natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Proizvodnja bioplina je najbolj razvita v Nemčiji, Belgiji, Avstriji in na Danskem.
Biogas production is most developed in Germany, Belgium, Austria and Denmark.
V večini držav prevladujejo obrati za pridobivanje bioplina na ravni kmetijskih obratov, največji delež centraliziranih obratov za pridobivanje bioplina pa imajo na Danskem.
In most countries farm scale biogas plants are predominant, but Denmark has the largest share of its production on centralized biogas plants.
Letna proizvodnja bioplina iz obratov na ravni kmetij v Evropi je bila za obdobje do sredine leta 2007 ocenjena na 1.85 x 10 9 m 3 bioplina (z vsebnostjo 65 % metana).
The annual biogas production from agricultural biogas plants in Europe by mid 2007 is estimated at 1.85x10 9 m3 of biogas (containing 65% methane).
Potencial proizvodnje bioplina iz gnoja znaša v EU 827 PJ (petajoulov), medtem ko je danes iz živinskega gnoja, energetskih rastlin in organskih odpadkov pridobljenih okoli 50 PJ.
The potential for biogas production based on manure in the EU is 827 PJ (Petajoule) whereas today some about 50 PJ is produced from both animal manure, energy crops and organic waste.
To pomeni, da je potencial pridobivanja bioplina samo iz živinskega gnoja 14-krat večji.
This means that there is a potential of a 14 times increase in the animal manure only.
Okoljski vidiki
Environmental aspects
Bioplin, pridobljen iz gnoja, ima številne okoljske prednosti, kot so zmanjšanje emisij metana in CO 2 , zmanjšanje emisij trdnih delcev in dušikovih oksidov, manj neprijeten vonj, higienizacija gnojevke in boljša sposobnost fertilizacije dušika pri predelavi gnoja, kar pomeni, da je za doseganje enakega učinka fertilizacije potrebno manj dušika.
Biogas from manure does have numerous environmental advantages, like reduction of methane and CO2-emissions, reduction of emissions of particulate matter and nitrous oxides, far less obnoxious odour, hygienisation of slurry and far better fertilizing capacity of the nitrogen in the treated manure, meaning less nitrogen is needed to reach the same fertilizing effect.
Proizvodnja bioplina (in s tem metana) v zaprtem, nadzorovanem sistemu, kot je obrat za pridobivanje bioplina, in posledična uporaba bioplina kot obnovljivega vira energije preko izgorevanja, ima zelo pozitiven učinek na izračun emisij toplogrednih plinov.
Production of biogas (and thus methane) in a closed, controlled system like a biogas plant – and the subsequent utilization of the biogas as renewable energy source through combustion - has a very positive effect on the "green house emission account".
Pretvorba metana v energijo in ogljikov dioksid preko izgorevanja privede do obratnega rezultata pri izračunu učinka toplogrednih plinov, kajti CO 2 je veliko manj škodljiv kot metan, energija, pridobljena z izgorevanjem bioplina, pa nadomesti fosilne vire energij.
By converting the methane into energy and carbon dioxide through combustion, there is a ‘reverse’ input to the green house effect account, because CO2 is by far less harmful than methane, and because the energy from the biogas combustion replaces fossil energy sources.
Emisije CO 2 iz obnovljivih virov energij (izgorevanja slame, lesa in bioplina) veljajo za nevtralne, ker iste količine CO 2 , ki nastanejo z izgorevanjem, vsrkajo zelene rastline, namenjene proizvodnji biomase.
CO2-emissions from renewable energy sources (like combustion of straw, wood and biogas) are considered neutral, because the same amounts of CO2 which are emitted upon combustion have basically been assimilated by green plants in the first place to produce the biomass.
Vodikov sulfid (H 2 S) je morda snov, ki se ji namenja največ pozornosti, ko govorimo o morebitnih tveganjih.
Hydrogen sulphide (H2S) is probably the substance in biogas which is given most focus, when talking about potential hazards.
