Energy, Environment, Agriculture and Sustainability

For NL PLAN, sustainability and the environment means bringing nature close to citizens and preserving it for future generations. We do not support large international projects that set their own agendas with central resources and out of the reach of citizens.

In addition, we recognize serious environmental problems, but are skeptical of the one-sided, and therefore propagandistic, way climate change is presented to the people as a problem. NL PLAN advocates regeneration and adaptation. Idealistic dots on the horizon. We want to encourage citizens to take initiative. Developing towards a sustainable society through entrepreneurship is the ideal direction.

NL PLAN argues that the current involvement in the physical environment is often accompanied by a sense of guilt and shame. Current politics argue that the world's emergency is man's fault, playing on shame and fear. We do not believe this is the most fertile ground to achieve positive systemic change.

Our action points include:

• Regeneration of ecosystems;
• Regeneration and adaptation of nature;
• Research into alternative energy sources;
• Supporting manure solidarity (distributing manure fairly);
• Encourage full recycling and encourage connection with nature, through allotments and more greenery in urban areas;
• Real factual approach regarding climate and nitrogen policies;
• Stop driving out farmers and solve environmental problems in consultation with farmers;
• Thorium-based nuclear power plants (molten salt reactors) over windmills, solar power and bio mass plants.

Climate, CO2, energy and nature

Leftists in particular claim that we must do something about the climate now, or else the world will perish. Although left and right is out of date, it can be said that NL PLAN has many left-wing views within the classic classification, but we do not go along with madness that can potentially disrupt the whole society. We saw a good example of this madness in June 2023 when Climate Minister Rob Jetten of D66 even had to admit that the €28 billion climate package would only lead to a reduction of 0.000036 degrees Celsius. We look much more from a scientific and pragmatic perspective.

It cannot be said that there is scientific consensus on the cause of climate change when more than 1,650 climate-critical peer-reviewed studies can be found. Also, the 97 percent consensus among scientists for human global warming from CO2 emissions is actually only 0.3 percent (Legates et al).

Climate is the change in weather in 30-year increments. Since 30 years as a minimum step is a long period of time, we have few measurement points to actually establish that the industrial revolution from ± 1750 and its associated CO2 emissions is the driver of climate change.

Average temperatures over the past century and a half contradict the idea of climate alarmists. True, temperatures rose steadily during the first half of the 20th century, only to fall slightly again until 1975 and then rise again, while the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere continued to rise. In addition, it is routinely concealed that between the 15th and 19th centuries we were emerging from a minor ice age and that the Middle Ages were warmer than today. In other words, climate change is not an environmental problem but an all-time phenomenon.

From ice cores of the Antarctic, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere can be measured over hundreds of thousands of years. Interestingly, this measurement clearly shows a lag between a rise in temperature and a change in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere during the various ice ages, with the rise in temperature occurring eight hundred years earlier than the rise in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. This suggests that there is most likely no causal relationship at all between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the average rise in temperature (Caillon et al, 2003).

Deforestation and petrification in large cities cause a reduction in natural buffers to cope with extreme weather events (which are of all times). Concrete cities may have insufficient drainage to cope with a heavy downpour, which can then be unfairly attributed to climate problems.

On the other hand, fossil fuels can be harmful to the environment in other areas (e.g., particulate matter emissions). It is important to gradually switch to other, more sustainable sources of energy, provided that this is done in a humane, non-autocratic and realistic way that also considers the harmful effects of non-fossil alternatives. 

NL PLAN wants to focus much more attention on serious environmental problems that have nothing to do with CO2 nitrogen and climate issues, such as deforestation, extreme amounts of plastic waste in rivers and oceans, and the toxins in our waters, atmosphere and soil that may lead to mass extinction of various life forms.

Limit Wind Generators

We favor "Power to the People," small-scale local solutions with support and revenue models for residents and business owners. Because the wind does not always blow enough, the energy output of wind turbines is unreliable. The latest generation of wind generators with shaft heights of 100 to 150 meters pollute the horizon and cause noise pollution and animal suffering. In addition, the production and dismantling of wind turbines is extremely environmentally damaging. Energy will have to be generated much more locally, using solar panels on rooftops, but there are snags for the future there as well.

