----

(2004/C 65 E/195)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2577/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 August 2003)

Subject:   Reaction on the addition of glucose and carbon to slurry with a view to protecting agricultural soils against pollution and gaseous ammonia emissions

Source: The 22 July 2003 edition of NOVA, a programme on TV Nederland 3, a Dutch TV station

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2003)

Agriculture is the major source of ammonia emissions to the atmosphere, which are among the pollutants causing the excedance of critical loads for acidification and euthrophication.

Directive 2001/81/EC of 23 October 2001 of the Parliament and of the Council on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants (1), requires that Member States prepare programmes of measures aimed at limiting the emission of acidifying and euthrophying pollutants in order not to exceed critical loads and levels and to improve the protection of the environment and human health. The ammonia emission ceilings per Member State to be attained by 2010 are listed in Annex I of the Directive.

The Directive does not, however, identify the specific measures to achieve the target, but leaves the responsibility to the Member States, which are required to define their programmes in relation to the level of reduction required. It should be stressed that a reduction of more than 40 % compared to 1990, as required in the case of the Netherlands, would imply the application of the whole set of measures for ammonia reduction, including specific measures to substantially reduce ammonia emission in the phase of manure landspreading.

Ammonia emission reduction is also part of the commitments for Parties (including all the Member States), which have signed the Gothenburg protocol of 1 December 1999 to the United Nations-Economic Commission for Europe (UN-ECE) Convention on long range transboundary air pollution to abate acidification, euthrophication and ozone. The Protocol contains a specific Annex (Annex IX) with the list of measures to reduce ammonia emission in agriculture, based on the extensive work of an expert panel from the different Parties participating in the Convention. In the case of manure land application, methods with a minimal efficiency of 30 % are required, including, therefore, manure injection.

On the general issue of the measures for emission reduction in intensive livestock rearing, including ammonia emission into the air, the Commission, in order to support the implementation of the IPPC Directive, (Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 on integrated pollution prevention and control (2)), in co-operation with the Member States, promoted the analysis of the practices in place and the identification of the best available techniques.

The Best Available Technique Reference Document (BREF) on intensive rearing of poultry and pigs, formally adopted in July 2003, lists the best available techniques to reduce emissions in housing, storage and spreading, as a result of an in depth work carried out by an expert panel, co-ordinated by the IPPC Bureau in Sevilla. Soil injection, is listed among the best available techniques to prevent ammonia emissions in the phase of spreading, with 80 % of reduction compared to the reference system (broadcasting).

On the basis of the above considerations it could be concluded that, at this stage of the knowledge, the technique of soil injection, if properly performed, is the most effective for ammonia emission reduction in the specific phase of animal manure application to land. However, the programmes of measures to reduce ammonia emission lie within the responsibility of Member States, which could rely on a broad series of measures, related to the different and subsequent phases of manure management: livestock housing, manure storage and spreading.

For land spreading, several alternative techniques are available in relation to crop type, expected ammonia reduction level, soil conditions and characteristics, and these can be adapted to the site, taking into account any sound scientific evidence on adverse effects of a given technique in a specific case.

On the issue of the use of additives for manure management, extensive scientific research has been carried out in order to assess their effectiveness in reducing ammonia and odour emission.

The Commission is aware of the results of the research. For instance, a recent review of a comprehensive network of experiments carried out by different research institutes on different types of additives to reduce ammonia and odour emission (3) includes, inter alia, the results of experiments on the effects of labile carbon sources, such as glucose, as possible acidifying agents. These sources, inducing a pH reduction in slurry through organic acid formation by anaerobic bacteria, could lead to a reduction of ammonia volatilisation, which is strictly pH dependent. The authors concluded that: ‘currently, the quantity of substrate required to induce a significant pH decline makes this additive type uneconomic’. However, they remarked that: ‘if the production of acid from glucose can be optimised ... it would offer an effective and safe means to prevent NH3 volatilisation.’

In any case, the Commission would welcome any further scientific work carried on in individual Member States, on utilisation of additives for emission reduction, according to a sound and rigorous experimental design, capable of providing reliable results.

On the issue of additives to improve manure management it could also be recalled that the Commission (Directorate General Research), in the context of the European Co-operative Research Action for Technology (CRAFT) of the BRITE EURAM Programme, aimed at promoting technological innovation in small and medium sized enterprises through its research and technological development, has funded a pilot project on additives for reduction of ammonia and odour emission from livestock manure (RAPID-QLK5-CT-2001-70429), which will be completed in December 2003.

----

(1)OJ L 309, 27.11.2001.

(2)OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.

(3)  Mc Crory and Hobbs, JEQ, 2001.30: 345-355.

----