Za zmanjšanje koncentracij H 2 S v bioplinu se lahko uporabijo različne metode; ali se očisti sam bioplin, na primer v črpalki za čiščenje plina (scrubber), ali pa se majhna količina (približno 4 %) svežega zraka doda bioplinu v rezervoarju – npr. pokritem, plinotesnem rezervoarju za skladiščenje gnojnice – kjer bakterije na površini gnojnice absorbirajo H 2 S.
Different methods can be used to reduce the concentration of H2S in the biogas; either the biogas is cleaned itself, for instance in a scrubber, or a small amount (approximately four percent) of fresh air is added to the biogas in a tank - for instance a covered, gas-tight slurry storage tank - where bacteria at the surface of the slurry take up the H2S.
Druga prednost tega je, da žveplo ostane v gnojnici za poznejšo hrano rastlinam.
A further advantage of this is that the sulphur remains in the slurry for later plant nutrition.
V bioplinu so lahko v majhnih količinah prisotne druge snovi.
Other substances may be present in small amounts in the biogas.
Dušik (N 2 ) in kisik (O 2 ) sta lahko prisotna v koncentracijah do nekaj odstotkov (to bi bilo tipično, če bi bil bioplinu dodan svež zrak za desulfurizacijo), vendar ti plini očitno ne predstavljajo nevarnosti za okolje.
Nitrogen (N2) and oxygen (O2) may be present in concentrations up to a couple of percent (this would typically be the case if fresh air is added to the biogas for desulphurization), but these gasses are obviously not an environmental hazard.
V majhnih količinah je lahko prisoten tudi vodik (H 2 ), vendar se ta med izgorevanjem izloči.
Hydrogen (H2) may also be present in small amounts, but will be eliminated during combustion.
Prisotne so lahko tudi sledi dveh potencialno nevarnih plinov, ogljikovega monoksida (CO) in amonijaka (NH 3 ), vendar se zaradi varnega in nadzorovanega poteka izgorevanja ves CO izloči.
Two potentially hazardous gasses, carbon monoxide (CO) and ammonia (NH3) may also be present in trace amounts, but given a safe and controlled combustion process, CO is completely eliminated.
Količina amoniaka je zanemarljiva v primerjavi s potencialom za znižanje dušika, kar je rezultat izboljšane uporabe bioloških gnojil v primerjavi z netretirano gnojnico.
Amount of ammonia is negligible compared to the potential for reduction of nitrogen to the environment resulting from the improved utilization of the bio fertilizer compared to untreated slurry.
Torej so, če se uspešno prepreči uhajanje bioplina iz obratov in če izgorevanje bioplina poteka pod optimalnimi pogoji, splošni učinki emisij, ki nastajajo ob pretvorbi organske biomase v bioplin z uporabo anaerobne presnove, v celoti pozitivni.
So in general, if leak of biogas from the installations is prevented effectively, and if the combustion of the biogas is carried out under optimal conditions the overall effects on emissions from converting organic biomass to biogas through anaerobic digestion are absolutely positive.
Ne gre samo za zmanjšanje emisij CO 2 , ki jih povzroča uporaba fosilnih goriv, temveč tudi za znatno zmanjšanje drugih emisij (metana itd.) npr. iz živinskega gnoja v primerjavi z razmerami, kjer obrat za pridobivanje bioplina ni na voljo.
Not only by reducing CO2-emissions from using fossil fuel, but also by a net reduction in other emissions (methane etc.) from animal manure etc. compared to a situation without a biogas plant
Energetski vidiki in potreba po nacionalni podpori in podpori EU
Energy aspects and the need for EU and national support
Količina bioplina, pridobljena iz gnojil živalskega izvora, je precej nizka, 40–90 m3/t (kubičnih metrov na tono), precej več se ga pridobi iz žit (170–220 m³/t), še večje količine pa omogoča prehrambena industrija (stranski proizvodi in odpadki iz klavnic (250–480 m³/t).
