Illegal paper sludge in manure digesters in Drenthe and Groningen. Prosecutor demands tons of money back from five companies

The Public Prosecution Service demanded high fines from five companies in the court in Zwolle on Monday for their supply of illegal paper sludge to eleven manure digesters in Friesland, Drenthe and Groningen.

In August 2019, the environmental service Fumo found 1,500 cubic meters of contaminated sludge on the property of the Van Oosten partnership in Hantumhuizen. This waste product from the paper industry, contaminated with copper and ink, turned out to have ended up at ten other manure digesters in Friesland, Drenthe and Groningen.

From September 1, 2018 to the end of 2019, a total of 9,400 tons were brought north. A large part was spread on the farmlands. The eleven manure digester farmers ultimately escaped legal prosecution. However, the owners will have to repay the subsidy they received.

However, it didn’t stop there. Under the name Brandgans, the Northern Netherlands police initiated a criminal investigation, which resulted in five suspicious trading parties.

Limburg paper factories

The source of the contaminated sludge is Industriewater Eerbeek (IWE), a company that purifies water for three paper factories. The 9,400 tons of waste found its way to various farms in Friesland, Groningen and Drenthe via the Limburg recycling company N+P.

Because of their role, Agroproducts in Niebert, Van der Veer Mesthandel in Warns and PJ Wassenaar & Zonen in Berltsum also ended up in the suspects of the Multiple Economic Criminal Chamber of the Zwolle court on Monday.

All suspects claim that they did not know that paper sludge may not be processed by manure digesters. Court chairman Dirk ten Boer wants to know how they arrived at this.

Dairy Campus

Paul Oostelbos of N+P says that he was informed by experts from the Dairy Campus in Leeuwarden. “All signals turned green,” says Oostelbos. “So we thought: we don’t run any risks with this.” Did he not have any doubts? “I’m not going to sit in the expert’s chair. If they say that to me, then I believe it.”

Public prosecutor Petra van der Vliet attaches little credence to those words. “I take great credit for the ease with which these professional market players seem to deal with their responsibilities,” she says.

“Our climate desperately needs companies to undergo a change in mentality and to take more into account the interests of the environment and not just look after their own wallets.”

The police investigation established that the water purification company of the paper manufacturers did indeed know that the copper contents of the paper sludge were too high. “But Industriewater Eerbeek places full responsibility on the transporter, the intermediary and the recipients.”

Climate issues

The prosecutor realizes that the criminal offenses are now four years old. However, given the climate problem, Van der Vliet speaks of “a dire current situation”. If the trial had not taken so long, her sentence would have been at least a quarter higher.

The officer is demanding a fine of 100,000 euros against Industriewater Eerbeek. In addition, the Public Prosecution Service (OM) is claiming back 309,000 euros in “unlawful advantage”. N+P has been fined 25,000 euros by the Public Prosecution Service and must repay more than 52,000 euros.

Agroproducts in Niebert should demand a fine of 10,000 euros, with an additional claim of 11,600 euros. Van der Veer Mesthandel in Warns is eligible for a fine of 25,000 euros and would have to pay back more than 53,000.

Finally, there is a demand for a fine of 15,000 euros and a claim of 23,000 euros for PJ Wassenaar & Zonen in Berltsum. Due to a previous conviction, the Public Prosecution Service also wants 120 hours of community service for the entrepreneur this time.

The court has yet to decide on the Public Prosecution Service’s demands. Wassenaar believes that he has already been severely punished by the publicity surrounding the case. He points to his co-suspects and especially the larger parties. “Do you have the feeling that you have been used?” the court chairman asks. The entrepreneur: “Yes, because I’m not like that myself.”

ttn-45