The biofuel legislation is getting voted up next week.
It's the last chance to have a word in the ear of necessary EU officials
to help get Pure Plant Oils accepted.
This group of European SVO advocates have been busy, the Folkcenter
report is a bit confusing (it appears to be the way with this type of
thing) but highlights the concerns with the way the legislative
procedure is progressing with regards to biofuels.
To explain things simply the European Parliament put forward a report
proposing some very sensible legislation to encourage biofuels use
especially thoose that have the lowest environmental costs, especially
pure plant oil.
The European Council looked at this report and offered a 'Common
Position' which watered things down somewhat especially as far as Pure
Plant Oils (SVO) is concerned. This is to be brought back before the
Parliament next week to be voted upon....
Call your local MEP (they are in the phone book) get their e-mail
address and send a copy of the folkcenter report with a covering letter
(something like the one below)
Darren
--------------
Dear (EMP),
I am writing to you as I am concerned about biofuel legislation
that is due to be voted upon next week has been altered in the councils
common position away from points that were emphasised in the Parliaments
original report to the Commission
Please find below details of areas of concern. Of particulal
importance is to have pure plant oils listed on the list of official
admitted biofuels within the framework of the EU on the promotion of the
use of biofuels for
transport.
Yours
.....
F o l k e c e n t e r f o r
R e n e w a b l e E n e r g y
Kammersgaardsvej 16, DK-7760 Hurup Thy
phone.: +45 97956600 , fax.: +45 97956565
Homepage: www.folkecenter.dk/plant-oil
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
REVIEW
1/1 2003
Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council
on the promotion of the use of biofuels for transport,
Interinstitutional file 2001/0265(COD):
Comparison between the European Parliament legislative
resolution, P5_TA-PROV(2002)0361, dated 04.07.2002,
referred to by specific Amendments,
The Amended proposal from the Commission, COM(2002)0508,
dated 12.09.2002,
and
The Common position adopted by the Council, 12695/02, dated
12.11.2002,
With special emphasis on the promotion of pure plant oils and
the environmental impact of different biofuels.
1
REVIEW ABOUT
Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council
on the promotion of the use of biofuels for transport,
Interinstitutional file 2001/0265(COD):
Comparison between the European Parliament legislative resolu-tion,
P5_TA-PROV(2002)0361, dated 04.07.2002,
referred to by specific Amendments,
The Amended proposal from the Commission, COM(2002)0508,
dated 12.09.2002,
and
The Common position adopted by the Council, 12695/02, dated
12.11.2002,
With special emphasis on the promotion of pure plant oils and
the environmental impact of different biofuels.
Introduction:
Along with the Interinstitutional file 2001/0266(COD), the present
Directive formed part of
the proposed Directive COM(2001)0547. The present Directive, referred to
as COM(2001)
0547-1, concerns the general promotion of biofuels whereas the closely
related Directive,
referred to as COM(2001)0547-2, concerns the excise duty on biofuels.
Obviously, the two Directives are closely related, and consequently they
should be con-sistent.
This is the case with the European Parliament legislative resolutions on
the two Directives.
The present comparison points out the lack of compliance of the Amended
proposal from
the Commission and especially the Common position adopted by the Council
with the
Amendments in the European Parliament legislative resolution and hence
the lack of
consistency with the related proposed Directive COM(2001)0547-2.
Summary:
Overall conclusion: The Amended proposal and especially the Common
position
have removed or weakened all the most significant Amendments in the
European
Parliament legislative resolution concerning the emphasis on and special
promotion
of pure plant oils, as well as the general priority of environmentally
superior bio-fuels.
Apart from weakening the promotion of environmentally sound solutions,
the
present Directive becomes inconsistent with the related proposed
Directive on
excise duty on biofuels.
2
The following list summarises the conclusions concerning the major
points on which the
Amended proposal and especially the Common position lack compliance with
the Amend-ments
in the European Parliament legislative resolution, along with the
corresponding solu-tions.
The full texts are shown on the following pages with corresponding
headings.
1) Amendment 30: Original Recital 13, Final Recital 26:
The amendment emphasises the special environmental benefits of pure
plant oils.
Conclusion: Amendment 30 was adopted in the amended proposal but omitted
in the common posi-tion.
Thus there is no emphasis on pure plant oils.
Solution: Reinsertion of Amendment 30 in Recital 26.