Biogas output from animal fertilizers is rather low (40-90 m3/t (cubic meters per tons), much higher from cereals (170-220 m³/t), and even higher from food-industrial materials (primarily slaughterhouse by-products and waste (250-480 m³/t).
S kombinacijo različnih surovin za pridobivanje bioplina je zaželen minimalni iznos 120 m³/t.
Combining different biogas raw materials a minimum output of 120 m³/t is desirable.
Predelava gnoja in tehnologije za pridobivanje bioplina vsebujejo skupne elemente, zato je priporočljivo podporo vzpostavitvi obratov za pridobivanje bioplina vezati na predelavo gnoja, a uporabiti tudi druge surovine, kot so organski odpadki ali neprehrambene energetske rastline.
Animal manure processing and biogas technologies contain joint elements, therefore it is advisable to link the support for setting up biogas plants to animal manure processing, but also using other raw materials like organic waste or non-food energy crops.
Večnamenske enote za presnovo (co-digestion units) lahko istočasno obdelujejo različne vrste odpadkov, v glavnem tekoč in trden gnoj, pomešan z različnimi organskimi odpadki.
The co-digestion units are capable of treating different types of waste at the same time, principally liquid and solid manures mixed with diverse organic waste.
Donosnost proizvodnje bioplina je negativna tako v primerih obratov za pridobivanje bioplina na ravni kmetijskih obratov, kot tudi v centraliziranih obratih.
Biogas production’s profitability is negative both in the case of farm-scale biogas plants centralised plants.
Prihodki vključujejo vrednost samega bioplina v obliki toplote in električne energije in vrednost povečanega učinka dušika v živinskem gnoju na kmetijske površine.
Revenues include value of the biogas itself in the form of heat and electricity and value of increased field effect of nitrogen in livestock manure.
Večji obrati za pridobivanje bioplina, ki sprejemajo zunanjo biomaso, imajo možnost dodatnega prihodka od vrednosti N, P in K, vrednosti uničenja (gate-fees) in vrednosti znižanja CO 2 .
Larger biogas plants that receive external biomass have the possibility for additional income from fertiliser value of N, P and K, value of "gate fees", and value of CO2e reduction.
V nekaterih državah članicah lahko obrati za pridobivanje bioplina ustvarjajo dohodek od prodaje zelenih certifikatov.
In some EU member states biogas plants have the possibility to generate income from sale of Green Certificates.
Investicijski in operativni stroški pa so veliki.
On the cost side the investment and operational costs are both considerable.
Donosnost in konkurenčnost obrata za pridobivanje bioplina v glavnem določajo prodajne cene proizvedene električne energije (običajno določene na ravni države).
Profitability and competitiveness of a biogas plant is mainly determined by the selling price of the produced electricity (usually set by the state).
Na Madžarskem je npr. cena zelene električne energije 0,09 EUR na kWh za vse vire obnovljivih energij, medtem ko znaša v Nemčiji – ob možnih bonusih – 0,2 EUR na kWh – dvakrat več kot na Madžarskem, s tem da so veleprodajne cene električne energije skoraj enake.
In Hungary for example the green-electricity price is set at 0,09 EUR per kWh (kilowatt per hour) for all renewable energy sources, whereas in Germany - with the possible bonuses - it amounts to around 0,2 EUR per kWh - twice as much as in Hungary, while the electricity wholesale prices are almost the same.
Prodajna cena, ki jo določi država, zato v mnogih primerih ne zadošča za trajnostno proizvodnjo bioplina.
The selling price set by the state is therefore in many cases insufficient for the sustainability of the biogas production.
Analize kažejo, da bi lahko vrednost CO 2 ekonomsko uravnotežila obrate na ravni kmetij in pokrila približno polovico ekonomske izgube centraliziranih obratov.
The analyses show that the value of the CO2 e could almost bring the economy of farm-scale plants in balance, and cover around half of the economic loss for the centralised plants.
