“In the mid-2010s, Groningen was still annually pumping out around 30 BCM, but this year it is expected to produce barely 4.6 BCM of gas. Some years ago, the government decided to phase out gas production in Groningen to tame the drilling-induced earthquakes, which have plagued the region since the 1980s. ”
Yeah I can see why people there are not hyped about continuing production.
The earthquakes in Groningen are different from other earthquakes because of the composition of the soil (mostly clay), and because the source of the quakes is close to the surface.
Up to now, the Dutch government’s approach to dealing with the damage has been miserable. But that goes for a lot of things from this government. In the Netherlands, people will certainly not be enthusiastic about increasing gas production in Groningen.
It’s been an ongoing topic of conversation since last year when prices started to rise due to Gazprom not filling the gas storages.
A lot of Dutch people are willing to help, if the people in Groningen are compensated for damage (that’s the real issue).
Also, our energy minister has formally asked the German government to extend their nuclear. It just seems unfair to a lot of Dutch people that we should make difficult sacrifices, while Germany refuses to make easy contributions.
(And most of our electricity is generated by burning gas, especially in winter, so it would definitely help us a lot to trade electricity for gas)
They should pump more, and customers like Germany should overcompensate the impact on people affected by the earthquakes. Europe can make this a win-win financially, and hopefully the people of Groningen can agree that it is worth the hassle. It would still be a sacrifice on their part for the greater good of EU independence and stricter sanctions on russian energy. Even if the russians wanted to increase gas deliveries again, we could say: “Sorry, but no!”
*Earthquake intensives*
> Ultimately, it is the government of the Netherlands — in close dialogue with the people of Groningen — who have to make the call on whether gas production should be ramped up or not.
I’m going to make some big ass air quotes while I speak the words “close dialogue”
the NG from the groninger gasfield is low-calory gas (in NL mainly used for household use) and the russian gas is High-Calory gas (mainly used for industrial applications). These 2 are not exchangable, abeit that fact that in NL we make LC-NG from HC-NG by mixing/deluting it with N2.
7 comments
“In the mid-2010s, Groningen was still annually pumping out around 30 BCM, but this year it is expected to produce barely 4.6 BCM of gas. Some years ago, the government decided to phase out gas production in Groningen to tame the drilling-induced earthquakes, which have plagued the region since the 1980s. ”
Yeah I can see why people there are not hyped about continuing production.
The earthquakes in Groningen are different from other earthquakes because of the composition of the soil (mostly clay), and because the source of the quakes is close to the surface.
Up to now, the Dutch government’s approach to dealing with the damage has been miserable. But that goes for a lot of things from this government. In the Netherlands, people will certainly not be enthusiastic about increasing gas production in Groningen.
It’s been an ongoing topic of conversation since last year when prices started to rise due to Gazprom not filling the gas storages.
A lot of Dutch people are willing to help, if the people in Groningen are compensated for damage (that’s the real issue).
Also, our energy minister has formally asked the German government to extend their nuclear. It just seems unfair to a lot of Dutch people that we should make difficult sacrifices, while Germany refuses to make easy contributions.
(And most of our electricity is generated by burning gas, especially in winter, so it would definitely help us a lot to trade electricity for gas)
They should pump more, and customers like Germany should overcompensate the impact on people affected by the earthquakes. Europe can make this a win-win financially, and hopefully the people of Groningen can agree that it is worth the hassle. It would still be a sacrifice on their part for the greater good of EU independence and stricter sanctions on russian energy. Even if the russians wanted to increase gas deliveries again, we could say: “Sorry, but no!”
*Earthquake intensives*
> Ultimately, it is the government of the Netherlands — in close dialogue with the people of Groningen — who have to make the call on whether gas production should be ramped up or not.
I’m going to make some big ass air quotes while I speak the words “close dialogue”
the NG from the groninger gasfield is low-calory gas (in NL mainly used for household use) and the russian gas is High-Calory gas (mainly used for industrial applications). These 2 are not exchangable, abeit that fact that in NL we make LC-NG from HC-NG by mixing/deluting it with N2.