0(02 Brussels, 20 November 2001 &RPPLVVLRQ VHUYLFHV SDSHU RQ WKH SURFHVVLQJ GLVSRVDODQGXVHVRIDQLPDOE\SURGXFWVLQ0HPEHU 6WDWHV $ %DFNJURXQG A number of BSE and related measures have been introduced over recent years, most of which have had the effect of extending the list of unsafe materials and/or restricting disposal methods and uses. For example, the list of specified risk material has been extended to include the entire intestine of bovines, mechanically recovered meat and the vertebral column. Also, animals that die on farm and meat and bone meal can no longer be used in feeds, which until recently were acceptable outlets for the industry. An inevitable result is that the amount of material needing destruction has increased across the EU. In order to monitor the level of the increase, the impact and disposal capacity in Member States, the Directorate General for Health and Consumer Protection sent a questionnaire to Member States on 29 March asking for details including current disposal routes, amount of animal by- products disposed of YLD each route and costs . Returns have been received from all Member States, and this paper provides a summary of the situation across the EU. Some Member States did not provide full data enabling a general assumption to be made, and the content of this paper may not be of statistical significance. Nevertheless, a number of factual key conclusions can be drawn as in section C below in relation to: - processing and disposal routes - trade/export of processed animal protein and rendered fat - collection, transport and rendering costs - storage capacity for rendered products and costs - incineration, co-incineration and small on-farm incineration - burial and/or landfill - biogas - composting and use of processed animal protein as fertilisers - disposal capacity in Member States A separate questionnaire was sent out by the Directorate General for Agriculture at the end of August 2001, aiming to collect data on the cost and methods of financing of the treatment of animal waste. The information provided in this context is currently being evaluated. The data from Germany are based on the information from only 10 Landers, some of whom did not answer to parts of the questionnaire. So the data may not reflect a national picture. % 3XUSRVHRIWKHSDSHU In the light of the coming Regulation on animal by-products not intended for human consumption, this paper serves mainly as a feedback providing an update on the processing, disposal and uses of animal by-products across the Community. It provides a useful picture facilitating the monitoring by the Commission of the situation particularly in relation to the storage and destruction of meat and bone meal, with a view to help Member States to avoid any possible problems that could arise from poor or illegal disposal methods, including exports due to lack of alternative outlets or storage capacity. & )DFWXDONH\FRQFOXVLRQV 3URFHVVLQJDQGGLVSRVDOURXWHV Nearly all Member States dispose of specified and high risk materials by rendering followed by incineration or co-incineration of the resulting meat and bone meal and/or fat. Co-incineration is mainly practised in A, D, E and F. Direct incineration of raw material is widely practised in the UK and EL. Also, FIN, D, EL, IRL, P, E, S and UK practise burial and/or landfill. Biogas is used as disposal route by S and A, but mainly in D. Composting of animal by-products is practised, and the resulting material spread on grazing and/or arable land in A, FIN, F, D, L and S. Other local disposal routes include feeding of certain high risk material (e.g. fallen stock) to animals such as fur animals whose flesh does not enter food/feed chains (DK, FIN, NL, UK), knacker’s yards (IRL, UK), hunt kennels and maggot farms (UK). In all Member States only low risk material is used in petfood, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products, with the petfood industry constituting an important outlet for animal by-products in F and UK (but pressure-cooked high risk material is also used for petfood in D). Luxembourg has no processing nor disposal facilities of its own (waste is sent to Belgium). Over half of processed animal protein and fat produced in FIN, F and IRL and a quarter of the material produced in A, B, D, EL, I, L, P and S derive from ruminant animals. France produces by far more processed animal protein and fat than any other Member State (see Chart 1 in Annex 1), but data from the industry (EURA) show that in 1999 the production was higher in D than F followed by I, E, DK and NL (see Annex 2). Premises where the treatment (denaturing with the solution of an approved colouring agent or sterilisation by boiling or steaming under pressure) of certain types of animal by-products