Izločitev prehodnih stroškov za trgovanje s CO 2 bi koristila ne le donosnosti proizvodnje bioplina, temveč bi se odražala tudi v nacionalnih izračunih proizvodnje CO 2 .
Removal of the transition costs for trade with CO2 e would not only benefit the profitability of the biogas production, but also the national accounts for the CO2 e production.
Kljub temu pa negativna donosnost jasno kaže, da proizvodnja bioplina ni smotrna brez velike podpore iz nacionalnih in evropskih finančnih virov.
Nevertheless, negative profitability clearly shows that biogas production is not viable without considerable support from both European and national financial resources.
Naložbe bi bilo treba spodbujati z različnimi ukrepi, vključno s sredstvi EU za regionalni razvoj in razvoj podeželja.
Investments should be encouraged by various measures, including regional and rural development EU-funds.
Ključni dejavnik pa je vendarle cena zelene električne energije, ki jo določi država; ta bi morala zagotavljati trajnostni pristop in delovati kot prava spodbuda.
They key factor is, however the ‘green-electricity’ price set by the state, which should be sufficient to ensure sustainability and act as a real incentive.
Vendar pa bi bilo treba ta evropska in nacionalna sredstva trošiti razumno.
However, these European and national resources should be spent wisely.
Vsa finančna podpora obratom za pridobivanje bioplina bi morala temeljiti na učinkovitosti, tehničnem razvoju in pozitivni bilanci glede toplogrednih plinov ter na drugih ekonomskih in okoljskih prednostih obratov.
All financial support for biogas installations ought to be based on the efficiency, technical development and positive greenhouse-gas balance and other environmental advantages of installations.
Potreba po novi direktivi o bioplinu in reviziji zakonodaje
A need for a new biogas directive and review of legislation
Zakonodajo EU in nacionalno zakonodajo je potrebno pregledati, da bi omogočili vzpostavitev in delovanje proizvodnih obratov za pridobivanje bioplina po vsej Evropski uniji.
EU as well as national legislation has to be revised in order to facilitate the setting-up and operation of biogas plants across the EU:
· Predvsem je potrebna direktiva EU o proizvodnji bioplina, s posebnimi cilji glede deleža bioplina v kmetijstvu v okviru cilja proizvodnje obnovljivih energij, statistični elementi, ukrepi za gradnjo in spodbujanje obratov za pridobivanje bioplina na podlagi nacionalne ali regionalne presoje vpliva, ukrepi za širjenje in spodbujanje rezultatov, pridobljenih s predhodnimi izkušnjami, poziv k nacionalnemu in regionalnemu načrtovanju za omejitev pravnih in administrativnih ovir, in priporočila za najnižjo raven ter mehanizem za letno prilagajanje plačil za „zeleno električno energijo“ in „zeleni plin“.
· First and foremost, an EU-directive on biogas production is needed, with specific targets for the agricultural biogas share within the target for renewable energy production, statistical elements, measures for construction and promotion of biogas-installations based on a national or regional impact evaluation, measures for dissemination and promotion of results gained from prior experiences, call for national and regional planning in order to restrict legal and administrative hindrances, and recommendations for the minimum level and yearly adjustment mechanism of payment for ‘green-electricity’ and 'green gas'.
· Pregledati je treba zakonodajo o uporabi ostankov iz obratov za pridobivanje bioplina.
· The legislation on the use of residues from biogas installations should be revised.
· Razmisliti je treba o prepovedi uporabe takšnih spodbujevalcev rasti v živalski krmi, ki vsebujejo težke kovine, če bi to predstavljalo vseevropski problem pri poznejši uporabi ostankov bioplina na poljih.
· A ban should be considered on using growth enhancers in animal feed containing heavy metals if this should be a European wide problem for later use of biogas residues on fields.