Solar panels only on roofs

We favor solar panels on large roofs. Honor sustainable initiatives by residents and local entrepreneurs on a small scale. We are not in favor of facilitating an unfeasible climate project and are against the large-scale construction of solar meadows, as large amounts of solar panels actually increase the local climate problem. This is called the "Photovoltaic Heat Island Effect" (Barron-Gafford et al). As with wind turbines, the degradation of solar panels is particularly environmentally damaging. In addition, wind and solar power collectively provide only 6 percent of total power generation and are thus also highly unreliable (depending on weather conditions).

Stop the biomass plant

Biomass power plants provide a quarter of total energy and are seen as a sustainable alternative. However, the opposite is true. Biomass plants simply emit CO2 by burning mainly trees. These very trees are needed to fix CO2 (if we assume the greenhouse story). In addition, apart from CO2 absorption, trees are needed to regulate the climate (more shade and moisture retention). The false argument often put forward in favor of biomass power plants is that no fossil fuels are burned, therefore no net CO2 is emitted. However, who guarantees that those trees will be replanted? In addition, it takes years for these trees to return to the same level.

Thorium reactors (Molten Salt Reactor (MSR))

Research into nuclear energy from thorium reactors (molten salt reactors), where much less nuclear waste is produced and the half-life of the nuclear waste is only 300 years. In addition, the waste products cannot be used for nuclear weapons and the reactor is self-regulating and cannot result in a nuclear meltdown (meltdown). 

In China, the first Thorium Molten Salt Reactor (TMSR-LF1) has received a user license. We oppose conventional nuclear power, but support this form of safe and relatively clean form of nuclear power. 

Further research into possible nuclear fusion reactors will also be needed. In addition to nuclear power, we will need to combine several solutions. Geothermal energy is a good alternative to provide heat to households, and the hydrogen fuel cell (proton exchange membrane fuel cell) can offer a solution within the transport sector and on a small scale, although more research is needed. 

NL PLAN is keen to make the Netherlands' energy generation more sustainable, but will always do so in consultation with local farmers, entrepreneurs and residents.

Other energy carriers

NL PLAN is in favor of promoting scientific research into energy carriers and energy production methods that are environmentally friendly, maintenance-free, easily repairable and fit into local systems. More money should also be made available for research into other forms of clean energy.

No electric car

NL PLAN is in favor of research into the most sustainable form of energy for transportation and transport. Electric cars are not always sustainable and sometimes even quite a fire hazard. Before the battery is truly fully sustainably recyclable and the electricity used to charge the car is fully sustainably generated, we should look at other alternatives (such as research into the hydrogen fuel cell car) and not immediately throw the conventional fuel car out with the trash.

As far as NL PLAN is concerned, the development of electric cars need not be encouraged. To grow along with the number of electric cars would require many additional wind generators and solar panels by 2040 (45 thousand additional wind turbines and 600 million additional solar panels). It will not be long before the power grid can no longer handle the growth. As an alternative, we will have to investigate whether the hydrogen fuel cell is a better alternative. In addition, NL PLAN is in favor of shared cars and reliable and free public transportation, so that the need to own a car decreases.

System corruption

NL PLAN is for breaking the power of environmental and climate lobbies and systemic corruption in the food industry, and wants to reverse privatization so we can put money and energy into the real environmental problems.

Generate energy more locally

Build utility platform for energy close to citizens. Citizens become energy producers for each other on sharing and utility platforms.

More nature

Allow large natural areas to run wild again. Encouraging projects that plant trees. If CO2 is already a problem, plants and trees are the means to fix CO2, restoring the natural ecosystem. This prevents extremes in weather and has a long-term stabilizing and buffering function within weather and climate systems.

When expanding natural areas at the expense of agricultural land, this will only be done in consultation with farmers and other stakeholders. Without force and coercion. Reducing soil, air and water pollution will be left to local initiators who know the natural environment.

Killing wild animals only as a last resort

NL PLAN stands for balancing human, animal and plant life. First we try to balance the ecology for the long term. In some cases it may be necessary to kill animals to protect other parts of nature or humans. This will always be the last choice for a solution.

