2023-11-14 19:01:03
Flanders escapes – at least temporarily – the disaster scenario of a freeze on permits, which would have partially paralyzed the economy of the north of the country. However, legal uncertainties remain.
“The Gordian knot has finally been cut. We rule out the horror scenario which was that of a complete freeze on the granting of permits.” It is in these terms that the Flemish Minister-President Jan Jambon (N-VA) welcomed the agreement reached between the three parties of the majority in the north of the country on the thorny issue of nitrogen, the one that came close to imploding the Flemish government on several occasions.
Ministers Zuhal Demir (N-VA), Jo Brouns (CD&V) and Gwendolyn Rutten (Open Vld) worked hard for several days to a new framework for granting permits in relation to nitrogen emissions. It was only during the night from Monday to Tuesday that white smoke rose above Place des Martyrs, the seat of the Flemish government. The entire government was then convened to endorse the “deal”.
Under pressure from the European Commission, the Flemish government was ordered to remedy the problem.
A first agreement was concluded during the 2022 carnival holiday, but it was then disavowed by the CD&V, pushed in the back by the Boerenbond who considered that the farmers were the turkeys of the joke. On the other hand, the N-VA continued to assert that the industry had already done more than its share in recent decades in the effort to reduce emissions.
A second text then saw the light of day last March, but the Council of State methodically tore it into pieces. It remains to be seen whether this time, the agreement will hold up legally. In the meantime, this will be incorporated into an amendment which corrects Zuhal Demir’s latest decree proposal and will be tabled shortly in the Flemish Parliament.
What does the agreement contain?
Nitrogen is a component of manure, slurry and synthetic fertilizers. Intensive livestock farming emits large quantities. Result: groundwater becomes polluted while land fertility is undermined. Under pressure from the European Commission, the Flemish government was ordered to remedy the problem.
Failing this, it was the freezing of permits which threatened to paralyze – at least in part – the Flemish economy. Because it is not only industry and agriculture that are targeted. The construction site of the Antwerp ring road (Oosterweel) as well as that of the Brussels ring road (widening to four lanes) are just as concerned, as are any residential construction projects. The Netherlands has already had the painful experience of this.
The agreement retains the reduction measures that had already been approved in the March agreement. It also maintains the objective of 30% reduction in emissions from pigs by 2030. The different authorization thresholds for industry (1%) and agriculture (0.025%) are also maintained and, in accordance with the opinion of the Council of State, will be motivated by clearer scientific arguments.
On the other hand, the notion of “ineligibility threshold” will disappear. This means that farms that exceed the set emission threshold might still request an exemption if they carry out a thorough environmental investigation. A case-by-case review should then be carried out.
The agreement also allows farmers to buy back emission rights from an operation forced to close its doors from 2025. With regard to the most emitting farms, which appear on a red list which has been hotly debated, the obligation to close in 2030 disappears. The farmers concerned will be able to choose either to end their farming, as planned in 2030 (with support policies), or to continue their activity. But their level of impact will then have to be less than 50% of the current situation, which in many cases will involve heavy investments. A review of the list of the largest emitters will take place in 2026.
Ultimately, Flemish agriculture will have to reduce its nitrogen emissions by 19,000 tonnes in six years, from 37,000 tonnes today to 18,000 tonnes in 2030. The Flemish authorities also intend to relaunch the European Commission so that it takes better account of the situation in Flanders, a densely populated and fragmented region.
Employer relief
As for employers’ organizations, it was time for relief on Tuesday. “We finally offer a new perspective for Flemish industry and the port of Antwerp in particular.“, welcomes Voka. The British chemical giant Ineos plans, in fact, to invest 3.5 billion euros in a mega-ethane cracker project in the area of the port of Antwerp. Ineos has moreover, immediately reacted to the announcement of the agreement by expressing its hope of obtaining an environmental permit “before the end of 2023”.
On the side of Unizo (SMEs and independents) and Essencia (chemical industry), we insist on the essential legal certainty which must accompany the implementation of the agreement. Past experience has shown that we are never safe from unpleasant surprises in this area.
Same caution regarding the execution methods on the Boerenbond sidewho nevertheless says he is satisfied with the removal of the “ineligibility threshold” and the closure obligation for the highest emitting establishments.
Groen judges that the agreement is “tailor-made for Ineos”, to the detriment of the environment and farmers.
Among the ecologists of Groen, who sit in opposition, the tone is frankly negative. They judge that the agreement is “tailor-made for Ineos”, to the detriment of the environment and farmers. Environmental associations are just as critical. Climaxi, which campaigns for the climate, considers that among farmers, it is the large farms which will draw the chestnuts from the fire, because they have the means to equip themselves and comply, while small farmers will become “prey easy in the face of the appetites of large farms.
Wallonia is not immune
Even if its economic model is not comparable to that of Flanders, Wallonia does not have an adequate measurement framework in relation to nitrogen concentration.
In Wallonia, the situation seems a priori less problematic than in Flanders. There are, in fact, fewer intensive livestock farms. “What is happening with our Flemish colleagues distresses us, of course. This being said, we have not heard, on the Walloon side, of a desire or a need to put in place specific programs going as far as operating closures”, confirms Bernard Decockenvironmental manager at the Walloon Federation of Agriculture (FWA).
It must be said that the economic model is very different in Wallonia. Walloon pig farming only represents 6% of the national herd, a stable proportion since 2000. In Wallonia, we mainly raise cattle (70% of the national herd, but this is decreasing). It is only on the chicken farm side that production has increased in recent years. Organic agriculture also occupies a more important place in the south of the country, where it represents 12% of the usable agricultural area exploited.
Walloon farms are nevertheless subject to double monitoring in relation to the nitrogen problem. On the one hand, the authorities control the ground connection rate. They check whether the surface area of the farm is sufficient to be able to use (spread) the slurry. Otherwise, financial penalties are applied.
Furthermore, APL (potentially leachable nitrogen) checks are carried out on 5% of farms each year. We take 90 centimeters of washable depth and compare the result with the rules of good agricultural practice. If the prescribed thresholds are exceeded, the operator will have to submit to a monitoring program.
Comparison is not right
But is Wallonia safe from nitrogen pollution? In any case, this is not the opinion of Gaëtan Senyagriculture manager at the nature defense association Natagora.
The first mistake, according to him, would be to want to compare Wallonia with Flanders, which is the worst student in the European class., just like the Netherlands. “Wallonia is certainly below Flanders in terms of nitrous oxide emissions, but it nevertheless displays levels higher than Brittany or Lombardy which are regions of intensive livestock farming,” he observes. .
In passing, he warns once morest the risk of seeing certain problematic farms in Flanders come to settle in Wallonia. “This is already the case now,” he notes. Bernard Decock (FWA) for his part wishes to qualify the statement: “There is certainly an increase in the number of Flemish farmers who come to settle in Wallonia, but this is not a significant trend. It is mainly due to the Grand Ducal border that we observe a little movement towards Wallonia. Walloon rules apply to everyone, regardless of the origin of the operators.”
No measurement framework
Gaëtan Seny especially pins the absence of an effective measurement framework in Wallonia. “In Flanders and the Netherlands, we measure the concentration of atmospheric nitrogen for each Natura 2000 zone. When a permit is requested for a new installation, we check whether these new emissions added to existing emissions will not have the effect to exceed the tolerance thresholds. In which case, the permit request may be refused. For its part, the Walloon Region does not have equivalent analysis tools. Consequently, the authorities responsible for issuing permits have no reference to assess whether atmospheric nitrogen emissions can harm neighboring Natura 2000 areas. A proper assessment, in accordance with the Habitats Directive, is impossible. Without this assessment, the competent authority should not be able to grant a permit.”
Finally, we will note that water quality hardly improves and that Wallonia regularly gets a slap on the wrist for insufficient transposition of the European Nitrate directive. The same goes for the absence or insufficiency of measures to transpose the water framework directive into agricultural matters. Water quality is especially degraded north of the Sambre-et-Meuse furrow (see map), because of pesticides, mineral nitrogen fertilizers and livestock effluent.
1700008154
#nitrogen #agreement #Flanders #finally