EU wants to clear the way for genetic scissors on plants

   “The European Parliament wants to equate gene-edited plants with normal breeding. The Greens and SPD speak of a “black day” for agriculture, while the CDU and Liberals speak of a great opportunity.

 

     For many farmers and the agricultural industry, it is a great opportunity to secure food supply in times of climate change or to reduce the use of pesticides; For organic farmers, on the other hand, it is genetic engineering by another name: plants that were created using new genomic techniques (NGT) such as Crispr/Cas genetic engineering.

 

     There are big differences between these plants and genetically modified plants (GMOs). Unlike GMOs, no foreign genes are usually introduced into a plant, for example to make it resistant to insects. Supporters argue that the Crispr/Cas gene scissors only accelerate what would be possible with classical breeding through targeted interventions in the genome.

 

     The European Commission shares this view. That's why she suggested in the summer that gene-edited plants should be treated in the same way as conventional breeding when it comes to approval. This amounts to a registration requirement without any further special rules.

 

     The condition is that they could have arisen naturally or through targeted breeding - for example through crossing and selection.

 

     According to a landmark ruling by the European Court of Justice in 2018, the same procedures apply to gene-edited plants as to GMOs. These are lengthy and, with a few exceptions, have effectively made Europe a GMO-free continent. Unlike conventional genetically modified plants, according to the proposal, individual EU states should not be able to ban the cultivation of these edited plants or outdoor trials.

 

     Relatively narrow majority for new EU genetic engineering regulation

 

     On Wednesday, the European Parliament backed the Commission's proposal for the new genetic engineering regulation with a relatively narrow majority of 307 votes to 263 and 41 abstentions. Unlike the Commission, however, MEPs are calling for compulsory labeling of goods, for example in supermarkets, that have been produced using new genomic techniques. The commission had only suggested labeling the seeds. In this way, she wants to prevent the seeds from being accidentally used in organic farming. It should remain banned there, even after the European Parliament's decision.

 

     The Greens and the SPD expressed strong criticism of the decision. “What the conservatives have supported here with votes from the liberals and the right is, for me, a political revelation and defies all reason,” said Green MEP and organic farmer Martin Häusling. It is irresponsible that, in the interests of the agricultural industry, the way is suddenly cleared for the negligent use of new genetic engineering without sufficient consultation. Hundreds of scientists, civil society, environmental associations and hundreds of companies stormed against it. The SPD MP Maria Noichl spoke of a “black day” for farmers. With the adopted position, conventional and organic farmers would partially lose the necessary protection from the previously applicable regulations on coexistence, traceability and transparency.

 

     The CDU MP Peter Liese, on the other hand, emphasized: "As a doctor who dealt intensively with genetic engineering in my doctoral thesis, I see no irresponsible risks for people or the environment, since no foreign genes are being introduced." In so-called natural plant breeding, seeds are often irradiated with gamma rays without anyone getting upset about it. FDP MP Jan-Christoph Oetjen spoke of a “good decision”. The new methods enabled more resistant plants and less use of pesticides.

 

     Now that the European Parliament has decided on its negotiating mandate, the member states still have to agree on a common position. A first attempt at this in the Council of Agriculture Ministers also failed because the federal government could not agree on a common position and therefore had to abstain. Belgium, which will conduct business in the Council from January to the end of June, has promised a quick agreement. Parliament and the Council of Ministers then have to agree on a common text for the EU law. The time for this is running out before the European elections from June 6th to 9th.

 

     The question of how patent law for gene-edited plants should be regulated is not clarified in the draft regulation. The point causes tension between the different interest groups. On Wednesday, the European Parliament voted to no longer be able to patent plants produced using genomic techniques. But that wouldn't have a really binding effect. Nevertheless, the biotechnology association DIB of the Chemical Industry Association expressed strong criticism. Questioning the tried and tested patent regulation would endanger legal certainty and innovations in medical and industrial biotechnology. This means that start-ups and small and medium-sized companies in particular will be deprived of their only protective right." [1]

1. EU will Weg für Genschere an Pflanzen frei machen. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (online) Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH. Feb 7, 2024. Von Hendrik Kafsack

ES nori atverti kelią genetinėms žirklėms, naudojamoms augalų paveldimų savybių keitimui

„Europos Parlamentas nori prilyginti modifikuotų genų augalus normaliam veisimui. Žalieji ir SPD kalba apie „juodąją dieną“ žemės ūkiui, o CDU ir liberalai – apie puikią galimybę.

 

     Daugeliui ūkininkų ir žemės ūkio pramonės atstovų tai puiki galimybė užtikrinti maisto tiekimą klimato kaitos metu arba sumažinti pesticidų naudojimą; Kita vertus, ekologiniams ūkininkams tai yra genų inžinerija kitu pavadinimu: augalai, sukurti naudojant naujus genominius metodus (NGT), pvz., Crispr/Cas genų inžineriją.