· Učinkovito uveljavljanje direktive o celovitem preprečevanju in nadzorovanju onesnaževanja (IPPC) in direktive o nitratih je ključnega pomena, skupaj z direktivo o blatu iz čistilnih naprav, okvirno direktivo o vodah, direktivo o pticah, direktivo o habitatih in zakonodajo o težkih kovinah.
· The effective enforcement of the IPPC and Nitrates Directives are crucial, along with the Sewage Sludge Directive, Water Framework Directive, Birds directive, Habitats Directive and the Heavy Metals legislation.
· Strategija je potrebna za vključitev obratov za pridobivanje bioplina v kjotski mehanizem.
· A strategy is needed to include biogas installations into the Kyoto-mechanism.
· Vseevropska zakonodaja je potrebna za zagotovitev, da se bo bioplin, po kakovosti enak zemeljskemu plinu, lahko pošiljal po omrežjih zemeljskega plina.
· EU-wide legislation is needed to ensure that biogas - upgraded to natural gas quality - can be fed into the natural gas network.
· Potrebni so predlogi za nadaljnje izboljšanje uporabe živalskih stranskih proizvodov za bioplin, kot to oznanja akcijski načrt za bioplin,
· Proposals are needed for further enhancing the use of animal by-products for biogas as announced in the 'Biomass action plan',
· Države članice bi morale bioplin vključiti v vmesno vrednotenje obstoječih programov za razvoj podeželja in regij ter predlagati ukrepe za prihodnost.
· Member States should include biogas in their mid-term evaluation of existing rural and regional development programmes and propose actions for the future.
Strategije za razvoj podeželja, vključno s projekti LEADER, bi morali vsebovati razvojne scenarije za storitve, povezane z biomaso in bioplinom;
Rural Development strategies, including LEADER projects should contain development scenarios for biomass and biogas utilities;
· Komisija bi morala do 15. decembra 2008 Evropskemu parlamentu predstaviti usklajeno poročilo o evropski proizvodnji bioplina ter pri tem upoštevati prej omenjene predloge in doseženi napredek;
· The Commission should present a coherent report on European biogas production to the European Parliament until 15 December 2008 taking into account the above mentioned proposals and the progress made;
· Prizadevati bi si bilo treba za naložbe v raziskave, razvoj in demonstracije.
· Efforts should be made to fund research, development and demonstration.
O osnutku so razpravljali tudi neodvisni strokovnjaki in službe držav članic, kar je močno pripomoglo k pojasnitvi določenih vidikov prihodnje politike na področju bioplina.
The draft was also discussed with independent experts and Member States administrations who have helped immensely to clarify up certain aspects of a future biogas-policy.
MNENJE Odbora za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko (*)
OPINION of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (*)
o trajnostnem kmetijstvu in bioplinu: potreba po spremembi zakonodaje EU
on Sustainable agriculture and biogas: a need for review of EU legislation
Odbor za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko poziva Odbor za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja, kot pristojni odbor, da v svoj predlog resolucije vključi naslednje pobude:
The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:
4. v zvezi s tem poudarja, da mora dovajanje električne energije, toplote in zemeljskega plina v omrežja potekati brez diskriminacije, in poziva, naj se bioplin obravnava tako kot zemeljski plin, da bo lahko po dovodu v omrežje zemeljskega plina razvil ves svoj potencial;
Stresses in this connection that the supply of electricity, heat and natural gas to networks must be non-discriminatory, and calls for biogas to be treated in the same way as natural gas so as to enable it to achieve its full potential once it has been fed into the natural gas network;
7. meni, da mladi in inovativni bioplinski sektor sicer potrebuje začetno spodbudo, da pa bi morali ti sistemi podpore prenehati veljati, ko bo sektor tržno donosen;
Considers that whilst the young and innovative biogas sector needs start-up support, such support schemes should only continue in effect until the sector becomes commercially viable;
2. poudarja, da proizvodnja biogoriv iz odpadkov ne bi smela postati sama po sebi cilj; zmanjšanje odpadkov mora biti prednostna naloga v okoljski politiki Evropske unije in držav članic;
