WPNL 202101

Leon Pulles, Maartje Smit and Joep van Doornik at the Water Board Estate
facilitated in more different ways. The fact that you spend five to
eight years developing onshore wind is absurd.”
“At some point the choice was made to leave the energy transition
up to regional and local authorities, the so-called ‘bottom-up’
approach. That really does have its advantages. For example, more
people are now aware of the energy transition. Officials who
worked on spatial planning five years ago have now been
introduced to the energy theme. The question, however, is whether
this will get us to where we need to be in 2030. If the national
government were to take more control of the energy transition on
land, as they do at sea, then I think the transition would be more
manageable,” says Pulles.
It is still possible, according to Pulles. “Of course we don’t know
what the technologies will be by then but just provide an outline of
what our energy supply will look like in 2030 and 2050, and work
towards it in a focused way. Everyone has the best intentions but
they haven’t really set a final picture yet, as was the case with the
Dutch Delta Works, for example.” Incidentally, this applies not
only to the Netherlands but also to other European countries, he
adds.
“If we need that much wind on land, then start looking at where it
can be done best, rather than having each municipality decide
where they think it can be done, only to find out that perhaps no
one in the municipality wants these wind turbines.” Pulles hopes
that perhaps the upcoming new environment law can speed things
up.
He does want to emphasize, however, that the finger cannot be
pointed at the government alone. According to him, the sector
itself could also have played a better role, especially when it comes
to including the public in the story. For example, the sector should
have explained to the public from the start why the energy
transition is necessary, what the impact is, but also draw
comparisons with how things were done in the past. “If you think
about how it used to be with coal firing then you shouldn’t really
have so much resistance,” he says.
Local participation
Fortunately, the municipality of Harderwijk and the water board
largely have the support of the local people and businesses. It helps
that the wind turbines will be located on an industrial estate and
near the water board. In addition, the people of Harderwijk are
used to the view of the wind turbines on the other side of the lake,
in the Flevopolder. Involvement from the outset, however, also
plays a major role in the story.
Pulles: “We said from the start that participation is very important,
that we want to do it well and that there is also room for it. Many
commercial developers take a different view. They think it is
important but are not as generous as we can be. At the end of the
day, it is all about the numbers.”
Besides several information evenings, the initiators were also
present at the Aaltjesdagen, a large public fair in Harderwijk. That
way you reach people who might not come to an information
evening that easy, says Pulles. They also involved young people.
Primary school pupils were taken to the information centre of the
Noordoostpolder wind farm and secondary school pupils took part
in a challenge.
Residents and businesses were asked how they would like to
participate in the wind farm. In Harderwijk, there was much
attention for the collective interest. That made a sustainability fund
a good solution. Proceeds from the future wind farm will go
towards this fund. The fund stands for biodiversity, climate
adaptation, sustainable energy and circularity. The community can
propose ideas within these themes. For biodiversity in particular, it
is usually difficult to make a business case. That appealed to
people.
01-2021 | 11