 

     Yra didelių skirtumų tarp šių augalų ir genetiškai modifikuotų organizmų (GMO). Skirtingai nei GMO, į augalą paprastai neįvedami jokie pašaliniai genai, pavyzdžiui, kad jis būtų atsparus vabzdžiams. Šalininkai teigia, kad Crispr/Cas genų žirklės, tikslingai įsikišant į genomą, tik paspartina tai, kas būtų įmanoma klasikiniu veisimu.

 

     Europos Komisija pritaria šiai nuomonei. Štai kodėl ji vasarą pasiūlė, kad su modifikuotų genų  augalais būtų elgiamasi taip pat, kaip su tradiciniu veisimu, kai reikia patvirtinti. Tai prilygsta registracijos reikalavimui be jokių specialių taisyklių.

 

     Sąlyga yra ta, kad jie galėjo atsirasti natūraliai arba tikslingai veisiant, pavyzdžiui, kryžminant ir atrankos būdu.

 

     Remiantis svarbiu 2018 m. Europos Teisingumo Teismo sprendimu, genetiškai modifikuotiems augalams taikomos tos pačios procedūros, kaip ir GMO. Jos yra ilgos ir, išskyrus kelias išimtis, iš tikrųjų padarė Europą žemynu be GMO. Skirtingai nuo įprastų genetiškai modifikuotų augalų, pagal pasiūlymą atskiros ES valstybės neturėtų turėti galimybės uždrausti šių redaguotų augalų auginimo ar bandymų lauke.

 

     Palyginti nedidelė dauguma už naują ES genų inžinerijos reglamentą

 

     Trečiadienį Europos Parlamentas gana nedidele balsų dauguma – 307 balsais už, 263 – prieš ir 41 susilaikęs, palaikė Komisijos pasiūlymą dėl naujo genų inžinerijos reglamento. Tačiau, skirtingai, nei Komisija, EP nariai reikalauja privalomai ženklinti prekes, pavyzdžiui, prekybos centruose, kurios buvo pagamintos, naudojant naujus genominius metodus. Komisija tik pasiūlė sėklas paženklinti. Taip ji nori, kad sėklos netyčia nebūtų panaudotos ekologinėje žemdirbystėje. Ten jos turėtų likti uždraustas net ir po Europos Parlamento sprendimo.

 

     Žalieji ir SPD išreiškė griežtą kritiką šiam sprendimui. „Tai, ką konservatoriai čia rėmė liberalų ir dešiniųjų balsais, man yra politinis apreiškimas ir prieštarauja bet kokiai priežasčiai“, – sakė žaliųjų Europos Parlamento narys ir ekologiškas ūkininkas Martinas Häuslingas. Neatsakinga, kad dėl žemės ūkio pramonės interesų staiga atsilaisvina kelias aplaidžiam naujos genų inžinerijos naudojimui be pakankamai konsultacijų. Šimtai mokslininkų, pilietinė visuomenė, aplinkosaugos asociacijos ir šimtai įmonių puolė prieš jį. SPD parlamentarė Maria Noichl kalbėjo apie „juodąją dieną“ ūkininkams. Priėmus poziciją, tradiciniai ir ekologiniai ūkininkai iš dalies prarastų reikiamą apsaugą nuo anksčiau galiojusių sambūvio, atsekamumo ir skaidrumo reglamentų.

 

     Kita vertus, CDU parlamentaras Peteris Liese'as pabrėžė: „Kaip daktaras, kuris savo daktaro disertacijoje intensyviai nagrinėjo genų inžineriją, nematau jokios neatsakingos rizikos žmonėms ar aplinkai, nes neįvedami jokie svetimi genai“. Vadinamajame natūraliame augalų selekcijoje sėklos dažnai apšvitinamos gama spinduliais, niekam dėl to nesinervinus. FDP parlamentaras Janas-Christophas Oetjenas kalbėjo apie „gerą sprendimą“. Nauji metodai leido augalams tapti atsparesniais ir mažiau naudoti pesticidus.

 

     Dabar, kai Europos Parlamentas nusprendė dėl savo derybų mandato, valstybės narės dar turi susitarti dėl bendros pozicijos. Pirmasis bandymas tai padaryti Žemės ūkio ministrų taryboje taip pat nepavyko, nes federalinė vyriausybė negalėjo susitarti dėl bendros pozicijos ir todėl turėjo susilaikyti. Belgija, kuri Taryboje dirbs nuo sausio iki birželio pabaigos, pažadėjo greitą susitarimą. Tada Parlamentas ir Ministrų Taryba turi susitarti dėl bendro ES teisės teksto. Laikas tam baigiasi prieš Europos Parlamento rinkimus birželio 6–9 dienomis.

 

     Klausimas, kaip turėtų būti reglamentuojamas modifikuotų genų augalų patentų įstatymas, reglamento projekte nėra išaiškintas. Taškas sukelia įtampą tarp skirtingų interesų grupių. Trečiadienį Europos Parlamentas nubalsavo už tai, kad nebegalima patentuoti augalų, pagamintų, naudojant genominius metodus. Tačiau tai tikrai neįpareigojančio poveikio neturėtų. Nepaisant to, Chemijos pramonės asociacijos biotechnologijų asociacija DIB išreiškė griežtą kritiką. Suabejojus išbandytu patentų reglamentavimu, kiltų pavojus teisiniam tikrumui ir medicinos bei pramoninės biotechnologijos naujovėms. Tai reiškia, kad pradedantiesiems ir ypač mažoms bei vidutinėms įmonėms bus atimta vienintelė jų apsaugos teisė.“ [1]

 

1. EU will Weg für Genschere an Pflanzen frei machen. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (online) Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH. Feb 7, 2024. Von Hendrik Kafsack

 

The EU's answer to America's billion-dollar funding program is finally available: heat pumps, wind turbines, hydrogen: The EU's answer to the funding programs of China and the USA is ready

  "The American President Joe Biden really frightened the Europeans with his "Inflation Reduction Act" - great concerns arose about the location. Now it is clear how Brussels wants to react.

 

     The European Union is finding it difficult to find an answer to the billion-dollar American and Chinese funding programs for the production of green technologies. The majority of member states rejected ideas for new and perhaps debt-financed EU funds early on. Now the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers want to improve the framework conditions for green technologies with the “Net Zero Industry Act”. Domestic products should also be given preferential treatment in tenders and auctions (“Buy European”). Negotiators from both institutions have agreed on this.

 

     The compromise envisages that the list of technologies covered by the law proposed by the European Commission in early 2023 will be greatly expanded. In addition to renewable energies, this includes nuclear power, heat pumps, hydrogen technology, technologies that can be used to decarbonize industry, power grid expansion and the production of synthetic e-fuels. This also includes the separation and storage or use of CO2 (CCUS).

 

     Member States are not obliged to promote all technologies. Otherwise, Germany in particular would not have supported the inclusion of nuclear power in the list.

 

     Response to the complaints from the European solar and wind industry

 

     The agreement enshrines the goal of building capacity to capture 50 million tons of CO2 in the EU by 2030. This corresponds to the roadmap for expanding CCUS presented by the Commission on Tuesday. For the other green technologies - the text refers to net-zero technologies - the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers have announced two goals: the share of domestic production should increase to 40 percent of new annual installations across all technologies by 2030 and 15 percent for each individual technology percent of production in the world.

 

     In order to get there, the “Net Zero Industry Act” provides for faster approval procedures. They should be limited to 18 months for larger projects of more than 1 gigawatt. For smaller ones it is twelve months. States can also classify individual projects as strategically important if they are crucial for independence from deliveries from third countries. The approval periods are then shortened to nine months for small projects and twelve months for large projects. Strategic projects also benefit from the fact that environmental impact assessments are to be simplified.

 

     The “Net-Zero Acceleration Valleys”, which the member states can designate, also benefit from preferential treatment including simplified environmental assessments. With these economic zones, states should specifically promote clusters of factories and suppliers for green technologies.

 

     Check in 2027

 

     In order to give European manufacturers priority in tenders and auctions, the compromise introduces some new requirements. This is not least a reaction to the complaints from the European solar and wind industry about alleged dumping prices from competitors from China. When awarding public contracts for renewable energy, the authorities should use criteria such as social and environmental standards and cybersecurity in addition to the price. If the EU depends for more than half on deliveries of a technology from a non-European third country or the share has grown significantly, that country's share in tenders should be limited to 50 percent. This is primarily aimed at China. Exceptions to these requirements are possible if costs otherwise increase by 20 percent or more.

 

     In auctions for the expansion of renewable energies, it is required that at least 30 percent of the auctioned output or 6 gigawatts per EU state be linked to sustainability and resilience criteria - such as the 50 percent criterion in public tenders. The commission should examine this in 2027 and then possibly propose a higher share of up to 50 percent. France had insisted on this. The federal government was against it. Germany relies heavily on auctions to expand renewables. The requirements for auctions should apply after a transition period of 18 months. Here too, exceptions are possible if costs increase by 15 percent or more.

 

     The European Parliament and the Council of Ministers still have to officially accept the agreement. In this case, however, that would probably be a formality. The SPD MP Tiemo Wölken spoke of an “important signal of departure for the industry: We are driving decarbonization and investing in future industries such as batteries, solar power, wind energy and heat pumps."

 

     The European Parliament's chief negotiator, CDU MP Christian Ehler, said: "The Net-Zero Industry Act may not mirror the American Inflation Reduction Act, but it can make Europe more attractive as a location and investment location for our industry."

 

     Parliament and the Council of Ministers have also agreed on the Commission proposal for the platform to promote green technologies STEP. It is intended to make it easier to access existing funding. There is no new money." [1]

 

 This is a huge mistake: not giving money. Mere bureaucratic games, faster permits, are not enough. If it doesn't pay to produce in the EU, then who needs those permits. Not buying from China is stupid. China is conquering the whole world with low prices and good quality. The European Union cannot compete in the world, so it is failing.

 

1. Endlich steht die Antwort der EU auf Amerikas Milliarden-Förderprogramm: Wärmepumpen, Windräder, Wasserstoff: Die Antwort der EU auf die Förderprogramme Chinas und der USA steht
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (online) Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH. Feb 7, 2024. Von Hendrik Kafsack, Brüssel