Ethics about gas extraction Groningen

Geschiedenis Gaswinning in Groningen

In 1948, the Netherlands discovered its first natural gas field in Coevorden, Drenthe, and soon
after, Shell and Esso founded the Dutch Oil Company (NAM). Although the company
initially focused on oil, it shifted to gas exploration after discovering the lucrative gas field in
Slochteren, Groningen in 1959. The Groningen gas field was one of the largest in the world,
containing almost three trillion cubic meters of gas, and was responsible for providing nearly
75% of the country's gas needs within ten years of its discovery. The gas field also helped to
transition the Netherlands from coal to cleaner-burning gas, with many homes, businesses,
and greenhouses connecting to the gas network. However, the gas extraction has also caused
induced earthquakes since the early 1990s, causing property damage and safety concerns in
the region.

The government passed the Mining Act in 1967 to regulate gas exploration, and gas extraction
became an important source of revenue for the Netherlands, with the state owning 50% of
NAM. The Dutch economy has benefited greatly from the Groningen gas field, earning an
estimated €280 billion since the 1960s. Nevertheless, induced earthquakes from gas extraction
have been a growing problem in the region since the 1990s, with over 80,000 damage reports
filed since 2012. The safety concerns and property damage caused by these quakes have
greatly impacted the quality of life and economic stability of the region.

Ethisch Dilemma
The ethical dilemma surrounding gas extraction in Groningen is the need to balance the economic
benefits of gas production against the safety risks and damage to human and environmental well-
being that it entails.
Inleiding

The history of gas extraction in Groningen dates back to 1959 when the first gas fields were
discovered in the province. The gas was found to be of high quality and more fields were
developed. Gas extraction in Groningen has made a significant contribution to the Dutch
economy and provided many jobs. It has generated huge revenues for the Dutch government
and also contributed to the development of the Dutch energy sector.

However, with the benefits of gas extraction come serious drawbacks. The gas extraction has
caused earthquakes in the area, damaging homes and buildings and eroding trust in the
government and the gas industry. Moreover, gas extraction has a significant impact on the
environment, particularly the landscape and biodiversity of the region.

The ethical dilemma arising from gas extraction in Groningen is the choice between economic
benefits and the safety of the population. On the one hand, gas extraction offers significant
economic benefits to Dutch society. It has generated huge revenues and contributed to the
development of the energy sector. Additionally, it provides employment opportunities for
people in the region.

On the other hand, there are serious risks associated with gas extraction, particularly
earthquakes that have damaged homes and buildings and eroded trust in the government and
the gas industry. Furthermore, gas extraction has a significant impact on the environment,
particularly the landscape and biodiversity of the region.

In a business context, it is relevant to consider the responsibility of companies to balance their

economic interests with the interests of society as a whole and those of the local population in
particular. This means that companies should not only strive for profit maximization but also
take into account social and ecological factors. The question is how to define the
responsibility of companies for society and what role the government has in regulating
business activities.

Positieve en negatieve aspecten

The gas extraction in Groningen has both positive and negative aspects. One of the main
benefits of gas extraction is the economic contribution it makes to the Dutch economy.
Energy companies have provided a major source of income for the Netherlands, enabling the
government to finance large infrastructure projects and expand social services. Additionally,
gas extraction creates jobs, not only for energy companies but also for suppliers and other
businesses in the region.

However, as previously mentioned, gas extraction also has negative consequences. One of the
main issues is that gas extraction in Groningen has caused earthquakes that damage homes
and buildings. These earthquakes have not only caused material damage but have also
impacted the mental health of residents. In addition, gas extraction has a negative effect on the
environment, for example, through the emission of greenhouse gases that contribute to

climate change. Moreover, there are concerns about the long-term effects of gas extraction on
the landscape and soil.
It is important to emphasize that the ethical dilemma arising from gas extraction in Groningen
is not only about the direct damage caused but also about the responsibility that energy
companies and governments have to compensate for this damage and ensure the safety of
citizens. While the economic benefits of gas extraction should not be ignored, energy
companies and governments must also consider the negative consequences and take
responsibility to minimize them.

Ethische en filosofische aspecten

The ethical dilemma of gas extraction in Groningen can be examined from various ethical and
philosophical perspectives. For instance, it can be viewed through the lens of Kant's
deontological ethics. According to this philosophy, it is a moral duty to not harm oneself or
others. The principle of 'the end justifies the means' is considered invalid. This means that if
drilling for gas in Groningen is harmful to the safety of the residents and the environment, it
should not be done, even if there are economic benefits.

From the perspective of Aristotle, the ethical dilemma can be examined in the light of the
honorific aspect of justice. This means that we should treat others as they deserve to be
treated. If the residents of Groningen are harmed by gas extraction, it is a moral duty to
compensate them for this damage.

The ethical dilemma can also be viewed through the lens of libertarian ethics. According to
this philosophy, it is the moral duty of the government to protect individual liberties. Gas
drilling in Groningen could be seen as a violation of these individual liberties. On the other
hand, stopping gas extraction could be seen as a violation of the economic freedom of
companies involved in gas drilling.

John Locke, known for his theory of natural rights, could argue that the residents of
Groningen have the right to be protected against the damage caused by gas extraction. This
right can also be seen as a fundamental human right.

Rawls, another philosopher, could argue that the ethical dilemma of gas extraction in
Groningen can be examined through the principles of social justice. He could claim that if gas
extraction is harmful to the residents of Groningen, the economic benefits of gas extraction
should be distributed in a way that compensates these people.

Zakelijke besluitvormingssituatie

An example of a situation where a company must decide whether or not to do business with
the gas industry in Groningen is an energy company considering using natural gas from
Groningen for its power plants.

Option 1: The company decides to do business with the gas industry in Groningen and use the
natural gas for its power plants.
Ethical considerations: The company must take into account the possible impact on the
environment and the safety of the local population due to gas extraction. There may also be
ethical concerns about the company's responsibility to its customers and society as a whole. If
the company decides to do business with the gas industry in Groningen, it must ensure that it
handles the consequences of gas extraction properly and minimizes risks. The company must
also promote transparency and accountability to maintain the trust of customers and society.

Option 2: The company decides not to do business with the gas industry in Groningen and
seeks alternative energy sources.

Ethical considerations: The company must consider the potential impact on employment and
the economy of the region. The company may also be responsible for the loss of income for
the community as a whole as a result of not doing business with the gas industry. In addition,
the company must consider the possibility that the alternative energy sources it uses may also
have a negative impact on the environment and the safety of the local population. The
company must make an informed decision to ensure that it is in line with its ethical values and
the interests of all stakeholders.

In both options, it is important for the company to carefully weigh the economic benefits and
ethical considerations. The company must take into account the various stakeholders and their
interests and make an informed decision that is in line with its ethical values.

There have been several companies in the past that have had to make choices regarding gas
extraction in Groningen. An example is the Dutch energy company Eneco, which in 2016
decided to no longer purchase gas from Groningen. The company stated that it puts the safety
of its customers and employees first and therefore does not want to take any risks regarding
gas extraction in Groningen.

Another example is Shell, which has done business with the gas industry in Groningen in the
past. However, the company has faced criticism and protests due to the alleged role of Shell in
gas extraction and its impact on the local population and the environment. The company has
stated that it is aware of the concerns of society and is committed to minimizing the impact of
its activities on the environment and society.

Current situation