2) Amendments 60 and 66: Article 2, paragraph 2, in combination with
Amendment 54: Annex, part A, Title:
The amendments state that the list of biofuels in the Directive should
be only indicative and open to
inclusion of new biofuels.
Conclusion: The amendments were adopted in the amended proposal, but in
the common position,
in connexion with an extension of Article 2 to replace part A of the
Annex, the clear non-exclusive-ness
stated in the amendments has been omitted. At the same time new fuels
have been added to
the list subsequent to the first reading by the Parliament; these new
fuels are predominantly refinery
products to be produced by the oil industry, including synthetic
biofuels suggested by the automobile
industry. In contrast, the pure plant oils with clearly better energy
balances have not been included
in the extended list although they were especially emphasised by the
Parliament in Amendment 30.
Solution to clarify the Directive and to make the list of biofuels as
complete as possible:
S Insertion of the text according to Amendment 54 in Article 2,
paragraph 2.
S Inclusion of pure plant oils in the extended list of biofuels.
The solution would be in compliance with the statement in the
communication from the Commission
to the Parliament dated 2.12.2002, document SEC(2002)1273 final,
according to which the list is not
intended to be closed.
3) Amendment 36: Article 3, original paragraph 1, final paragraphs 1 and
2:
The amendment stipulates a reporting by the Commission to the Parliament
and the Council con-cerning
the specific environmental impact of biofuels.
Conclusion: Amendment 36 was adopted in the amended proposal but omitted
in the common
position. Thus there is no reporting on the environmental impact of the
planned measures, and no
instruments to evaluate and compare the different biofuels in terms of
environmental impact.
Solution: Reinsertion of Amendment 36 in Article 3, paragraph 2.
4) Amendment 43: New Article 3a, final Article 3 paragraph 7:
The amendment stipulates that the Member States shall give priority to
the promotion of those bio-fuels
with a very good environmental balance.
Conclusion: Amendment 43 was adopted in the amended proposal but omitted
in the common posi-tion.
Thus there is no priority to the biofuels with the best environmental
balance.
Solution: Reinsertion of Amendment 43 in Article 3.
3
5) Amendment 47: Article 4, original paragraph 2, final paragraph 3:
The amendment stipulates that the reporting by the Commission shall
include a specific environmen-tal
assessment of the biofuels, including impact on water quality, and the
consideration of selective
tax on biofuels , on the basis of environmental criteria.
Conclusion: Amendment 47 was fully adopted in the amended proposal but
only partially adopted in
the common position. The omissions concern the more specific
environmental assessment of
biofuels, including impact on water quality, and the consideration of
selective tax on biofuels, on the
basis of environmental criteria.
Solution: Reinsertion of a more specific environmental assessment of
biofuels, and reinsertion of the
consideration of selective tax on biofuels, on the basis of
environmental criteria in Article 4.
6) Amendment 70: Article 5, new paragraph 2a, final paragraph 3:
The amendment stipulates that environmental efficiency criteria shall be
set for the use of biofuels.
Conclusion: Amendment 70 was fully adopted in the amended proposal but
only partially adopted in
the common position. The omission concerns the more specific
environmental criteria.
Solution: Reinsertion of more specific environmental criteria for
biofuels in Article 5.
The following table shows the consistency and interrelation between the
Amend-ments
in the European Parliament legislative resolutions on the two proposed
Direc-tives:
P5_TA-PROV(2002)0361
Promotion of biofuels,
Interinstitutional file 2001(COD)0265:
Amendments
P5_TA-PROV(2002)0345
Excise duty on biofuels,
Interinstitutional file 2001(CNS)0266:
Corresponding Amendments
30 *) 2 *)
60/66/54 **)
36 ***) 21 ***)
43 ****) 3, ****) 5, 10, 11, 12
47 ***), ****), *****) 3 ***), 5 *****, 10/11/12 *****), 21 ****)
70 ***) 3 ***), 21 ***)
Notes:
*): The specific mentioning of and emphasis on pure plant oils;
**): The openness of the biofules list/inclusion of pure plant oils;
***): Analysis of the specific environmental impact of the different
biofuels;
****): Priority to the environmentally best biofuels;
*****): Differentiated tax on biofuels based upon environmental
criteria.
4
As it appears, there is a strong mutual correspondence between the two
proposed Directives which
includes all the amendments in the present proposed Directive.