Stresses that producing agrofuels from waste should not become a goal in itself; reducing waste should continue to be a priority in the environmental policy of the European Union and in that of Member States;
4. poziva Komisijo, naj zagotovi ustrezne varnostne ukrepe, ki bodo preprečili kontaminacijo in širjenje teh snovi, sredstev in organizmov ter bolezni, ki jih povzročajo, ob upoštevanju, da se s postopkom segrevanja virusi odstranijo zgolj do neke mere ter da večina organskih kontaminantov le malo upade, težke kovine pa se ne spremenijo;
Urges the Commission to ensure that adequate precautions are taken to avoid contamination and spreading of these substances, agents and organisms and any diseases they induce, recognising that the heating process reduces the viruses only to a certain extent and that most organic contaminants are barely reduced and heavy metals remain intact;
6. poziva Komisijo, naj na podlagi pretvorbenega kroga različnih vrst biomase v obratih za pridobivanje bioplina preuči njihovo trajnost glede na količino emisij toplogrednih plinov ter njihov vpliv na kakovost zraka, biološko raznovrstnost, vključno z naravno vegetacijo (gozdovi, travniki, pašniki) , upravljanjem zemljišč in proizvodnjo hrane;
Calls on the Commission to examine, on the basis of conversion cycle comparisons of various types of biomass in biogas plants, the sustainability of these types with respect to the volume of greenhouse gas emissions and their effects on air quality, biodiversity, including natural vegetation (forests, meadowland, marshland), land management and food production;
9. poziva Komisijo, naj zbere vse potrebne podatke o proizvodnji bioplina v državah članicah, da bo imela jasno predstavo, kako bioplin napreduje v Evropski uniji, ob upoštevanju, da so ti podatki potrebni in lahko pomagajo oblikovati ustrezno strategijo za soočenje s tem vprašanjem;
Calls on the Commission to collect all relevant data on the production of biogas in the Member States, in order to have a clear picture of how the subject of biogas is advancing in the European Union, taking into account that this data is necessary and helpful in formulating a relevant strategy to address the issue;
o enakosti spolov in krepitvi vloge žensk v razvojnem sodelovanju
on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development Cooperation
Pripravljavka mnenja (*):
Draftswoman (*): Gabriela Cretu,
MNENJE Odbora za pravice žensk in enakost spolov Error!
OPINION of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (*) 18
– ob upoštevanju Sporočila Komisije z dne 8. marca 2007 z naslovom Enakost spolov in krepitev vloge žensk v razvojnem sodelovanju ( KOM(2007)0100 ),
– having regard to the Commission Communication of 8 March 2007 entitled Gender Equality and Women Empowerment in Development Cooperation ( COM(2007)0100 ),
– ob upoštevanju sklepov Sveta za splošne zadeve in zunanje odnose ter predstavnikov vlad držav članic, ki so se sestali v okviru Sveta, z dne 14. maja 2007 o enakosti spolov in krepitvi vloge žensk v razvojnem sodelovanju;
– having regard to the Conclusions of the General Affairs and External Relations Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, adopted on 14 May 2007 on "Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development Cooperation",
– ob upoštevanju Uredbe (ES) št. 806/2004 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 21. aprila 2004 o spodbujanju enakosti spolov pri razvojnem sodelovanju
– having regard to Regulation (EC) No 806/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on promoting gender equality in development cooperation
– ob upoštevanju členov 2, 3(2), 137 in 141 Pogodbe o ES,
– having regard to Articles 2, 3(2), 137 and 141 of the EC Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah, razglašene leta 2000
– having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union proclaimed in 2000
1. , zlasti njenega člena 23,
1. and, in particular, Article 23,
– ob upoštevanju konvencije Združenih narodov z dne 18. decembra 1979 o odpravi vseh oblik diskriminacije žensk,
– having regard to the United Nations Convention of 18 December 1979 on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW),