Dein Suchergebnis zum Thema: W��hrung

The European Union is committed to reducing their economy-wide net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 % compared to 1990 level by 2030. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS 1) delivers harmonised pricing of greenhouse gas emissions for energy-intensive sectorsin EU Member States, Norway, Iceland,and Liechtenstein. The price signal has been weakened by the current measures to avoid carbon leakage, i.e. the relocation of production to third countries for reasons of costs related to EU climate policies. The carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) seeks to replace those measures. The CBAM shallensure that imported goods into the EU and goods produced within the EUface the same cost of carbon. Producers of goods with lower specific emissions have an advantage over producers causing more emissions in the production process. Operators within the EU report yearly the emissions of their installations since the introduction of the EU ETS 1 in 2005. Starting now, importers mustreport theemissions related to th
Die Arbeitshilfe beinhalt eine Einführung in die gesetzlichen Grundlagen wie KSG

Germany has approximately 11,000 municipalities which can make a significant contribution towards achieving climate targets. The Local Authorities Funding Guideline (LAG) of the German National Climate Initiative (NCI) has supported municipalities in designing and implementing climate action since 2008. One of the LAG components comprises funding a dedicated position for a climate action manager in a municipality. Since 2008, more than 800 climate action managers have been funded in this way. Their tasks are very diverse. First, they implement investments in energy efficiency. Beyond that, they make a major contribution to establishing climate action in municipalities. Among other things, they organise and coordinate networks and expert groups within and outside their administration, they conduct public relations work, carry out educational projects, and solicit additional funding for various projects. However, evaluating their impact presents a challenge. This study contributes towards such an evaluation. To determine the impact of climate action management, a set of criteria and indicators have been identified and a survey consisting of 46 questions belonging to 6 question blocks on the topic of municipal climate action was created. In this paper the questions in the following four blocks are evaluated: (i) Introductory, statistical questions, (ii) Climate action personnel in the municipality, (iii) Importance of climate action in administration and local politics, and (iv) Inventory of climate action activities. The survey was conducted among all municipalities with more than 10,000 inhabitants in two German federal states: North Rhine-Westphalia and Brandenburg. The evaluation of the survey was carried out in three groups: 1) municipalities with climate action managers, 2) municipalities that once had a climate action manager, but no longer have one, and 3) municipalities that have never had a climate action manager. The comparison of the results of the three groups shows that municipalities with a climate action manager perform better in practically all of the criteria surveyed than municipalities without a climate action manager: climate action has a higher priority, generally finds stronger support in municipal politics and greater attention also outside the environmental protection sector. There is more often a climate action committee within the administration, there is more often a financial budget available, more experts are involved in implementing climate action and more funding programmes are tapped into. Since the majority of cities in Group 3 are smaller cities with 10,000 to 20,000 inhabitants, it can be seen that cities of this size are less active in climate protection. These cities obviously need more or different support through funding. The effectiveness of the LAG’s „climate action manager“ funding priority could be demonstrated. The funding of a position for the manager to implement climate action in the municipalities should therefore be continued. The funding programme should be further expanded to reach smaller municipalities in particular. It could also be shown that personnel responsible for climate protection in the municipality is essential in order to become more active in climate protection. The survey results can therefore be used to demonstrate the importance of climate action managers for municipal climate action and for the implementation of climate protection measures. The aim should be to increase the number of municipalities with climate action managers.
Die Arbeitshilfe beinhalt eine Einführung in die gesetzlichen Grundlagen wie KSG

Susanne Fröschl jetzt Mitglied der Geschäftsführung 12.03.2015 Seit dem 1.