Consequences:
Obviously, the amendments to the two proposed Directives are
interdependent. The
present Directive, which is more general, is further in the legislative
procedure.
Therefore its final form will affect the options in the excise duty
Directive, which lays
down the specific terms for biofuel taxation.
*): Therefore the specific mentioning and special emphasis on pure plant
oils
should appear in both Directives in order to secure their unique
position.
Their especially low environmental impact is also a major key to the
environmental analysis and comparison of different biofuels and the
consequent tax differentiation.
**): The Amendment 60/66/54, which has no direct counterpart in the
Directive
on excise duties plays a key role because it forms the best guarantee
against a possible exclusion of pure plant oils from the measures by the
Member States, and from the comparative analysis.
***): The analysis of the specific environmental impact of the different
biofuels
is a key to a differentiated priority and taxation of biofuels.
****): The selective political priority to the environmentally best
biofuels is, along
with the differentiated taxation, a key to the maximum environmental
effect
of both Directives.
*****): The differentiated taxation on biofuels based upon environmental
criteria is
the best guarantee for the environmentally optimum development in the
EU.
This measure is dependent upon all the prior elements in this list.
Consequently, upholding all the listed Amendments to the present
Directive is
important to secure the environmentally optimum development in the EU.
In this
process, pure plant oils have a key role to play, both in themselves and
as an
especially environmentally sound reference.
5
1) Amendment 30: Original Recital 13, Final Recital 26:
Parliament, first reading:
(13) Provision should be made for the
possibility of rapidly adapting the list of
biofuels, the percentage of renewable
contents, and the schedule for introducing
biofuels in the transport fuel market, to
technical progress and to the results of an
environmental impact assessment of the first
stage of introduction.
(13) Provision should be made for the
possibility of rapidly adapting the list of
biofuels, the percentage of renewable
contents, and the schedule for introducing
biofuels in the transport fuel market, to
technical progress and to the results of an
environmental impact assessment of the first
stage of introduction. In this connection,
consideration should also be given to pure,
cold-pressed vegetable oil, such as rapeseed
oil, which does not undergo any chemical
change and can thus be produced in an
environmentally friendly way, and whose
by-products also contain protein and can be
used as animal feed. Account should also
be taken of other alternative fuels such as
LPG, LNG, DME and CNG, which are
already used in the transport fuel market
and which have all the necessary
technology already in place for expansion,
as well as a proven record of lower
emissions of greenhouse gases and air
pollutants.
Amended proposal from the Commission:
(1326) Provision should be made for the possibility of rapidly adapting
the list of biofuels, the
percentage of renewable contents, and the schedule for introducing
biofuels in the
transport fuel market, to technical progress and to the results of an
environmental
impact assessment of the first stage of introduction. In this
connection, consideration
should also be given to different biofuels like pure, cold-pressed
vegetable oil,
such as rapeseed oil, which can be produced in an environmentally
friendly way,
and whose by-products also contain protein and can be used as animal
feed.
Other alternative fuels could also be taken into account, such as
automotive LPG
(Liquefied Petroleum Gas), LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas), DME
(Dimithylether)
and CNG (Compressed Natural Gas), which are already used in the
transport
fuel market.
Common position adopted by the Council:
(26) Provision should be made for the possibility of rapidly adapting
the list of biofuels, the
percentage of renewable contents, and the schedule for introducing
biofuels in the transport
fuel market, to technical progress and to the results of an
environmental impact assessment of
the first phase of introduction.
Conclusion: Amendment 30 was adopted in the amended proposal but omitted
in
the common position. Thus there is no emphasis on pure plant oils.
Solution: Reinsertion of Amendment 30 in Recital 26.
6
2) Amendments 60 and 66: Article 2, paragraph 2,
in combination with
Amendment 54: Annex, part A, Title:
Parliament, first reading, Article 2, paragraph 2:
2. The products listed in Part A of the
Annex shall be considered biofuels.
2. The products listed in Part A of the
Annex are examples of current biofuels.
The list is indicative, and the fuels listed
may be promoted only if they contribute to
a significant reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions during the whole life cycle of
the biofuels compared to the greenhouse
gas emissions during the whole life cycle
of the fossil fuels they replace.
