Question for written answer E-3537/2010 to the Commission Rule 117 Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) Subject: Thermal power stations in Mérida (Extremadura): socio-economic impact In the light of the information supplied by ‘Térmicas No’ (No power stations), an Extremadura-based federation of protest groups, on the plans to build thermal power stations in the Mérida region (Badajoz, Spain), the implications are not just confined to the environment, but also extend to the socio-economic sphere. The area concerned is a tourist destination, a mixture of health and historic and natural heritage, which provides tourism-related direct employment for 250 workers, who are scattered over a number of SMEs (6 hotels of various classes, 5 country houses with a total of 600 beds, 9 bars, and 2 restaurants, along with other small businesses linked to tourism). Clearly, the jobs in question are all of a permanently local nature and cannot be moved. As a result of substantial investment to promote the arts and the natural environment, the regional tourist trade is visibly on the rise. In addition, the area comprising Alange, La Zarza, Oliva de Mérida, Guareña, and Manchita is one of Extremadura’s main centres for olive growing and olive oil production. The certified organically grown crops, primarily stone fruit and olives, are making steady headway. Furthermore, the Alange Dam irrigates vast lowland and upland fertile plains, a driver of the region’s wealth (rice, tomatoes, maize, etc.). Finally, the wine-growing sub-area of ‘Ribera Alta’, encompassed within the ‘Ribera del Guadiana’ certified designation of origin, includes several localities1, all within range of the power stations. This privileged region, a clear case in which conservation of the natural and historic heritage coexists alongside economic progress, would be irreversibly damaged if even one of the power stations were to be built; two of them would be immediately adjacent to the baths and the protected areas. The local economic fabric would therefore plainly be weakened by the pollution from the power stations and their impact on the countryside. That fact would not be offset by the resulting employment, which would very largely be accounted for by the construction stage but, once the power stations were in operation, would amount to a handful of highly skilled jobs (about 40 per power station), which would, moreover, be concentrated in multinational companies. Bearing in mind the plant health effects of the acid rain and tropospheric ozone that would be generated by the power stations: Does the Commission know whether the authorities have conducted any studies on the job losses that these projects would entail, both in tourism and in farming, and on the fall in profits in those sectors? Does it consider that the projects run counter to the recommendations of the ‘EU Sustainable Development Strategy’ and its specific objectives of ‘Conservation and management of natural resources’ and ‘Public health’ and that they are possibly contrary to the ‘Lisbon Strategy’? 1 Aljucén, Cristina, Don Álvaro, Don Benito, Esparragalejo, Guareña, La Haba, Manchita, Mérida, Oliva de Mérida, Trujillanos, Valdetorres, Valverde de Mérida, Villagonzalo, and La Zarza. 816001.EN PE 442.307.