Achieving nitrogen targets at lower costs: possible, but desirable?

2. How can these nitrogen targets be achieved at the lowest cost?

The cabinet has decided that everyone should feel the pain. This means that even farmers who contribute little to the nitrogen problem, for example because they farm far from nature reserves, have to make a (small) contribution.

But Treasury officials warn that the more policy focuses on buying so-called “tax points,” such as large cattle ranches near wildlife sanctuaries, the fewer farmers will ultimately be affected by the policy.

In the cheapest and most efficient scenario, 5,300 farmers would have to be purchased. Other companies do not need to shrink. Authorities write that this requires a “multi-targeted” policy, for example that farmers in the Gelderse Vallei should stop almost all, and other goals, for example in the field of climate and water quality, should be stopped. are not taken into account.

Then other sectors must also make an important contribution; they should emit half the nitrogen. Authorities write that this election will cost only 10 billion, although they later noted that the “legal and enforcement aspects” could lead to higher costs.

In another scenario where there is only 30 kilotons of nitrogen left to save in the long run, more than 11,000 farmers will have to stop as they are doing now, but only 200 growers will have to reduce their farms. Here too, the focus will be on the (mandatory) purchase of advanced chargers near nature reserves.