Parliament, first reading, Annex A, part A, Title:
A. List of biofuels and percentage of
renewable contents
A. Examples of possible biofuels and
percentage of renewable contents
Amended proposal from the Commission, Article 2, paragraph 2:
2. The products listed in Part A of the Annex shall be considered
biofuels. Shall be
considered biofuels in particular the products listed in Part A of the
Annex.
Amended proposal from the Commission, Annex A, part A, Title:
A. LIST EXAMPLES OF POSSIBLE BIOFUELS AND PERCENTAGE OF RENEWABLE
CONTENTS
Common position adopted by the Council, Article 2, paragraph 2:
2. At least those products listed below shall be considered biofuels:
(a) "Bioethanol": ethanol produced from biomass and/or the biodegradable
fraction of waste, to
be used as biofuel;
(b) "Biodiesel": a methyl-ester produced from vegetable or animal oil,
of diesel quality, to be
used as biofuel;
(c) "Biogas": a fuel gas produced from biomass and/or from the
biodegradable fraction of waste,
that can be purified to natural gas quality, to be used as biofuel, or
woodgas;
(d) "Biomethanol": methanol produced from biomass, to be used as
biofuel;
(e) "Biodimethylether": dimethylether produced from biomass, to be used
as biofuel;
(f) "Bio-ETBE (ethyl-tertio-butyl-ether)": ETBE produced on the basis of
bioethanol. The
percentage by volume of bio-ETBE that is calculated as biofuel is 47%.
*) (g) "Bio-MTBE (methyl-tertio-butyl-ether)": a fuel produced on the
basis of biomethanol. The
percentage by volume of bio-MTBE that is calculated as biofuel is 36%.
*) (h) "Synthetic biofuels": synthetic hydrocarbons or mixtures of
synthetic hydrocarbons, which
have been produced from biomass.
*) (i) "Biohydrogen": hydrogen produced from biomass, and/or from the
biodegradable fraction
of waste, to be used as biofuel.
*): New fuels added to the original list in Annex part A.
Common position adopted by the Council, Annex A, part A, Title: Annex
omitted.
7
Conclusion:
S Amendments 60 and 66 have been ignored in so far as the biofuels in
the final
list are emphasised as the main biofuels. At the same time three new
types of
refined fuels marked with *), of which two are refinery products to be
produced
by the oil industry, one of which is synthetic biofuels suggested by the
auto-mobile
industry, have been added to the list by the Council after the first
read-ing
by the Parliament, whereas the pure plant oils with clearly better
energy
balances have not been included in the extended list although they were
espe-cially
emphasised by the Parliament in Amendment 30.
S Amendment 54, which stated that the list contained examples, was
adopted in
the amended proposal but omitted along with the Annex in the common
posi-tion.
S Thus the list now in Article 2 paragraph 2 replaces the list which
formed part A
of the deleted Annex, and it is still lacking a clear definition that it
is indicative
and presents current examples; in this way it appears as a more
restrictive list
which may in effect hinder the promotion of pure plant oil and other
biofuels not
mentioned.
S According to the communication from the Commission to the Parliament
dated
2.12.2002, document SEC(2002)1273 final the list is not intended to be
closed:
3. COMMENTS ON THE COMMON POSITION Ad b:
The Commission's original proposal included (in an Annex) a list of
existing
biofuels. This list was intended to support and illustrate the different
biofuels
products used in the main body of the text which referred to "liquid or
gaseous fuel
for transport produced from biomass". The European Parliament considered
that the
text needed to be changed in order to clarify that this was not a closed
list. The text
of the Common Position meets this objective by:
(a) expanding the illustrative list of biofuels (including 'biohydrogen'
but deleting
'biooil' as proposed by Parliament);
(b) moving the list from the Annex into the Articles; and
(c) redrafting Article 2 to clarify that the list is not exclusive.
4. CONCLUSION:
As regards the definition of biofuels, the Common Position seeks to
ensure that "other
renewable fuels" used in the transport sector are not ignored by the
proposal.
Solution to clarify the Directive and to make the list of biofuels as
complete as
possible:
S Insertion of the text according to Amendment 54 in Article 2,
paragraph 2.
S Inclusion of pure plant oils in the extended list of biofuels.
8
3) Amendment 36: Article 3, original paragraph 1, final paragraphs
1 and 2:
Parliament, first reading:
1. Member States shall ensure that the
minimum proportion of biofuels sold on
their markets is 2%, calculated on the basis
of energy content, of all gasoline and diesel
sold for transport purposes on their markets
by 31 December 2005 and that this share
increases, aiming towards a minimum level
of blending, in accordance with the schedule
set out in Part B of the Annex.
1. Member States shall ensure that the
minimum proportion of biofuels sold on
their markets is 2%, calculated on the basis
of energy content, of all gasoline and diesel
sold for transport purposes on their markets
by 31 December 2005 and that this share
increases in accordance with the schedule set
out in Part B of the Annex.
The Member States shall submit to the
Commission a detailed report on the
environmental impact of the planned
measures and a breakdown of the costs.
The following at least must be taken into
account:
- land use,
- degree of intensity of cultivation,
- use of pesticides,
- protection of watercourses,
- energy efficiency,
- potential emission of greenhouse gases,
- combustion behaviour.
This report shall be published. The
Commission shall take these reports into
account in the report which it submits to
the European Parliament and to the
Council pursuant to Article 4(2).
Amended proposal from the Commission:
1. Member States shall ensure that the minimum proportion of biofuels
sold on their
markets is 2%, calculated on the basis of energy content, of all
gasoline and diesel
sold for transport purposes on their markets by 31 December 2005 and
that this share
increases, aiming towards a minimum level of blending, in accordance
with the
schedule set out in Part B of the Annex.
2. The Member States shall submit to the Commission a detailed report on
the
environmental impact of the planned measures and a breakdown of the
costs.
The report shall cover at least the following :
a. land use,
b. degree of intensity of cultivation
c. use of pesticides,
d. protection of watercourses,
e. energy efficiency,
f. potential emission of greenhouse gases,
g. combustion behaviour.
The report shall be made available to the public.
9
Common position adopted by the Council:
1.(a) Member States should ensure that a minimum proportion of biofuels
and other renewable
fuels is placed on their markets, and, to that effect, shall set
national indicative targets.
(b) (i) A reference value for these targets shall be 2%, calculated on
the basis of energy
content, of all petrol and diesel for transport purposes placed on their
markets by
31 December 2005.
(ii) A reference value for these targets shall be 5,75%, calculated on
the basis of
energy content, of all petrol and diesel for transport purposes placed
on their
markets by 31 December 2010.
Conclusion: Amendment 36 was adopted in the amended proposal but omitted
in
the common position where the final paragraph 2 was deleted. Thus there
is no
reporting on the environmental impact of the planned measures, and no
instruments
to evaluate and compare the different biofuels in terms of environmental
impact.
Solution: Reinsertion of Amendment 36 in Article3, paragraph 2.
4) Amendment 43: New Article 3a, final Article 3 paragraph 7:
Parliament, first reading:
Article 3a
In the measures that they take, Member
States shall consider the overall
environmental balance of the various types
of biofuels and give priority to the
promotion of those biofuels with a very
good environmental balance.
Amended proposal from the Commission:
7. In the measures that they take, Member States shall consider the
overall
environmental balance of the various types of biofuels and give priority
to the
promotion of those biofuels with a very good environmental balance.
Common position adopted by the Council: Paragraph 7 omitted.
Conclusion: Amendment 43 was adopted in the amended proposal but omitted
in
the common position. Thus there is no priority to the biofuels with the
best
environmental balance.
Solution: Reinsertion of Amendment 43 in Article 3.
10
5) Amendment 47: Article 4, original paragraph 2, final paragraph
3:
Parliament, first reading:
2. By 31 December 2006 at the latest, the
Commission shall report to the
European Parliament and to the Council on
the progress made in the use of biofuels in
the Member States, on the economical
aspects and on the environmental impact of
further increasing the share of biofuels. On
the basis of this report, the Commission will
propose, where appropriate, an adaptation
of the system of targets as laid down in
Article 3.