No large data centers in the Netherlands

Industrial, high-security buildings that only ensure that computer servers with digital applications are always running eat up energy and should be curtailed. This generated energy is badly needed to supply the population itself. Data centers contribute to the revenue models of large international computer companies such as Microsoft and Google and do not benefit the circular and local economy.

Environmental emissions and waste



NL PLAN wants much more attention to real environmental problems, such as the various forms of waste products and radiation that seriously threaten both plant and animal habitat.

Those waste products can be defined in three categories:

1) Bulky waste such as packaging made of various hard-to-degrade plastic materials. 2) Micro-level waste such as particulate matter and microplastics. 3) Substances that are toxic in excessive amounts.

More and more studies indicate that electromagnetic radiation of the wrong frequency can have a substantially negative impact on cellular metabolism. We should think about the ever-increasing levels of cell phone radiation present in our living environment. NL PLAN seeks humane solutions to these three categories of environmental pollution.

Recycling

Conduct good educational campaigns to make people aware that the earth is finite, and that both sustainable production and recycling of consumer goods are essential to prevent depletion of the earth.

Packaging and transportation

Research the most effective sustainable methods of packaging and transporting products while respecting product quality.

Ladder of Lansink

Indicate sustainable possibilities of the product through the "Ladder of Lansink". Prevention, reuse, recycling, energy, incineration and landfill, where prevention is preferable over the succeeding steps in the ladder.

Discourage disposables

Encourage as early as the design phase of products to improve longevity/quality/usability. Discourage production of disposable or short-lived items. Here, NL PLAN is against useless legislation such as the recent plastic surcharge that entrepreneurs can simply pocket. The entrepreneur should then invest this in sustainable solutions, but who checks that?

Reducing plastic

Encourage projects that clean up the plastic soup in the oceans and ban non-recyclable plastic packaging.

Making inner cities car-free

NL PLAN is in favor of making inner cities car-free to reduce particulate matter. Strict rules for the use of combustion engine vehicles. Only vehicles with a catalytic converter are allowed on public roads and MOT inspections are strictly controlled. However, good alternative transport options must be realized before this kind of plan is implemented.

In this case, NL PLAN is in favor of free public transportation for all Dutch citizens. The recent temporary Weesperstraatknip in Amsterdam is an example of how not to do it.

Pushing back 5G

NL PLAN wants to push back the telecommunications standard 5G (5th generation mobile network) as it is a completely unnecessary technology that is probably more harmful than its predecessor 4G/MT-Advanced due to its high frequency band.

In addition, NL PLAN encourages independent research into the potential harmfulness of various artificial electromagnetic radiation (all protocols mobile telephony and Wi-Fi) to humans and nature. Research alternatives. For example, certain frequencies could be less harmful.

Corporate sustainability in the apparel industry

Sustainable business is the future. Consumers are becoming increasingly aware of the impact companies have on the environment and expect companies to be accountable for their production processes and use of sustainable materials. A company must therefore do its part to find and implement sustainable solutions.

The first widely accepted definition of sustainability emerged in 1987 when the World Commission on Environment and Development presented its report to the world at a press conference in London. The development of using biological materials, minimizing waste during the production process, using renewable energy sources in production and investing in recycling and upcycling has taken off. But it's not just about the physical products; packaging is also important and must be sustainable. Think about using sustainable cardboard and biodegradable packaging.

As a company, you need to focus on these trends. By investing in sustainable products and processes, you can not only contribute to a better world, but also improve your image and stand out from the competition. In addition, sustainable products can often be reused and have a higher quality. It is therefore a win-win situation for both the company and the planet.

In short, sustainable business is not only important for the environment and consumers, but also offers benefits for the company itself. In doing so, sustainable development allows today's world population to meet its needs without depriving future generations of the opportunity to meet their needs to a similar extent. We must continue to innovate and invest in sustainable solutions to contribute to a better and more sustainable future.

Put sustainable fashion at the center

In the apparel industry, sustainable fashion must take center stage. It is important to make people aware of the importance of making sustainable clothing choices. To achieve this, you can take several initiatives, such as organizing hands-on classes, sharing information about sustainable materials and encouraging sustainable choices.

