WRITTEN QUESTION P-3210/00 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission. Use of agricultural products for non-food purposes.
Date: 2000-10-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: alternative use of agricultural products, bioenergy, common agricultural policy, substitute fuel

22.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 151 E/97

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 November 2000)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for his interest in the renewal of the protocol to the
EU-Cape Verde fisheries agreement and is pleased to inform him of the following:

The Commission is aware of the importance of renewing the protocol before it expires and following a
series of preliminary contacts, took part in three successive rounds of talks in Brussels on 19/20 July 2000,
Praia 23-25 August 2000 and Brussels 6/7 November 2000.

Although significant progress was made during the talks, in particular concerning fishing opportunities
and financial compensation, the two parties were unable to reach an agreement, particularly with regard to
quayside transhipment conditions.

(2001/C 151 E/110)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3210/00

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Use of agricultural products for non-food purposes

In paragraph 45 of its resolution A4-0219/98 of 18 June 1998 (1) the European Parliament stated:

The use of agricultural products for non-food purposes, e.g. for biomass, makes it possible to create
new sources of
income and jobs in rural regions. Ecological energy generation from biomass
contributes to reducing CO2 emissions. This sector should be supported in the context of Community
legislation, in particular by means of tax privileges or exemptions, and, in addition, the use of certain
non-food products with a positive life cycle analysis must be made compulsory,
in particular in
environmentally sensitive areas.

1. What action has the Commission taken so far to comply with Parliament(cid:146)s wish, apart from the
appropriations available in the Altener programme?

2.
In the light of current developments in the energy market, does the Commission advocate the
drafting of proposals requiring a certain percentage of biodiesel to be mixed with ordinary diesel, which
might have positive effects on the environment, make the EU less dependent on imports and promote the
development of new markets for oilseeds?

Does the Commission also see any prospects for the application of pure vegetable oil as a motor

3.
fuel?

(1) OJ C 210, 6.7.1998, p. 180.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 2000)

Promoting biofuels has been one of the Community(cid:146)s aims since the early 1990s. In its recent commu-
nication on the European Union(cid:146)s oil supplies (1), the Commission(cid:146)s strategy provides for, in particular, the
presentation of an energy saving and diversification plan at the G(cid:246)teborg European Council. Among other
things that plan will aim at taking appropriate action in order to provide incentives for the use of
substitute fuels, including biofuels.

More specifically as regards the questions put by the Honourable Member: the granting of assistance in
order to promote non-food crops is not provided for under the Altener programme. The Commission

C 151 E/98

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.5.2001

would nevertheless again point out that, as part of the common agricultural policy, provision has been
made (2) for the possibility of using set-aside land for non-food crops, but without specific further aid for
energy crops. Nevertheless the Commission has noted the proposals made in this area by certain
Member States when Agenda 2000 was implemented.

The Commission is certainly in favour of mixing biodiesel and diesel oil. It would point out that this is
currently taking place, more specifically in France, where 5 % of the fossil diesel used consists of biodiesel.
The Commission has been notified of the French regulations governing this area. The Commission and
Member States have not raised any objection. The same type of notification has been received from
Austria, concerning 2 % mixtures.

In addition the proposal that the law be used to require a low percentage of biodiesel to be mixed with
diesel fuel within the Community had been put forward by certain circles concerned. The Commission
feels that, at least for the moment, no such action would be appropriate. For certain Member States, at
least as things now stand, any such mandatory inclusion would cause problems owing to a lack of
production and distribution infrastructure or problems of raw material availability. The Commission feels
that, for the moment, it would be appropriate to leave the option open to the Member States that are
willing to expand this sector.

The Commission leaves to the Member States the choice as to which option seems to them best suited to
their conditions. Thus, contrary to what takes place in France, unadulterated biodiesel is used in, above all,
Germany, and also in certain niches of environmental relevance. It should be noted that the Commission
has conferred a biodiesel standardisation remit on the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN)
which takes account of the various potential uses (in particular whether blended or unadulterated).
Moreover, as part of its policy on fuel quality, the Commission may, among other things, put forward
proposals laying down the specification levels applying to biofuels (3).

Finally, Community policy favours biofuels while also taking account of their various potential uses.
However, a more effective policy is now hampered first of all by fiscal matters. At the moment it is
impossible for biofuels to make major inroads into the market without any tax exemption. The
Community legislation in force only authorises that detaxing in the case of (cid:145)pilot projects(cid:146). Since the early
1990s the Commission has been drafting proposals for directives which would create an adequate legal
basis (4) for enabling the Member States to make such tax exemptions, but although its initial proposal was
accepted by Parliament (5), this did not receive unanimity within the Council owing to opposition by one
Member State. The Commission had provided a wider interpretation of the term (cid:145)pilot project(cid:146) authorising
limited detaxing in France, (for a quantity of biofuels representing roughly 1 % of fuel consumption in
France), but in its decision of 27/9/2000 (6), the Community(cid:146)s Court of First Instance felt that the situation
went beyond that of (cid:145)pilot(cid:146). This stresses the importance of suitable tax legislation.

(1) COM(2000) 631 final.
(2) Article 6(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 of 17 May 1999 establishing a support system for producers

of certain arable crops (OJ L 160, 26.6.1999 and OJ L 194, 27.7.1999).

(3) Directive 98/70/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1998 relating to the quality of
petrol and diesel fuels and amending Council Directive 93/12/EEC (OJ L 350, 28.12.1998 and OJ L 40, 13.2.1999).
(4) Proposal for a Directive on excise duties on motor fuels from agricultural sources (OJ C 73, 24.3.1992). Proposal
for a Council Directive restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products, Article 14
1(b), (OJ C 139, 6.5.1997).

(5) Amended proposal for a Council Directive on excise duties on motor fuels from agricultural sources (OJ C 209,

29.7.1994).

(6) BP Chemicals/Commission Judgment of 27.9.2000. Case T-187/97.

(2001/C 151 E/111)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3211/00

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: EU legislation to combat legionella infection

(10 October 2000)

Last year 28 people died in the Netherlands after they had been infected with the legionella bacterium at a
flower show in Bovenkarspel.