2. By 31 December 2006 at the latest, and
every two years thereafter, the Commission
shall draw up an evaluation report for the
European Parliament and for the Council on
the progress made in the use of biofuels in
the Member States, on the economical
aspects and on the environmental impact of
the current situation and of further
increases in the share of biofuels. To this
end, the Commission shall devise a specific
environmental impact assessment
incorporating a comprehensive life-cycle
analysis of the use of biofuels. In that
report, the Commission must pay particular
attention to environmental aspects,
especially variations in water quality, soil
erosion, use of inputs and pesticides, and
the preservation of natural habitats, flora
and fauna, and to the consequences of the
changes caused by the biofuels connected
with the production of biomass. That report
may also give consideration to the
possibilities for the introduction of a
selective tax on the various biodiesels, on
the basis of environmental criteria. On the
basis of this report, the Commission shall
propose to the European Parliament and
the Council, where appropriate, new targets
for biofuels as laid down in Article 3
possibly by introducing a minimum
blending percentage.
Amended proposal from the Commission:
23. By 31 December 2006 at the latest, and every two years thereafter,
taking into
account the reports referred to in Article 3(2), the Commission shall
draw up an
evaluation report to for the European Parliament and to for the Council
on the
progress made in the use of biofuels in the Member States, on the
economical aspects
and on the environmental impact of the current situation and of further
increasing
increases in the share of biofuels.
To this end, the Commission shall devise a specific environmental impact
assessment incorporating a comprehensive life-cycle analysis of the use
of
biofuels. In that report, the Commission shall pay particular attention
to
environmental aspects, in particular variations in water quality, soil
erosion, use
of inputs and pesticides, the preservation of natural habitats, flora
and fauna
and to the consequences of the changes caused by the biofuels connected
with
11
the production of biomass.
The report may also consider the possibility of introducing a selective
tax on the
various biodiesels, on the basis of environmental criteria. On the basis
of thise
report, the Commission will shall propose, to the European Parliament
and the
Council, where appropriate, an adaptation of the system of new targets
for biofuels
as laid down in Article 3 and in Part B of the Annex, possibly by
introducing a
minimum blending percentage.
Common position adopted by the Council:
2. By 31 December 2006 at the latest, and every two years thereafter,
the Commission shall
draw up an evaluation report for the European Parliament and for the
Council on the progress made
in the use of biofuels and other renewable fuels in the Member States.
This report shall cover at least the following:
(a) the cost-effectiveness of the measures taken by Member States in
order to promote the use of
biofuels and other renewable fuels;
(b) the economic aspects and the environmental impact of further
increasing the share of biofuels
and other renewable fuels;
(c) the life-cycle perspective of biofuels and other renewable fuels,
with a view to indicating
possible measures for the future promotion of those fuels that are
climate- and
environmentally friendly, and that have the potential of becoming
competitive and
cost-efficient;
(d) the sustainability of crops used for the production of biofuels,
particularly land use, degree of
intensity of cultivation, crop rotation and use of pesticides;
(e) the assessment of the use of biofuels and other renewable fuels with
respect to their
differentiating effects on climate change and their impact on CO2
emissions reduction;
(f) a review of further more long-term options concerning energy
efficiency measures in
transport.
On the basis of this report, the Commission shall submit, where
appropriate, proposals to the
European Parliament and the Council on the adaptation of the system of
targets, as laid down in
Article 3(1). If this report concludes that the indicative targets are
not likely to be achieved for
reasons that are unjustified and/or do not relate to new scientific
evidence, these proposals shall
address national targets, including possible mandatory targets, in the
appropriate form.
Conclusion: Amendment 47 was fully adopted in the amended proposal but
only
partially adopted in the common position. The omissions concern the more
specific
environmental assessment of biofuels, including impact on water quality,
and the
consideration of selective tax on biofuels, on the basis of
environmental criteria.
Solution: Reinsertion of a more specific environmental assessment of
biofuels, and
reinsertion of the consideration of selective tax on biofuels, on the
basis of environ-mental
criteria in Article 4.
12
6) Amendment 70: Article 5, new paragraph 2a, final paragraph 3:
Parliament, first reading:
2a. When adapting the Annex pursuant to
paragraphs 1 and 2, environmental
efficiency criteria shall be set for the use
of biofuels.
Amended proposal from the Commission:
When the Annex is adapted pursuant to the first and second paragraph,
environmental
criteria shall be set for the use of biofuels.
Common position adopted by the Council: Addition to paragraph 1:
When adapting this list, the environmental impact of biofuels
shall be taken into account.
Conclusion: Amendment 70 was fully adopted in the amended proposal but
only
partially adopted in the common position. The omission concerns the more
specific
environmental criteria.
Solution: Reinsertion of more specific environmental criteria for
biofuels in Article
5.
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