Involve all stakeholders

It is important to have the conversation about sustainable fashion with all stakeholders, such as producers, brands, workers, consumers and governments. By involving all stakeholders, different perspectives on the production process are included and a joint effort can be made to create a more sustainable apparel industry.

Showcase sustainable apparel and fashion initiatives

To make people aware of the value of sustainable clothing, it is important to highlight sustainable fashion and initiatives, such as the national Dutch Sustainable Fashion Week, where brands, retailers and consumers have been finding each other in their ambitions in the transition to a sustainable fashion sector for ten years. In this way, people can find and borrow inexpensive sustainable materials or buy eco-friendly ones. 

Encourage change

Through laws and regulations, financial incentives, subsidies and research and development, sustainable fashion can be driven. This should culminate in a sustainable clothing industry where ethical labor is central.

Sustainability in education

It is important to encourage sustainability and the value of clothing from an early age. Clothing is too often treated as a disposable product. The negative trend of large mountains of fast fashion can be broken by establishing a chain in which each link contributes to an environmentally friendly end product where longevity and reuse are central. Education, from primary to university level, offers plenty of opportunities to inspire and teach young people about sustainable clothing production and recycling.

Agriculture and livestock

NL PLAN encourages small-scale agriculture and animal husbandry. The party favors quality over quantity, and wants to eventually discourage the use of artificial fertilizers, monocultures and genetic modification.

NL PLAN encourages living conditions for animals to be in line with their natural behavior. Megastalls have no place in this and should always be discouraged in consultation with farmers in the long term. Animals should have sufficient space and freedom, so that stress and diseases are prevented as much as possible. Ideal are small-scale farms, where both agriculture and animal husbandry are practiced, so that the natural manure can be used immediately on the land.

On the other hand, NL PLAN is absolutely against expropriating the farmer. NL PLAN wants to encourage the farmer to switch to small-scale and alternative forms of agriculture, but ethical standards are always the basis for just solutions. As with the view on CO2 emissions, NL PLAN sees the same propagandistic tendencies in traditional mass media and current politics regarding nitrogen emissions.

Running from the nitrogen crisis in the PAS (Program Approach to Nitrogen)?

The nitrogen crisis is a created crisis, which refers to reactive nitrogen compounds such as NOx (nitrogen monoxide) and NH3 (ammonia). NOx is mainly emitted by industry. An agricultural farm with livestock primarily emits NH3 in addition to NOx. Ninety percent of these molecules end up in the upper layers of the atmosphere. Only 10 percent precipitate locally within 100 to 500 meters around the farm (research report Dr. A. Tietema, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Mathematics and Computer Science: Most of the nitrogen from farms goes into the 'nitrogen blanket'; what precipitates is very localized - University of Amsterdam (uva.nl)).

Reactive nitrogen is not necessarily harmful to plant growth, as plants actually need these forms of nitrogen. However, some plants need larger amounts of nitrogen than others, so "native" plants could be displaced when too much reactive nitrogen gets into the soil. This would disrupt Natura 2000 areas. However, most natural areas in the Netherlands are artificially created and have been labeled Natura 2000. Moreover, we are talking about 160 areas that are relatively small, making agriculture and industry almost impossible.

The European Habitat Directive (Article 1.12a) is vague about the amount of nitrogen that would have a disturbing effect on those areas (wetten.overheid.nl - Regeling - Wet natuurbescherming - BWBR0037552 (overheid.nl)). Nevertheless, the Netherlands has come up with a threshold value of only 0.05 mol/hectare (0.7 grams of nitrogen/hectare) (Norms - building with steel (bouwenmetstaal.nl)). This is insanely low and means that if a bird releases its droppings over a Natura 2000 site, reactive nitrogen exceedance occurs one hectare around this cast of bird droppings (YouTube.com - Hoezo Stikstof? - Pierre Capel). In Germany this standard is much higher (7 mol/hectare or 100 grams of nitrogen/hectare), with permits in areas with little agricultural activity being issued up to even the maximum EU standard of 50 mol/hectare (700 grams/hectare) (Neighboring countries deal with nitrogen problem differently - bioscience + society (biomaatschappij.nl)).

