WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2145/98 by Laura GONZÁLEZ ÁLVAREZ , Pedro MARSET CAMPOS to the Commission. Planned forestry biomass incinerator power station at Salinas de Pisuerga (Palancia, Spain)
Date: 1998-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, GONZALEZ ALVAREZ, MARSET CAMPOS
Subjects: Castile-Leon, Spain, air quality, biomass, environmental protection, industrial waste, power plant, protected area, renewable energy, waste incineration, waste management













EUR-Lex - 91998E2145 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2145

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2145/98 by Laura GONZÁLEZ ÁLVAREZ , Pedro MARSET CAMPOS to the Commission. Planned forestry biomass incinerator power station at Salinas de Pisuerga (Palancia, Spain)  


Official Journal C 135 , 14/05/1999 P. 0023 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2145/98by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission(13 July 1998)Subject: Planned forestry biomass incinerator power station at Salinas de Pisuerga (Palancia, Spain)After five years of administrative proceedings relating to the supply of fuel, the planned incinerator power station at Salinas de Pisuerga is now facing enormous opposition from both inside and outside the region concerned. So far almost 100 complaints have been lodged by a variety of groups, a number of appeals have been submitted, calling for the project to be revised, and at least three administrative disputes are currently underway.The widespread disquiet has intensified increased by the repeated refusal of the promoter (and also of the Castilla y León regional government) to give any explanation whatsoever regarding their intentions in the area. At the same time it has been stated that the data relating to the supply of fuel are confidential.What is more, the project is located on the very edge of the areas protected under the Brown Bear Rescue Plan and Project 2000, areas in which considerable efforts have also been made to promote rural tourism. The current promoter has been granted public aid totalling 399 860 000 pesetas (OM-PAEE and SG-ERDF).1. Does the Commission believe the nature of this project to be compatible with what is laid down in the White Paper entitled "Energy for the future: renewable sources of energy", which was published by the Commission on 26 November 1997?2. Does the Commission regard it as logical to subsidize at one and the same time both the project in question and others in the same area which are clearly incompatible with it?3. Has the Commission any evidence that incinerators do not comply with Directive 89/369/EC(1), Directive 84/360/EEC(2) and Directive 75/442/EEC(3) on air pollution and waste?4. What action is the Commission intending to take in order to ensure that incinerators which are still in operation comply with Community law? What priority is to be given to the needs and the interests of local people?5. In view of the EU's wish to develop renewable energy sources, is there any regulation which relates to biomass production plants?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission(5 October 1998)1. It is indeed so that, under the White Paper on the promotion of renewable energy sources(4), the promotion of biomass takes pride of place. However, it goes without saving that in no way can that development be detrimental to the environment. It is stipulated in the White Paper that, where action is taken to promote renewable energy sources, the net environmental effects of the various energy sources will be taken into account.It is assumed as far as the Salinas de Pisuerga project is concerned that the plant in question is intended to incinerate forestry waste. The European waste catalogue has a specific entry for this type of waste: 02 01 07 waste from forestry exploitation.2. It should be pointed out that neither the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) nor the Cohesion Fund have subsidised the forestry-biomass-fired power station at Salinas de Pisuerga.3. Even if the current provisions for waste incineration did not apply to this type of incinerator, Article 4 of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste(5) would do so. This requires Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that waste is recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and without using processes or methods which could harm the environment and, in particular, without risk to water, air, soil and plants and animals, without causing a nuisance due to noise or odours, and without adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest. In view of the content of the question the assessment by the authorities of Article 4 should in this case be clarified.4. The region of Palencia is part of the autonomous community of Castilla y Léon. The Commission has received a waste management plan for this community. The plan only covers municipal waste and the installation in question is not included in this plan. It is unclear to what extent the revision of the plan, which should be presented to the government in early 1999, will include this installation. Inclusion of an incinerator in an approved waste management plan is a condition to be meet before the Community can contribute financially to such installations via the structural or regional funds.5. Council Regulation (EEC) 1765/92 of 30 June 1992 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops provides that land that has been satisfied may be used to grow products which are not directly intended for human or animal consumption.Most of the non-food arable crops obtained from such land whose being left fallow has been either obligatory or voluntary are intended for the production of renewable energy sources(6).(1) OJ L 163, 14.6.1989, p. 32.(2) OJ L 188, 16.7.1984, p. 20.(3) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39.(4) COM(97) 599 final. .(5) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.(6) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992.