Nachhaltiger Konsum ist mehr 05.07.2011 Treibhausgase, die durch die Ernährung

Using the Bo2W experience in Ghana, this report reviews the specific financing requirements – resulting from the Bo2W approach.
Die Arbeitshilfe beinhalt eine Einführung in die gesetzlichen Grundlagen wie KSG

Sailer in Endlagerkommission berufen 11.04.2014 Der Sprecher der Geschäftsführung

Michael Sailer, Sprecher der Geschäftsführung des Öko-Instituts, war Mitglied

Nanotechnology is considered as one of the key enabling technologies of this century and offers a wide variety of potential uses that that should be considered from the point of view of their economic, health and environmental impacts and applications.The use of nanomaterials may lead to products with new or improved properties and many nanotechnology enabled products have already been commercialized, ranging from sun-screen (titanium dioxide) over sports equipment (carbon nanotubes) to food packaging (nanoclay). At the same time, several institutions and stakeholders stress the need for action to address regulatory and knowledge gaps with regards to potential effects of nanomaterials -and products using or containing them- on human health and environment. While there is no indication that all nanomaterials are dangerous, the European Commission highlighted that a substance may present a different danger profile depending on its presence as a nanomaterial or as bulk. Potential risks should therefore be identified at an early stage to be able to develop a culture of sustainable innovation. However, the risk assessment approach could have limits, and it is in that sense that we interpret a statement of Pr. K.A. Dawson at a recent conference organized by the EU Commission, when he highlighted that "the pace of innovation in nanomaterials design far outpaces our capacity to ‚be sure‘ ". Until now, at the European level, the chemicals industry sees the existing risk assessment paradigm and regulatory framework as a solid basis for ensuring that nanomaterials are produced, used and disposed of in a safe and sustainable way, and highlights particularly the role of REACH (see "Nanomaterials – Safe and Innovative", CEFIC). The provision of clear and unambiguous criteria to identify nanomaterials for regulatory purposes is a prerequisite for the implementation of any legislation by enabling a coherent cross-cutting reference. In this sense, the recommendation on the definition of a nanomaterial published by the European Commission on 18 October 2011 marked an important step forward, and states that a nanomaterials is: A natural, incidental or manufactured material containing particles, in an unbound state or as an aggregate or as an agglomerate and where, for 50 % or more of the particles in the number size distribution, one or more external dimensions is in the size range 1 nm – 100 nm.In specific cases and where warranted by concerns for the environment, health, safety or competitiveness the number size distribution threshold of 50 % may be replaced by a threshold between 1 and 50 %. By derogation from the above, fullerenes, graphene flakes and single wall carbon nanotubes with one or more external dimensions below 1 nm should be considered as nanomaterials. Specific provisions on nanomaterials have been introduced at the EU level, for biocides, cosmetics, food additives, food labelling and materials in contact with foodstuff. Although there are no explicit requirements for nanomaterials under REACH or CLP, they meet the regulations‘ substance definition and therefore their provisions apply. However, regarding REACH, a number of shortcomings have been reported for nanomaterials. For instance, because most nanomaterials currently on the market are derived from "parent substances" that benfit from a phase-in status, the many nanomaterials currently marketed benefit from delayed registration deadlines in direct contradiction with the "no data, no market" principle underlying REACH. In addition, nanomaterials that are produced or imported at smaller quantities are not subject to registration. And eventually, there are controversial debates surrounding the identification and characterization of nanomaterials. Discussions on the adaptation of REACH annexes to better address nanomaterials are currently on-going. However, despite this approach and notwithstanding the rapid increase of the market for nanotechnology products, exposure monitoring and assessment is very difficult or impossible at present for nanomaterials as authorities and most enterprises have no means to obtain sufficiently reliable information. Besides the approach of adapting REACH annexes and other regulations to better address nanomaterials, many EU Member States and the EU Parliament support the introduction of databases or registries for gathering necessary information on (products with) nanomaterials to address current regulatory shortcomings.In this regard, a number of approaches to reporting, either voluntary or mandatory, have been proposed (including by Belgium) or implemented. Within the European Union, France has become the first country to require manufacturers to identify uses of substances in nanoform in the frame of a mandatory reporting scheme. Various NGO’s and companies constituted their own databases, including claims about the exposure risk and possible hazards the nanomaterials may pose for humans and the environment.
Am Beispiel von Produkten aus der automobilen W PDF Download (extern) Export BiBTeX

Nanotechnology is considered as one of the key enabling technologies of this century and offers a wide variety of potential uses that that should be considered from the point of view of their economic, health and environmental impacts and applications.The use of nanomaterials may lead to products with new or improved properties and many nanotechnology enabled products have already been commercialized, ranging from sun-screen (titanium dioxide) over sports equipment (carbon nanotubes) to food packaging (nanoclay). At the same time, several institutions and stakeholders stress the need for action to address regulatory and knowledge gaps with regards to potential effects of nanomaterials -and products using or containing them- on human health and environment. While there is no indication that all nanomaterials are dangerous, the European Commission highlighted that a substance may present a different danger profile depending on its presence as a nanomaterial or as bulk. Potential risks should therefore be identified at an early stage to be able to develop a culture of sustainable innovation. However, the risk assessment approach could have limits, and it is in that sense that we interpret a statement of Pr. K.A. Dawson at a recent conference organized by the EU Commission, when he highlighted that "the pace of innovation in nanomaterials design far outpaces our capacity to ‚be sure‘ ". Until now, at the European level, the chemicals industry sees the existing risk assessment paradigm and regulatory framework as a solid basis for ensuring that nanomaterials are produced, used and disposed of in a safe and sustainable way, and highlights particularly the role of REACH (see "Nanomaterials – Safe and Innovative", CEFIC). The provision of clear and unambiguous criteria to identify nanomaterials for regulatory purposes is a prerequisite for the implementation of any legislation by enabling a coherent cross-cutting reference. In this sense, the recommendation on the definition of a nanomaterial published by the European Commission on 18 October 2011 marked an important step forward, and states that a nanomaterials is: A natural, incidental or manufactured material containing particles, in an unbound state or as an aggregate or as an agglomerate and where, for 50 % or more of the particles in the number size distribution, one or more external dimensions is in the size range 1 nm – 100 nm.In specific cases and where warranted by concerns for the environment, health, safety or competitiveness the number size distribution threshold of 50 % may be replaced by a threshold between 1 and 50 %. By derogation from the above, fullerenes, graphene flakes and single wall carbon nanotubes with one or more external dimensions below 1 nm should be considered as nanomaterials. Specific provisions on nanomaterials have been introduced at the EU level, for biocides, cosmetics, food additives, food labelling and materials in contact with foodstuff. Although there are no explicit requirements for nanomaterials under REACH or CLP, they meet the regulations‘ substance definition and therefore their provisions apply. However, regarding REACH, a number of shortcomings have been reported for nanomaterials. For instance, because most nanomaterials currently on the market are derived from "parent substances" that benfit from a phase-in status, the many nanomaterials currently marketed benefit from delayed registration deadlines in direct contradiction with the "no data, no market" principle underlying REACH. In addition, nanomaterials that are produced or imported at smaller quantities are not subject to registration. And eventually, there are controversial debates surrounding the identification and characterization of nanomaterials. Discussions on the adaptation of REACH annexes to better address nanomaterials are currently on-going. However, despite this approach and notwithstanding the rapid increase of the market for nanotechnology products, exposure monitoring and assessment is very difficult or impossible at present for nanomaterials as authorities and most enterprises have no means to obtain sufficiently reliable information. Besides the approach of adapting REACH annexes and other regulations to better address nanomaterials, many EU Member States and the EU Parliament support the introduction of databases or registries for gathering necessary information on (products with) nanomaterials to address current regulatory shortcomings.In this regard, a number of approaches to reporting, either voluntary or mandatory, have been proposed (including by Belgium) or implemented. Within the European Union, France has become the first country to require manufacturers to identify uses of substances in nanoform in the frame of a mandatory reporting scheme. Various NGO’s and companies constituted their own databases, including claims about the exposure risk and possible hazards the nanomaterials may pose for humans and the environment.
Am Beispiel von Produkten aus der automobilen W PDF Download (extern) Export BiBTeX

Produkte / Öko-Institut und Institut für ökologische Wirtschaftsforschung (IÖW)