given the freedom to invest in this.”

Researcher Wim de Vries is also in favor of using “the carrot rather than the stick” for the time being. Every farm is different.

Agriculture must also be held to fixed targets. De Vries: “Then as a farmer you know where you stand. Like in school, you have to get a grade to transfer. This means that if you have to get an eight and you are already at seven and a half, you have to do less than if you are at a three.”

However, enthusiasm among farmers about innovations is growing, says Overijssel deputy Ten Bolscher. He sometimes receives messages from farmers who say that they have achieved a significant reduction in emissions, for example through an animal feed measure. “That shows pride.”

Investing in innovation may become difficult in the short term as a result of the Council of State’s nitrogen ruling last month, says Ten Bolscher, on so-called ‘internal netting’. For example, if a farmer wants to build a low-emission stable, it seems that this reduction cannot be used for that new stable, but must be immediately skimmed off for the benefit of nature. “That’s what we’re stuck with now.”

To share





Email the editor