Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-15-Speech-3-132"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.19991215.6.3-132"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"It gives me great satisfaction to welcome this proposal for amending Regulation (EC) No 3093/94 regulating the production and use of substances which deplete the ozone layer. In my opinion, it was high time for new measures to be adopted to protect the ozone layer given the alarming figures being reported. The depletion of the ozone layers in the stratosphere is one of the most momentous environmental problems we are facing. There has been a 6% to 10% decrease in ozone since 1980. The ozone hole over the Antarctic covered an area of 20 million km2 for over 40 days in 1996, and the depletion of the ozone layer over Scandinavia, Greenland and Siberia reached a record 45% level. The depletion of the ozone layer has adverse effects on human health by reducing immune defences and increasing skin cancer. It also affects the ecosystem in a particularly worrying way. We must react as quickly as possible, particularly as we know which substances deplete the ozone layer. Firstly, there are the hydrochlorofluorocarbons or HCFCs. These are used mainly in refrigeration technology and air-conditioning systems, as solvents and in the production of insulating foam. Secondly, there is methyl bromide which is primarily used for soil fumigation to combat pests and plant diseases. It is classified by the WHO as “highly toxic”. Thirdly, there are the chlorofluorocarbons or CFCs which are now only contained in refrigeration systems but which were originally used in the production of plastic foam, solvents and aerosol propellants. Lastly, there are the halons which are used in fire extinguishing systems, especially in critical applications, such as aircraft, where there are now harmless alternatives. We must therefore make every effort to eliminate these substances and to use alternatives. This is the essence of the proposal under discussion today. However, it is not as forthcoming on the timetable as we might have hoped, as noted by the rapporteur. This is why amendments have been tabled which, in the main, have been rejected by the Council. The latter’s attitude is truly regrettable. The targets proposed by the Committee on the Environment can be achieved because there are alternatives. For example, the Council proposes that the production of the substances in question should not exceed 35% of 1997 production levels by 2008. Yet, also with reference to 1997 production levels, the Committee on the Environment demands that production levels be reduced to less than 75% by 2001, less than 55% by 2004 and less than 30% by 2008. By 2014, the Committee demands a level below 15%, whereas the ceiling proposed by the Council is 20%. I deplore the Council’s lack of ambition. This is even more regrettable because it is in an area in which not only the protection of the environment is at stake, but more particularly human health!"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph