Mandatory green-gas blending divides government and sector
The government is aiming to introduce it from 2027, while energy companies warn of higher costs.
The government wants to require energy suppliers to deliver a growing share of green gas from 2027. It expects the measure to reduce emissions and dependence on fossil gas, but energy companies fear a higher bill for customers.
The bill introducing the blending obligation is before the Lower House (Tweede Kamer). The government has postponed its introduction by a year and reduced the original build-up path by 25 per cent to limit costs for end users. The obligation is to be expanded gradually from 2027.
According to a letter to parliament, the targeted reduction in lifecycle emissions in 2027 is 0.6 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent. By 2031, this is to rise to 2.85 megatonnes, equivalent to roughly 0.8 billion cubic metres of green gas. The government also cites energy independence and additional production in the Netherlands as objectives.
The same letter states that the additional costs for end users in 2030 would be no more than 6 cents per cubic metre of gas. That is half the previously cited upper limit of 12 cents. This is a policy estimate, not a fixed tariff that every consumer will automatically pay.
Energy company Essent, by contrast, warns of a structurally higher gas bill. The company previously estimated that the measure could raise the average household’s bill by roughly €200 a year by 2031. That calculation is the company’s estimate and, as the discussion shows, depends on production, imports and market prices.
One important change is that green gas produced outside the Netherlands may also count. The European Commission objected to limiting eligibility to domestic production because this could hinder the free movement of goods. The government therefore also wants to allow green gas produced outside the Netherlands, provided it is fed into the gas grid in the Netherlands.
The political decision therefore centres on three uncertainties: how much green gas will become available, how the costs will be divided between suppliers and customers, and how much climate benefit the measure will actually deliver. The Lower House still has to consider the proposal, so its introduction is not yet a certainty.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The government wants to introduce a rising blending obligation from 2027.
- The government expects climate benefits and less dependence on fossil gas.
- Energy companies warn of higher costs; the Lower House is still considering the bill.
Left
Arguments The government must reduce emissions quickly and may therefore set standards for the energy sector. Green gas can be particularly useful in areas where full electrification is difficult, while vulnerable households should be protected through targeted policy.
Values Climate justice, affordability, public direction and reducing dependence on fossil fuels.
Consequences Postponement could delay investment in sustainable production; without compensation, households with few alternatives could be disproportionately affected.
Centre
Arguments The obligation can work if it is introduced gradually, measured properly and accompanied by consumer protection. Policy should leave room for different technologies and take European rules into account.
Values Practicality, affordability, climate objectives and administrative predictability.
Consequences A lower build-up path reduces the risk of price shocks, but could also mean that the climate benefits are achieved later.
Right
Arguments The government should not mandate expensive technology before production and infrastructure have been sufficiently developed. Suppliers must be able to compete, and consumers should not unexpectedly face higher bills as a result of a policy choice.
Values Affordability, freedom of choice, market forces and restraint in regulation.
Consequences An obligation could drive investment and domestic production, but also raise costs, particularly for people who cannot quickly switch away from gas.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The legal status, objectives and estimates were checked against parliamentary documents and NOS. Essent’s cost warning was attributed as a company estimate and not presented as a fixed amount for consumers.
- confirmed The blending obligation is to take effect from 2027. — The letter to parliament refers to introduction from 2027. source
- confirmed The targeted emissions reduction rises from 0.6 megatonnes in 2027 to 2.85 megatonnes in 2031. — These figures appear in the letter to parliament on the revised build-up path. source
- confirmed The estimated additional costs are no more than 6 cents per cubic metre in 2030. — The estimate appears in the letter to parliament, where it is compared with an earlier estimate of 12 cents. source
- confirmed Essent warns of roughly €200 extra per year in 2031. — This is the estimate put forward by Essent itself and also described by NOS. source
- confirmed The European Commission objected to limiting eligibility to green gas produced in the Netherlands. — The letter to parliament describes the objection in terms of the free movement of goods. source
Editor's note
The policy objectives, revised build-up path and estimated additional costs come from parliamentary documents. The estimate of €200 extra per year is a warning from Essent, not an independent forecast. The law has not yet been passed.Sources
- Wet bijmengverplichting groen gas — Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal
- Stand van zaken wetsvoorstel bijmengverplichting groen gas — Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal
- Minister weerspreekt energiebedrijven die hogere rekening voorzien door groen gas — NOS
- Essent waarschuwt voor stijgende gasrekening door groengaswet — Essent
More on this in Dutch media
- De Telegraaf — „groengas energietransitie”
- Trouw — „groengas energietransitie”
- RTL Nieuws — „groengas energietransitie”