WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3182/97 by Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS to the Commission. Pollution of the Megalopolis Basin
Date: 1997-10-13
Institutions: European Parliament, PAPAYANNAKIS
Subjects: EU aid, Greece, action programme, air quality, environmental protection, environmental standard, industrial pollution, pollution control, power plant, public health













EUR-Lex - 91997E3182 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3182

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3182/97 by Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS to the Commission. Pollution of the Megalopolis Basin  


Official Journal C 158 , 25/05/1998 P. 0050 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3182/97 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (13 October 1997)Subject: Pollution of the Megalopolis BasinThe population of the Megalopolis Basin are extremely concerned at the fact that an electricity generating plant operated by the Greek Electricity Board (DEI) is failing to comply with the required standards.In view of the fact that:(a) the 30 million cubic metres of exhaust gases (mainly carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, sulphuric acid, nitrogen oxides) emitted into the atmosphere every day exceed the limits laid down by the European Union,(b) 700 tonnes of brown coal and ash pollute the atmosphere every day from the 11 chimneys of the electrostatic filters, the residues from which are dumped in the earth,(c) the average life of the filters is 5-6 years, though at the DEI Megalopolis plant they have not been replaced for 24 years so that their current retention capacity is about 10%,(d) there is blatant infringement of Community directives on air pollution from industrial installations while the emissions of harmful gases are creating conditions with serious implications for public health.Will the Commission say:1. whether it considers it appropriate to carry out an on-the-spot check to verify the situation at the DEI electricity plant at Megalopolis,2. whether it intends to intercede more actively with the Greek authorities to speed up the introduction of preventive measures so that the electrostatic filters and brown coal filters are replaced as quickly as possible in a manner which complies with Community law and protects public health and the environment, and3. whether it is prepared to contribute towards the funding of replacement filters under the operational programmes for the environment and energy, should the Greek authorities submit a request to that effect?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (24 November 1997)Information regarding the question posed by the Honourable Member does not enable us to conclude as categorically as he can that there is blatant infringement of Community Directives on air pollution from industrial plants.According to the information at the Commission's disposal, the Megalopolis power plant is a large combustion plant coming under Council Directive 88/609/EEC of 24 November 1988 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants ((OJ L 336, 7.12.1988. )). It is made up of four units using lignite as fuel. The first three came into operation between 1970 and 1975, and the fourth in 1991.Directive 88/609/EEC requires that large combustion plants that have come into operation after 1 July 1987 adhere to the emission limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and dust (Article 4 and Annexes II to VII). However, in the case of plants burning solid fuels produced in the Member State and having special characteristics, the emission limit values can be exceeded provided that a minimum rate of desulphurisation is achieved.Regarding the three older units, Directive 88/609/EEC does not set out specific emission limit values for each unit but establishes annual ceilings in the programme that each Member State was obliged to draw up in order to reduce the annual emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from large combustion plants existing in the Member State before 1 July 1987. The Greek authorities have in fact informed the Commission of their plan for stabilising emissions, which was drawn up in 1992, as well as given an emission inventory for phase one.The Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that Directive 88/609/EEC does not directly regulate dust emissions from existing large combustion plants (before 1 July 1987). Instead, Community legislation deals with air quality (regarding sulphur dioxide and suspended particulates) in Council Directive 80/779/EEC of 15 July 1980 on air quality limit values and guide values for sulphur dioxide and suspended particulates ((OJ L 229, 30.8.1980. )), and the Commission has recently drawn up a proposal for a new Directive ((COM(97) 500. )) within the framework of Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and management ((OJ L 296, 21.11.1996. )), repealing Directive 80/779/EEC.It is not the Commission's job to carry out in situ checks on the state of industrial plants in Member States. This is the responsibility of the local authorities. The Commission however intends to request further information from the Greek authorities on the steps taken to implement the requirements of Directive 88/609/EEC to unit 4 since its coming into operation and the steps taken to comply with Directive 80/779/EEC.The Structural Funds have cofinanced, under the 1989-1993 Community support framework for Greece, the investment for the construction of the fourth unit in the Megalopolis complex, providing 45.4% of funding at a cost of 56 thousand million Drachma (approximately ECU 187 million).This financing is given on the condition that, before 31 December 1998, and with national funds, a complete desulphurisation unit is built. According to the Commission Decision currently in force, the subsidy granted for this Megalopolis unit must be reimbursed if the Greek authorities do not, within the agreed timescale, provide the additional investment necessary for reducing pollution to an acceptable level. It goes without saying that the Commission can only consider a possible request by the Greek authorities for the replacement of the filters in the light of the outcome of the check to ensure that the obligations under the aforementioned Decision are being respected.