Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-09-Speech-2-365"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040309.13.2-365"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, Mr Kronberger already knows my opinion on this report as I have expressed it quite strongly in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. However, I should perhaps be more moderate in my views tonight.
He may be quite passionate in his opinions but frankly they are misjudged. He might be quite earnest in the conclusions he arrives at but frankly they are erroneous. He must now face the reality that if he wants to regulate emissions of this kind from the industrial installations we are talking about, setting emission values just does not work. The impact on those installations of trying to impose such standards would be unbearable.
Nevertheless, I have one or two kind things to say about his report. Like the curate's egg in English parlance, it is good in parts. If you look at mercury and arsenic, for example, there may be a case for trying to set emission values in this sector, but certainly not in others. Take for example nickel. Nickel is one of the most important elements used in the production of stainless steel. The most common type of stainless steel contains 18% of nickel, but it can contain up to 30%. The nonsense of this proposal is that it assumes the measures used to control gaseous emissions of nickel can be applied to the situation in steel plants where nickel is emitted as a fine dust during the production process. In reality, the vast amounts of dust in the production area contain only a very small amount of nickel and the emissions from steel plants are relatively small. To try nevertheless to reach emission values in such a situation would be impossible.
Again in the case of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, the kind of measure proposed by Mr Kronberger will inevitably lead to the closure or end of use of coal-fired power stations, to the end of coal burning being used, to a loss of jobs and, across the whole of Europe, to an even greater reliance on imported gas and other supplies.
However well-meaning, these proposals are unrealistic, ill-considered and would undermine Europe's reputation for taking a responsible approach. I would urge him to think again."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples