John Deasy
Ceist:39 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the cost of the export and incineration of specified risk material for the years 2000, 2001 and to date in 2002. [25693/02]
Other Questions. - Disposal of Animal Carcases.
Under the Diseases of Animals (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) (Specified Risk Material) Order of 21 February 1997, it is a requirement that SRM, consisting of certain offal including the skull, spinal cord, eyes and other specified material of cattle and sheep over 12 months of age, be separately collected, transported, processed and disposed of outside of the feed chain. In practice this material is separated from other animal offal at slaughter plants and butchers premises, dyed and sent to three dedicated rendering plants under the veterinary supervision of my Department for rendering into meat and bonemeal (MBM) and tallow. The MBM derived from the SRM is dispatched to the Continent for disposal by incineration. The tallow is generally burned as an alternative fuel at the rendering plants. The cost of collecting, processing and disposing of risk material derived from animal offal is a commercial matter and is borne by the meat industry.
All animals collected under the fallen animals collection scheme and animals from BSE depopulated herds are also treated as risk material and processed at the three dedicated SRM rendering plants. The rendered material derived from these animals is also dispatched to the Continent for incineration. The costs of rendering and destruction abroad of this material is borne by my Department.
In 2000, €1.5 million was paid for the disposal of meat and bonemeal accruing from the processing of fallen animal material in the period end 1998 to October 2000 and €0.7 million for material derived from herds with a BSE positive animal.
There is significant controversy in Tipperary in relation to the building of an incinerator. It is an emotive issue in Tipperary. The horse racing industry is in jeopardy because of the proposal to build an incinerator. There is an alternative method of disposal known as alkaline hydrolysis which is on show in the veterinary college. Will the Minister try to establish whether this alternative method of disposal would be feasible in an Irish context? There is not enough effort to move it forward. It is a real alternative. I would like the Department to be more positive.
I am interested in what Deputy Hayes has put forward. I am aware of the demonstration in UCD and two senior experts from the Department of Agriculture and Food are there today looking at it. Over the past year they have met various companies which are promoting alkaline hydrolysis as an alternative way of disposing of risk material. My information is that this system works, but only for one or two animals and not the bulk of animals we have nationally. That in itself is an advance. The system has been forwarded to the European scientific steering committee for validation and approval. It has not yet approved of the system for member states. When it is, and when a credible alternative is put to me, I will be very positive and pleased. I have said many times in the past that we cannot have an industry without also having a waste disposal system. In 2001, the Department paid €10 million for rendering and €16.8 million for export for disposal by incineration. That is because the increase in the numbers of fallen animals is becoming a significant problem.
The Minister has partially answered my concerns. The costs he has mentioned are €26 million. In addition, storing meat and bonemeal is not sustainable. Ultimately the cost will be borne by the producer. It is a matter of urgency to find a solution to this problem. In seeking a solution people should not play on the emotions and fears of the general public.
Has the Department commissioned any studies on the comparative value and risks of incineration and alkaline hydrolysis? I accept – and it is good to be able to agree with the Minister in relation to alkaline hydrolysis – that we are very much at the early stages in that technology. Perhaps the Minister would comment on the comparative studies.
We have put a huge amount of effort, time and personnel into comparing the different systems. Alkaline hydrolysis is at a very early stage and we must have it validated and approved before we can do anything with it. The fact remains that we have hundreds and thousands of tonnes of meat and bonemeal in storage. We are trying to get rid of it and more is coming on stream. We also have infected carcases in storage. If we have an industry, we must have a system of disposal. It is not good enough, in the medium or long-term, to expect somebody else to dispose of our problem for us. We must face up to the fact that a disposal system must be put in place if we are to have an industry. I agree with Deputy Timmins that playing on people's emotions will not solve the problem.