Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-24-Speech-3-943"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-11-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101124.15.3-943"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-11-24-Speech-3-2222
lpv:speaker	lp:Matthias Groote2
lpv:spokenAs	member; AFCO (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-08--2011-07-31)3 substitute; PECH (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ENVI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Arab Peninsula (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ITRE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"I voted in favour of the report on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (RoHS), because the extension of the area of application to cover all electronic equipment represents a definite improvement. However, I find the fact that there are so many exceptions problematic. In particular in the area of renewable energies, photovoltaic modules, which consist in part of cadmium telluride compounds, are not covered by this directive. This substance is not only harmful to health, it is also hazardous and therefore really ought to be placed within the scope of the RoHS Directive. The danger that, as a result, photovoltaic installations would have to completely disappear from roofs would not arise. Rather, there are numerous cadmium telluride-free alternatives on the market. I therefore disagree in this regard with the decision of the majority in Parliament and the Council."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph