91997E2432

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2432/97 by Xaver Mayer (PPE) to the Commission (8 July 1997)

Subject: Use of alternative raw materials for the production of yeast - reduction of pollution

The production of yeast using molasses leaves residues which have to be disposed of. This is partly achieved by discharging the effluent into local waste water treatment plants. The heavy burden on the purification capacity of public plants gives rise to costs that are becoming a growing burden on yeast-producing enterprises. A study carried out by the Institute for the Organization of the Agricultural Market of the Federal Agricultural Research Establishment in Braunschweig states that the higher the sugar content of the raw material, the lower the effluent pollution and that, where purer raw materials are used, the biodegradability of the residues is improved. The study also concludes that the current EU agricultural market rules have an adverse effect on the competitive position of the yeast industry, since the molasses market is delinked from the world market by a threshold price and molasses is not eligible for export refunds.

For the reasons given the study recommends a change in the EU agricultural market rules on molasses.

1. Does the Commission believe that the current EU agricultural market rules have an adverse effect on the competitive position of the yeast industry?

2. Has the Commission taken or does it intend to take the measures proposed in the study for overcoming the competitive disadvantages of the EU yeast industry? If so, what measures are involved?

3. Does the Commission consider it desirable for pollution by the yeast industry to be curbed through the use of purer raw materials, and what measures does it believe should be taken to this end?

4. How does the Commission view the proposal that, where sugar is used to produce yeast, a production refund should be paid, that yeast should be included in the annex to Regulation No 1010/86 ((OJ L 94, 9.4.1986, p. 9. )) and that Regulations Nos 3033/80 ((OJ L 323, 29.11.1980, p. 1. )) and 3034/80 ((OJ L 323, 29.11.1980, p. 7. )) should permit the production of yeast from sugar?

5. Would the measures proposed in question 4 have adverse effects on the sugar industry? How could this be prevented?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)

The environmental burden to which the Honourable Member refers stems from the use of molasses as a raw material as opposed to the purer glucose and sugar. The choice of molasses has been made by yeast manufacturers on the basis of cost considerations alone and it is accordingly just, in the Commission's view, that they should bear the consequences of their actions when these lead to additional costs for ensuring that the national and Community effluent standards are met. In reply to the specific questions posed by the Honourable Member:

1. - 3. The Commission believes that the common agricultural policy is ensuring the availability to the yeast industry of agricultural products at reasonable prices. The reform process begun in 1992 is furthermore generating lower cereals prices which in their turn should lead to lower market prices for the use of glucose as a purer raw material for yeast manufacture.

4. - 5. The Commission is aware that yeast is not admitted as an eligible product for receiving the production refund on certain sugar products used in the chemical industry (Council Regulation (EEC) No 1010/86 laying down general rules for the production refund on certain sugar products used in the chemical industry). Although Regulation (EEC) No 1010/86 is regularly reviewed by the Commission in close cooperation with the Member States, yeast has not until now been considered eligible for addition to this Regulation.