On May 25 the federal elections take place. Maybe you already know for which party you are going to vote, maybe you don’t. Maybe you are in for a better, or at least, greener future. And so am I. So, which party should you vote for?
Some time ago I started to investigate the election programs from the different parties. I traced their websites, looking for signs of a greener future.
In this prospect GROEN clearly offers an increase in renewable energy in the future and not to forget a controlled closure of our nuclear power plants (before 2025). Also N-VA is eager to change the energy landscape. They plead for a healthy mix of energy forms, including a nuclear exit before 2065. SP.A’s main focus is affordable energy for every household, but nevertheless they are also betting on renewable energy. CD&V on the other hand is less clear about its future energy plans. Their focus also lies with affordable energy, but whether this energy is green or not, that isn’t quite clear. The last party I will discuss is OPEN VLD, which, in my opinion, has a rather poor policy regarding green energy. They rather plead for a free energy market.
So, three out of five parties explicitly shared their views about a greener future. Some more ambitious than others, but will they succeed in the end? At least we have to give them the chance to prove what they are worth. What is your opinion looking at the different energy policies?
It is of course not my intention of this post to influence your vote. I just want you to gain some knowledge about the different party programs. By clicking on the name of the party, you will get some more information concerning their energy policy.
Vortex waterturbine 
I would like nothing more than a greener future. But from what I learned about renewable energy during my study it was quite clear that there aren’t enough renewable options yet to just stop all power plants. So maybe I’ll look into a few of these election programs, just to understand how they are planning on gaining so much renewable energy.
I would also be interested to see some other environmental subjects in these election programs, like the reduction of fine particles in air or ways to succeed in the 2020 climate goals of the EU.
Politics always lag behind. Ideally seen, the energy problem would have been solved long time ago. In the future, fine particles, etc… will certainly become more and more of a problem. And that would be a ‘real’, i.e. visible (!) problem (which is of course due to the ongoing use of fossil fuels).
I guess I am just like you in for green energy, but at the same time have a concrete realistic plan. That we don’t make the same mistakes as you mentioned before by importing nuclear energy rather than producing it ourselves.
Good that you offer a bit of an overview, because although we should, it’s cumbersome to look in detail at all party programs.
I certainly agree. We are only able to decrease nuclear energy production, when there are enough (green) alternatives to replace it. Nevertheless, nuclear power plants will have to shut down sooner or later… Whether this is in 2025 or later on, that’s less important I think.
From what i’ve seen parties usually just assume stuff in stead of getting numbers and facts out on the table. This is why i think that parties who go for a lot of green energy or no green energy at all lack behind in vision. An energypolicy that is acceptable would off course be situated between the two. We have to remember though that we(engineers) know facts about energy (and green energy) which other people don’t. Because of this politicians will more easily convince people without the knowledge about energy by telling them that 100% of some kind of ernegy is possible instead of for example 50/50.