REGIONAL ACTIVITIES

European Parliament: Asbestos (a) Progress on Safety System (Written question by Mrs. Buchan)

British industry has for some time been adapting itself to new and much higher safety standards in the handling of asbestos. As a result it is one of the few industries within the Community complying with most of the require- ments of EEC's proposals on asbestos.

At the present time, the manufacture of pipes has been cut down drastically, with the result that pipes with pitch cov- erings are being imported into the United Kingdom. These pipes are actually com- prised in part of blue asbestos which is banned in Britain. Further, in the brake lining industry, certain substitutes are used and some, which are greatly infe- rior to British standards, are being im- ported from the Continent. The result is a threat to British manufacturing in- dustry in this sphere and a reduction of safety standards in the work environ- ment.

Would the Commission please state: 1. What progress has been made within the EEC towards bringing about a stan-

Directive, the Commission has made a Proposal for a second Council Directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to agents at work: asbestos and which has as its aim the protection of workers against risks to their health and safety, including the prevention of such risks arising or likely to arise at work from exposure to asbes- tos, by laying down limit values and other specific requirements.

Moreover the Commission has sub- mitted on 7th March 1980 a proposal for a Council Directive amending for the fifth time Directive 76/69/EEC concern- ing the restriction on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparation. This Directive contains pro- visions for use of different types of as- bestos fibres and prohibitions on mar- keting and use in certain cases.

These proposals are in line with the resolution of the European Parliament on the danger of asbestos to health,

adopted in its session of 16th December 1977.

They are based on the EEC Treaty and in particular Article 100, and there- fore the opinion of the European Par- liament and the Economic and Social Committee has already been requested.

The Commission is studying the pos- sibility of concluding a 'Convention for the quality of life' in the field of pollu- tion by asbestos fibres. The preliminary study is already finished and the discus- sion phase will begin at an early date.

3. The Commission does not envisage to take measures in addition to those mentioned above.

(b) Ban on Blue Asbestos (Written question by Mrs. Ewing)

Will the Commission reconsider the question of the ban on blue asbestos?

Answer given by Mr. Narjes on behalf of the Commission:

On 7th March 1980 the Commission presented to the Council a proposal for a Directive relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (asbestos).

Any changes in the conditions of use of blue asbestos (crocidolite) might be made once Parliament has delivered its opinion on the proposal. []

Reduction of Lead Additives in Petrol dard system of safety on the lines sug- gested by the Simpson report? 2. What steps have been taken to ensure that any proposed action will have the effect of bringing safety standards up to at least the highest standards for the handling of asbestos now in force within the EEC ? 3. What action does the Commission in- tend to take to prevent the importation into Britain of products containing as- bestos of a lower environmental safety standard than currently permitted in Britain, or products produced in a work- ing environment the safety standards of which are below those permitted in Bri- tain (such lower standards being assumed to give the products a manufacturing cost and consequent sale price advan- tage)?

Answer given by Mr. Richard on be- half of the Commission:

1 and 2. The Council Directive of 27th November 1980 on the protection of workers from the risks related to ex- posure to chemical, physical and biolog- ical agents at work already contains in Article 3.3. two measures that relate to asbestos. Pursuant to Article 8 of this

170

~(Written question by Mr. Linkohr and Mrs. Weber)

1. How does the Commission view the possibility of laying down new limits on the emission of vehicle exhaust gases lower than the levels permitted under the Council Directive of 29 June 1978.

2. Is the Commission prepared to draw up a new Directive which takes account of both the noxious effects of lead addi- tives in petrol and recent technical devel- opments, for example in the case of ex- haust catalysers? If so, is it prepared to go below the limit of 0.15 g lead per litre petrol?

3. The Government of the Federal Rep- ublic of Germany has proposed to the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) and to the European Community a reduction of about 50% in the permit- ted levels of pollutants in vehicle ex- haust gases. Can the Commission give details of its reply to the proposal by the German Government?

Answer given by Mr. Narjes on be- half of the Commission:

1. The Commission introduced limits on exhaust emissions from motor vehi- cles as early as 1970 in Directive 70/220/ EEC. The limits have been tightened successively by three Directives (74/ 290/EEC, 77/102/EEC, 78/665/EEC); work on tightening them for a fourth time is to begin very soon. The emission standards adopted by the EEC are iden- tical to those drawn up within the broader framework of the United Na- tions Economic Commission for Europe (ECE), Geneva. The repeated lowering of emission limits was the fruit of close collaboration between the EEC and the working parties of the ECE and of the Member States of the Community tak- hag a common line.

