Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-12-Speech-3-086"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-03-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030312.2.3-086"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-03-12-Speech-3-0872
lpv:speaker	lp:Daniel Ducarme2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; ELDR (1999-09-13--2003-06-04)3 member; EMPL (2002-01-17--2003-06-04)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2003-06-04)3 unknown; Parti réformateur libéral/Front démocratique des francophones (1999-07-20--2003-06-04)3
lpv:translated text	". At first reading, Parliament presented a series of amendments aimed at quite rightly recognising pure plant oil (PPO) as a biofuel. These various amendments have not been taken up in the common position adopted by the Council, and this is why I am voting in favour of Amendment No 7 tabled by the competent committee. In fact, there is good reason to recognise pure plant oil as a biofuel given its many environmental advantages, but also because the decentralised production of oil in farms would allow the farmers in question to gain added value from their production. The main criticism made in relation to the use of PPO relates to the need to adapt diesel engines. However, this need could work in favour of PPO, since an entire economic sector could thereby be established, with all the economic and social benefits that would bring. Furthermore, adaptations of engines are also necessary for other alternative fuels which do benefit from tax exemption: hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, electricity, etc."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph