It is clear, according to Van der Ploeg, that companies are doing too little, “far too little” even. “Everyone is holding off the boat, but at some point they have to change. Then they are too late and they get hit.”
Growth greater than reduction
Green steps have been taken, but they are often canceled out by growing prosperity. Ruud van den Brink of the TNO research institute cites the car industry as an example. “Cars have become more fuel efficient, but also bigger and people have started driving more. So the total emissions have increased. We are trying, but the growth rate cannot keep up.”
That is why not only companies, but also consumers will be affected by measures. Van den Brink: “Our research shows that it helps a lot if less is also consumed. So not only save energy, but also really buy fewer products.” For support, it is important that the measures are fair and effective.
‘A matter of doing’
Many large companies, such as Shell and BP, want to study the report before responding, but a number of organizations are taking a decisive step.
For example, according to employers’ organization VNO-NCW, the report once again underlines the urgency of action. There are enough plans and objectives, “it is now a matter of doing. Everyone has to deliver, companies, citizens, including politicians and the government.”
The Dutch Banking Association states that “a further acceleration of the energy transition is necessary”.
VEMW, the interest group of the largest polluting companies in the Netherlands, also says that it is no longer about formulating goals. “It’s about implementing well-thought-out measures. Let’s get started on that quickly now.”
VEMW does point to the lack of decision-making in The Hague. Far-reaching changes are required, and in order to implement them properly, cooperation with the government is crucial in addition to legislation and regulations.
First mover problem
Businesses are more likely to turn to politicians for action. They do want to become more sustainable, but then the competition has to do the same. Otherwise, the greener companies will suffer. And they do have a point there, according to Art de Zeeuw, emeritus professor of environmental economics.
“Businesses haven’t done enough, but it’s also unfair to just point at them. Businesses are there to provide jobs and make a profit. But government is about reducing emissions. Businesses know it’s important but they will never take steps that endanger their viability. The business community is waiting to see what demands are imposed on them. Now they are not being challenged. Give them a CO2 price and they reduce.”
According to professor Van der Ploeg, non-binding agreements are not good enough either. “If you ask a turkey at Christmas how it wants to be eaten, it won’t say so. You have to set a CO2 price and ban some things, such as fossil fuel vehicles. Then everyone knows that and there is no more investment in them. the wrong things.”
Low hanging fruit
Van der Ploeg argues for the same type of approach as for the corona vaccines. “Vaccines have come on the market within a year. We were not waiting for that because then you will be too late and there will be many deaths. The same applies to climate. There will be deaths and we will cause irreversible climate damage.”
The same kind of massive investment in research and development with governments, universities and companies is therefore necessary, according to Van der Ploeg. “And then we have to have the guts to make mistakes; bet on different horses. If a technology is not good enough, you withdraw the subsidy.”
It will require a significant effort to limit the damage from climate change. Ruud Van den Brink, TNO: “A lot still needs to be done; the low-hanging fruit, those easier measures have been taken. The measures for 2030 are challenging, but this report shows that emissions really have to go to zero by 2050, the preferably sooner. And the last percentages are often the most difficult and the most expensive. It will be quite a task, but it is certainly feasible.”
–