intended to be marketed locally as feedingstuffs for certain animal categories is carried out in accordance with Council Decision 95/348/EC laying down the veterinary and animal health rules for such treatment applicable to the UK and IRL European Union Renderers Association 7UDGHH[SRUWRISURFHVVHGDQLPDOSURWHLQDQGUHQGHUHGIDW Eleven Member States (except A, EL, L and S) send processed animal protein and/or fat to other Member States as trade, for incineration, co-incineration (use as fuel) or petfood. FIN, F, D, EL, NL and UK export processed animal protein and/or fat to third countries including Estonia, Russia and Switzerland either for incineration, use in technical products, feeds for fur animals or petfood. &ROOHFWLRQWUDQVSRUWDQGUHQGHULQJFRVWV Costs for the collection and transport of animal by-products intended for disposal vary across the Community, ranging from as low as 20 Euro per tonne in DK to as high as 135 Euro in E (data for NL and P cover collection, transport and rendering all together). F, DK and FIN have the lowest rendering costs (50, 75 and 77 Euro, respectively), with EL, E and D showing the highest costs (190, 177 and 168 Euro, respectively) (see Chart 2 in Annex 1). Figures from the industry (EFPRA) show that, in 2000, D collected more animal by-products followed by F, I, UK and E (see Annex 3). 6WRUDJHFDSDFLW\IRUUHQGHUHGSURGXFWVDQGFRVWV All Member States except L are storing processed animal protein and/or fat. UK and F had in store by far more processed animal protein (436,000 and 200,000 tonnes, respectively) and fat (215,000 and 30,000 tonnes, respectively), but significant amounts are also stored in IRL, P, NL and DK (see Chart 3 in Annex 1). The monthly storage cost for one tonne of processed animal protein ranges from as low as about 2 Euro in A, IRL, I and NL to as high as 11 Euro in FIN and D (see Chart 4 in Annex 1). F, EL, NL and P indicated a shortage of storage facilities. ,QFLQHUDWLRQFRLQFLQHUDWLRQDQGVPDOORQIDUPLQFLQHUDWLRQ Direct incineration of raw material is widely practised in the UK and EL. UK has by far more incinerators (about 288 plants) and small on-farm incinerators (about 2500 plants), followed by EL (about 64 incinerators) and P (over 100 small on-farm incinerators). Most other Member States render the raw material and then incinerate or co- incinerate the resulting meat and bone meal and/or fat. Co-incineration is mainly practised in A, D, E and F. Only D (and B until 1999) receives processed animal protein from other Member States for incineration, and the estimate annual amount of material sent for incineration or co-incineration is relatively high in both D and B. Data from the industry (EFPRA) show that, in 2000, almost half of the total EU meat and bone meal destined for incineration was recorded in F (see Annex 4). European Fat Processors and Renderers Association In accordance with Commission Decision 97/735/EC concerning certain protection measures with regard to trade in certain types of mammalian animal waste %XULDODQGRUODQGILOO FIN, D, EL, IRL, P, E, S and UK practise burial and/or landfill, with landfill costs ranging from 30 to 80 Euro per tonne of material. %LRJDV Used as disposal route by S and A, but mainly in D, with disposal costs ranging from 9 to 83 Euro per tonne of material. &RPSRVWLQJDQGXVHRISURFHVVHGDQLPDOSURWHLQDVIHUWLOLVHUV Composting of animal by-products is practised, and the resulting material spread on grazing and/or arable lands in A, FIN, F, D, L and S. Processed mammalian and non-mammalian proteins are also used as fertilisers on grazing and/or arable lands (and/or other lands including garden, amenities and leisure lands) in B, FIN, F, D, I, NL, S and UK. 'LVSRVDOFDSDFLW\LQ0HPEHU6WDWHV EL, IRL, L, NL, P and S indicated that there is a shortage of facilities in their countries for destroying animal by-products, and are all (except EL and L) considering building new incineration or co-incineration facilities. The industry (EFPRA) estimates that there is a shortage of incineration capacity for meat and bone meal in all Member States except D and A (see Annex 5). UK only uses imported processed animal protein 900000 800000 700000 600000 &KDUWHVWLPDWHDQQXDORXWSXWRISURFHVVHGDQLPDOSURWHLQDQGIDW 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 $11(; 0 WRQQH Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal PAP Rendered fat Spain Sweden UK 200 180 &KDUWDYHUDJHFRVWIRUWKHFROOHFWLRQWUDQVSRUWDQGUHQGHULQJRIRQHWRQQHRIDQLPDOE\SURGXFWV 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 $11(; FRQW G 20 LQWHQGHGIRUGLVSRVDO 0 (XUR Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal Collection & transport Rendering Spain Sweden UK 500000 450000 400000 350000 300000 &KDUWHVWLPDWHDPRXQWRISURFHVVHGDQLPDOSURWHLQDQGIDWLQVWRUH