Heijmans : Nuance is the new radical

The energy transition is one major changes facing us today. For that reason, independent energy researcher and publicist Remco de Boer is encouraging open dialogue on the challenges and opportunities. 'This is a messy quest, littered with instances of good and bad fortune. There isn't a one-size-fits-all solution. So let a thousand flowers bloom!'

How can we expedite the process of rendering things more sustainable, and by what means? The debate to this end is characterized by sound bites and one-liners, put forward in a stentorian voice and in shrill tweets. A universal panacea has barely been discovered before once again being torn apart online by a 'sustainability guru'.

In this era of polarization, Remco de Boer is keen to foster a nuanced narrative on the energy transition. Schooled as an engineer, the researcher has now spent two decades in the world of energy and construction.

He wrote the book Tussen hoogmoed en hysterie, 5 jaar strijd tegen schaliegas in Nederland ('Between Haughtiness and Hysteria: the 5-year battle against shale gas in the Netherlands') and is a regular on news and current affairs programmes when it comes to the subject of energy. 'Energy affects various areas of policy: economy, spatial planning, the social sphere. It's an incredibly interesting subject.'

We put a number of assumptions about sustainability within Heijmans to Remco de Boer. De Boer recognizes the objection from Theo Smits that too much is being bet on one horse, namely the Stroomversnelling ('Expedition') or Nul-op-de-meter ('Zero-on-the-meter') renovations. Remco: 'It's true that there isn't a one-size-fits-all solution for sustainability. It's better to scrutinize what works in what situation. One oft-heard criticism of the Nul-op-de-meter (NOM) is that the concept is rather rigorous, that a 'NOM light' isn't possible, proceeding in steps.'

De Boer points to the fact that the Stroomversnelling is being driven by a collective of major construction firms and corporations - who are keen to make great strides promptly. Yet criticism of NOM is tricky: 'The 'church of the Expediters' is quickly getting out of hand. They're suggesting that to be against NOM is to be against making things sustainable in general. In my view, the energy transition will benefit more from open dialogue in which there is room for all opinions and facts. That uncompromising attitude is counterproductive.'

'The process of making things sustainable is a quest for the government as well. This is the biggest transition for our generation, certainly not a piece of cake'

During his visits to a Netherlands on the path to sustainability, Remco witnessed a great many good initiatives. 'An awful lot is happening. Countless people are engaged in coming up with innovative solutions - sometimes successfully, sometimes not. At any rate, it's full steam ahead in terms of innovation, new insights and roles are being created in local authorities, corporations and grid operators.'

He cites ThuisBaas van Urgenda, a programme enabling residents to make their homes more sustainable themselves, step by step, with a return on investment period of fifteen years. 'Great, isn't it, that this exists alongside NOM? Let a thousand flowers bloom!'

One important question within the compass of the sustainability drive is who will foot the bill. When it comes to the government's duties, De Boer argues for circumspection. 'Thorough discussion is crucial in terms of the public purse and what public money has to be spent on. The process of making things sustainable is a quest for the government as well. This is the biggest transition for our generation, certainly not a piece of cake.'

However, the government could help to support certain innovations. De Boer sees that more expensive solutions are falling by the wayside and, due to lack of subsidies, are not being given an opportunity to be scaled up and therefore fall in price either. 'That's something that has happened in the case of wind energy. Constructing more offshore wind farms would halve the costs.'