Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-11-Speech-2-429"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20080311.35.2-429"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, Commissioner, the rapporteur has submitted a good report and he has submitted it for the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, which is good. We have just heard from Mr Langen that the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy is apparently competing with us here. This is always how it is: whenever something becomes successful, the Committee on Industry tries to walk off with it. That is not necessarily a good thing. I recall that the pioneers of biogas production were farmers, who were laughed at 10, 15, 20 years ago when they wanted to produce energy from manure. The idea here, to put it in graphic terms for once, is to turn shit into gold. This actually entails producing energy from manure – and not entering into competition with human food. What is left over from the manure will be an even better fertiliser that is more versatile than aggressive fertilisers. This means that biogas is counted among the renewable energies alongside wind, water, sun and wood and is in fact a renewable energy if we confine ourselves to producing it from organic waste. In a situation like the one that arose last year and the year before in the milk sector, where 23.5 cents was being paid for milk, the comparative excellence was much higher when maize was fed directly into the biogas facility, than when it was merely sent through the cow and milk was produced. This means that food prices and energy prices always correspond and this has something to do with the fact that we do have an Electricity Feed Act – in Germany in any case, but also in some other countries – by which better recycling of plant products can be achieved in the energy sector than in the food sector. We have to watch out here that we do not get into a competitive situation. There is competition between tank and table if we get it wrong. However, if we strike a balance on the issue of biomass fuel, this balance turns out to be negative, whereas we had a positive balance with biogas – even with biogas for cars. It therefore depends on us clearly favouring smaller plants in policy on subsidies and in remuneration policy, in order to prevent migration into industrial production."@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