Brussels, 20/10/2014 (Agence Europe) - In promoting the industrial renaissance, the EU should look to what the starch and starch derivatives industry can do and make sure this promising sector is not neglected. Derived from wheat, maize and potatoes, starch and starch derivatives are widely used in the food, animal feed and biofuel industries and offer a biodegradable and renewable alternative to oil in the chemical industry.
Sugar quotas and bio-economy. At an event in Brussels on 15 October, Starch Europe, the association which represents the interests of a sector which employs 16,000 people and indirectly creates thousands of jobs on farms, set out the reasons why it firmly believes it can contribute to the EU's industrial renaissance (20% of EU GDP to come from industry by 2020). Firstly, sugar quotas are to be axed by 2017, in line with the reform of the common agricultural policy, thereby allowing the European sector to produce up to 2 million tonnes of isoglucose in the future, compared with 700,000 tonnes at present. Secondly, the EU bio-economy strategy in 2012 includes starch and starch derivatives which can play a central role in replacing fossil energy in numerous non-food chemical applications (paper, textiles, plastics, etc.). Provision of money from the European public purse for a pilot factory, as part of the Horizon 2020 programme, has been a much appreciated boost.
Import rights. However, the opportunities that the sector offers must be protected, stresses Jamie Fortescue, Starch Europe's managing director, particularly against its main competitors Thailand and the United States, which can produce materials more cheaply (economies of scale, cheap energy, etc.). When trade agreements are negotiated with these states in particular, Starch Europe calls for import duties to be maintained so the sector can continue to develop or at least hold its position. Starch Europe also warns against excessive legislation which could harm the sector. Fortescue cites the example of a draft country-of-origin directive which would add a further 30% to producers' costs (if they have to hold the raw materials in different silos depending on where they come from). (MD)