The reduction in the limits on emis- sions of the regulated pollutants - car- bon monoxide (CO), unburnt hydro- carbons (HC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) - are illustrated below by taking a medium-sized vehicle (1 130 kg) as an example. Compared with the original limits set for CO and HC in Directive 70/220/EEC and for NOx in Directive 77/102/EEC, the figures laid down in

Environmental Policy and Law, 7 (1981)

the latest Directive - 78/665/EEC - represent a reduction of 35% for CO, 25% for HC and 15% for NOx. Com- pared with this latter Directive, the fig- ures adopted jointly by the Member States for the fourth amendment of the EEC regulation on this subject represent an additional reduction of 23% for CO and 25% HC and NOx taken together. In accordance with the principle stated above, these limits should soon be incor- porated into Community rules by means of a further Directive adapting Directive 70/220/EEC to technical progress.

Emission limits have generally been tightened without making vehicles less energy-efficient. Furthermore, Directive 78/611/EEC of 29 June 1978 limits the maximum lead content of petrol mar- keted in the Community to 0.4 g/l, al- though the maximum content may go down to 0.15 g/1. This Directive must be applied not later than 1 January 1981.

There is certainly no technological barrier to a further reduction in emission limits, but there is a wide difference of views between the Member States on the consequences of such a measure in energy and economic terms.

In order not to prejudice technolog- ical development now in progress, there should be a detailed analysis of the im- pact in energy and economic terms of the proposed objectives based on a pains- taking examination of the foreseeable trend of the number of vehicles in use, the volume of pollutants actually dis- charged and the concentrations resulting locally and regionally. Such an analysis of various solutions cannot be started without precise information about the current situation and the foreseeable medium-term situation; the Commission has begun the preparatory work, but the collation of the information which the Member States already possess or must gather will take time.

2. As soon as conclusions can be drawn from the preparatory work in progress, the Commission, in collabora- tion with the Member States, will study the possibilities of further reducing the emission limits for pollutants in the ex- haust gas of motor vehicles (CO, HC, NOx). With their present technology catalytic converters, which require the use of lead-free petrol, have adverse con- sequences in energy and economic terms which must be assessed in the light of possible benefits to public health of their u s e .

In the absence of results from the application of Directive 78/611/EEC, which does not enter into force until

Environmental Policy and Law, 7 (1981)

1 January 1981, the Commission does not contemplate amending it in the me- dium term.

3. The Commission has not received any official request - in figures - from the Federal Republic of Germany for the reduction of the permitted levels of pollutant gases from motor vehicles. It

is not for the Commission to give a reply to the Government of the Federal Rep- ublic of Germany about proposals which this Government has put to the ECE. The Commission would also remind the Honourable Members that the nine Mem- ber States have taken a common line at the ECE. []

Discharges of Titanium Dioxide (Written question by Mrs. Squarciahipi)

The numerous questions tabled on the disposal of titanium dioxide waste during Question Time on 15 December 1980 and 12 January 1981 show that the directive on discharges of red mud into the sea (which leaves a wide margin of discretion to the Member States) is extremely unsatisfactory in that it sanc- tions misuse of the marine environment and serious damage to flora and fauna.

"I

• ~ ~ . , .

"Don't be hysterical! They've got as much right to live as we have."

Courtesy: Punch, cartoon by Thelwell

1. Since it has been the aim of the envi- ronment policy adopted by the Council to prevent pollution and accordingly to promote research into 'clean' produc- tion cycles, does the Commission not consider that the moment has come to apply this approach to titanium dioxide production which it is possible to carry out without producing waste ? 2. Does not the Commission further consider that it cannot continue to judge the use of clean production cycles to be 'uneconomic', as it did after one of my questions of 16 February 1979, with a superficial understanding of the prob- lems of pollution and the costs it entails

for the companies concerned as well as for society as a whole. 3. Finally, does not the Commission consider that incentives should be given to companies to alter their production cycles by incorporating clean technol- ogies ?

Answer given by Mr Narjes on behalf of the Commission:

1. It is indeed the Commission's in- tention to pursue a preventive environ- ment policy rather than a, less rational and more costly, remedial policy.

A 'clean' process of manufacturing titanium dioxide does exist and is used in the Community; but its wider appli- cation is held back because it is based on advanced high-temperature technol- ogy and requires ore with a high titanium dioxide content.

2. The Commission did not condemn this manufacturing process as uneco- nomic in its Answer to the Honourable Member's Oral Question No. 116/78. It simply stated that studies undertaken during the preparation of the Directive on waste from the titanium dioxide in- dustry had concluded that the solutions mentioned by the Honourable Member did not seem cost-effective. The Com- mission also indicated that it was for the titanium dioxide producers themselves to decide which were the most appro- priate manufacturing processes, having regard to technical and economic data, legislation and environmental conditions.

3. As regards financial aid for the use of clean technologies, the Honourable Member must be aware of what happen- ed to the appropriations for Community environmental measures. One of the in- tended purposes of these funds was to subsidize the development of technol- ogies which pollute less and are more sparing of natural resources.

A fresh request will be made to the Council in the preliminary draft budget for specific appropriations for such mea- sures and it is hoped that Parliament will lend its support to this proposal. []

171