Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-04-Speech-3-123"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-07-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010704.3.3-123"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-07-04-Speech-3-1242
lpv:speaker	lp:Eija-Riitta Korhola2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Suomen kristillisdemokraatit rp (2001-05-30--2004-07-19)3 member; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Latvia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, we have just voted on the definition of renewable energy sources, and we also defined the concept of biomass more precisely. It was said that biomass shall mean the biodegradable fraction of products from agriculture, forestry and related industries. Although Parliament has unfortunately not reproduced the definition we agreed on last time, according to which peat should count among the renewables, inasmuch as it regenerates each year, I would like to state that peat should be implicitly included in the version now agreed. Every gardener knows that peat is a biodegradable product. It breaks down entirely – obviously, as it is generated biologically. Bacteria and microbes cause it to decompose if it is taken away from its oxygen-free state. It also decomposes on the surface of marshland. This is what the theory of peat growth is based upon: marshland grows where there is more peat growing than decomposing. As these are the facts, and they are not going to change, I hope that Parliament, the Commission and the Council will make the implicit explicit and make clear mention of peat in the future. This I hope for in the name of environmental protection. In my own amendment, adopted by Parliament in November, restrictions were imposed on the use of peat: the capital would not be touched, but just the interest would be used. Environmental organisations, which based their views on outdated knowledge regarding the carbon cycle of marshlands, paradoxically opposed my design to prevent the exploitation of marshes, and this is the result: greed leads to a sorry end, and so, probably, does environmental greed too. I hope the debate will continue."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph