Platform on civil engineering, underground infrastructure, energy, construction equipment & construction machinery
By André Mepschen, Business Developer National at Water Alliance and board member of the Advisory Board Aqua Netherlands
There are few things as obvious in the Netherlands as water. The tap opens and it flows. That idea is not only in households, but deeply embedded in how we build, expand and produce.
Until the moment a company wants to build a new factory hall, scale up production or modify a process and is told that no additional drinking water connection is available. In parts of the Netherlands, this is already a reality. For those affected it is immediately a serious problem. For those not yet affected, it remains abstract.
At the same time, we want to move toward building 100,000 homes a year in the Netherlands. Those homes will also require a drinking water connection. This clashes with the limits of extraction, licensing, infrastructure and spatial planning. This is an issue now, not later.
The National Drinking Water Conservation Action Plan is clear. The goal is to save 20 percent from 2016-2019, for both industry and consumers. By 2035, per capita drinking water consumption must move toward 100 liters per day.
These are solid goals. But goals alone do not create movement.
The question that lingers is simple and uncomfortable: are we as the Netherlands really steering for this? With concrete measures, clear agreements and consistent action? Or will we stick to ambitions, pilots and good intentions while the pressure on the system continues to increase?
Water is still cheap. As a result, scarcity doesn't feel like scarcity. The value of water is high, but you don't see that on the bill. What costs little rarely gets priority.
Look at household drinking water use. In 2023, the average was 118 liters per person per day. About 40 percent of that goes on showering and about 30 percent on toilet use.
For many people, that remains an abstract number. Yet here lies a simple opportunity. With relatively simple measures, savings of 10 to 20 percent are possible. This applies to households but in practice just as well to industry.
In industry, however, water takes on an extra charge. There, it's not just about usage, but about operational reliability. A plant that shuts down due to water shortages or stricter discharge requirements pays a much higher price than the water bill alone. Production loss, process disruption and operational uncertainty weigh heavily.
In addition to availability, water quality also plays an increasingly important role. The Water Framework Directive sets clear requirements for the quality of surface water and groundwater. This affects companies that discharge to surface water or otherwise affect a body of water, for example through groundwater.
Added to this is a practical reality. The composition of surface water changes due to seasons, drought and peak loads. Companies that take in surface water for process water notice this immediately. And those who purify with membranes or other techniques have to deal with concentrate streams for which a solution is needed.
This requires a different way of thinking. The classic linear model of ingest, use and discharge is reaching its limits. Circular thinking is becoming increasingly necessary.
We seem like sector frogs in a pan on the fire. The water is getting hotter, but as long as it's not boiling yet, everyone stays put.
The national government, provinces, municipalities, water companies and water boards each have their role. This division of roles has grown historically and has worked well for a long time. In the current situation, with overlapping and complex issues, that fragmentation helps less and less.
Who brings the various parties together and provides direction and cohesion? That direction is often lacking. This makes us dependent on early adopters: organizations that want to move forward, that want to prepare for the future and do not wait until it is too late. That is valuable but insufficient to carry the task as a whole.
When it comes to water measures, the same question invariably comes up: what is the payback period? This is a logical question, but a limited one.
Investing in water is not just about saving money. It's about security. About whether you can continue to produce in the future, whether you depend on restrictions in supply or discharge, and how robust your operations are in the face of changing circumstances.
Sometimes there is no immediate financial payback, but certainty that you won't shut down during a dry spell. Sometimes there are hardly any additional costs, but you avoid dependence on a drinking water company that cannot provide additional water or has stricter requirements for discharges.
Waiting doesn't help. Technology is rarely the problem. The question is how to get started.
First, map your own situation. Find out where water comes from, where it is used and where it disappears. Then look at possible solutions and engage with parties who can help, whoever they may be.
Those who take that step often discover that more is possible than previously thought. The biggest roadblocks are not in facilities or technology but in choices, priorities and decision-making.
And that is exactly why water does not belong only in the technical corner, but in the place where direction is set.
This issue is central to Aqua Netherlands' broader conversation toward 2026 on the future of the water sector.
About the author
André Mepschen works as Business Developer National at Water Alliance and is also a board member of the Advisory Board Aqua Netherlands.