The government argument in the Netherlands is that we have a huge density of agriculture, which is why this standard should be so low. As a result, there is no longer a balance between agriculture and industry on the one hand and nature conservation on the other. The Netherlands makes it extra difficult for itself by declaring many small areas as Natura 2000 areas. This makes the nitrogen problem partly an administrative problem that makes agriculture, industry and housing construction largely impossible, while there is no real environmental problem. After all, we are not talking about toxic substances that destroy nature, but substances that actually stimulate plant growth.

A recent study led by Albert Tietema of the UvA Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED) shows that 90 percent of reactive nitrogen emissions from dairy farms go into the atmosphere and are deposited elsewhere in the environment.

NL PLAN does not want the nitrogen problem to come at the expense of building housing. The solution is to preserve a number of large Natura 2000 areas, not building around them. We eliminate the smaller Natura 2000 areas. In this way we circumvent the EU Habitat Directive and ensure a balance between agriculture, nature and industry. However, in some cases industry will eventually be required to reduce harmful emissions in several areas (not only nitrogen).

Besides rearranging nature reserves, Prof. Johan Sanders of Wageningen University & Research has given clear alternatives to reduce the amounts of ammonia in livestock farming, without too drastic measures, making buying out farmers unnecessary.

NL PLAN wants to look more at polluting industries such as Schiphol Airport and other polluters who unethically buy out nitrogen rights at the expense of farmers. So we stay away from our farmers.

Human scale

NL PLAN opts for the human scale, small-scale local agricultural initiatives without genetic modification.

Looking ahead

We look seven generations ahead with every policy decision. No harm to seven generations in the future.

Alternative agriculture

NL PLAN is in favor of promoting alternative, more sustainable forms of food production, such as Herenboeren (cooperative), food forests, urban agriculture, permaculture and Transition towns.

Organic (dynamic) agriculture

NL PLAN is in favor of promoting organic and biodynamic agriculture and animal husbandry in the Netherlands, including products such as soy that normally come from far away.

Horticulture and livestock farming within one farm

NL PLAN is for encouraging the combination of small-scale horticulture and livestock farming within one farm. That way, manure can be used directly on the land.

Animal welfare

NL PLAN believes it is important that animals can go outside. Animal products should clearly describe the extent to which animals can go outside and exhibit their natural behavior.

Reduce the number of Natura 2000 areas.

Most natural areas in the Netherlands are artificially created and have been labeled Natura 2000. This makes the nitrogen problem partly an administrative problem and not a real environmental problem. Furthermore, NL PLAN does not want the nitrogen problem to come at the expense of building homes. A number of large Natura 2000 areas will be preserved, with no construction around them. The smaller Natura 2000 areas can be eliminated.

Nitrogen and the forced buy-out of farmers will not be done.

Reducing ammonia in agriculture can be achieved without buying out farmers (see nine-point plan by Prof. Johan Sanders). NL PLAN is in favor of a gradual transition to more sustainable agriculture, but forced buyouts of farmers are unacceptable. Nitrogen rights are being unfairly exchanged between Schiphol Airport and farming. NL PLAN is not in favor of buying out farmers so that Schiphol can emit more nitrogen.

The government states that the Netherlands has a major nitrogen problem and that halving the livestock population and farming is the solution. Farmers have rebelled and are getting a lot of support. NL PLAN thinks that the nitrogen problem can be better solved with technical innovations. For example, what are new possibilities of cattle feed, barn floors and other innovations?

Prof. Johan Sanders is professor emeritus of Bio-based Economy at Wageningen Agricultural University and has drawn up a nine-point plan to reduce ammonia in livestock production.

Nine Innovation Methods:

• Increasing the share of essential amino acids in pig and poultry feed.
• Increasing the proportion of resistant protein in cattle feed.
• Picking up beet leaves and using them as animal feed.
• Increasing field yield in grass.
• Acidifying manure produces less ammonia emissions while reducing methane emissions.
• Ammonia stripping of manure digestates (Byosis technology).
• Refining grass as by Grassa BV.
• Separate collection of urine and feces in the 'low-emission' (eco) barn.
• Spreading manure diluted with water.

Navigate using the red buttons below to read the rest.