Local governments can play a key role in reducing emissions associated with local energy use. 17 Polish municipalities provided data on energy use and CO2 emissions for 2015. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was used to calculate lifecycle impact indicators for greenhouse gases, particulate matter, acidification and eutrophication associated with the annual energy demand in each municipality. Results showed that impacts from energy use increase almost proportionally with total energy used in the participating municipalities due to the heavy reliance on fossil fuels. Analysis of two municipalities of similar size showed that impacts can be attributed to different usage sectors. For one municipality, energy plans should focus on reducing emissions from private transport and associated fuel use. For the other, energy plans should focus on reducing energy demand from residential buildings. This means that a 'one-size-fits-all' energy plan, which may be developed at a national level, would not fit all municipalities. The application of LCA allows for identifying and informing energy planning with impact reduction potential for multiple environmental pressures. Analysis of the provided energy use and CO2 data showed large uncertainties in CO2 emission intensities and allowing for sufficient time and guidance in the energy and emissions accounting is recommended. ; publishedVersion
The quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedure is an element of the QA/QC programme of the Union system for policies and measures and projections to be established in 2021 according to Article 39 of the Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action (EU) 2018/1999. The European Environment Agency (EEA) is responsible for the annual implementation of the QA/QC procedures and is assisted by the European Topic Centre on Climate Change Mitigation and Energy (ETC/CME). The QA/QC procedure document describes QA/QC checks carried out at EU level on the national reported projections from Member States and on the compiled Union GHG projections. QA/QC procedures are performed at several different stages during the preparation of the national and Union GHG projections in order to aim to ensure the timeliness, transparency, accuracy, consistency, comparability and completeness of the reported information.
Nanotechnologies have reached maturity and market penetration that require nano‐specific changes in legislation and harmonization among legislation domains, such as the amendments to REACH for nanomaterials (NMs) which came into force in 2020. Thus, an assessment of the components and regulatory boundaries of NMs risk governance is timely, alongside related methods and tools, as part of the global efforts to optimise nanosafety and integrate it into product design processes, via Safe(r)‐by‐Design (SbD) concepts. This paper provides an overview of the state‐of‐the‐art regarding risk governance of NMs and lays out the theoretical basis for the development and implementation of an effective, trustworthy and transparent risk governance framework for NMs. The proposed framework enables continuous integration of the evolving state of the science, leverages best practice from contiguous disciplines and facilitates responsive re‐thinking of nanosafety governance to meet future needs. To achieve and operationalise such framework, a science‐based Risk Governance Council (RGC) for NMs is being developed. The framework will provide a toolkit for independent NMs' risk governance and integrates needs and views of stakeholders. An extension of this framework to relevant advanced materials and emerging technologies is also envisaged, in view of future foundations of risk research in Europe and globally. ; publishedVersion
International audience ; Nanotechnologies have reached maturity and market penetration that require nano-specific changes in legislation and harmonization among legislation domains, such as the amendments to REACH for nano materials (NMs) which came into force in 2020. Thus, an assessment of the components and regulatory boundaries of NMs risk governance is timely, alongside related methods and tools, as part of the global efforts to optimise nanosafety and integrate it into product design processes, via Safe(r)-by-Design (SbD) concepts. This paper provides an overview of the state-of-the-art regarding risk governance of NMs and lays out the theoretical basis for the development and implementation of an effective, trustworthy and transparent risk gover nance framework for NMs. The proposed framework enables continuous integration of the evolving state of the science, leverages best practice from contiguous disciplines and facilitates responsive rethinking of nanosafety governance to meet future needs. To achieve and operationalise such framework, a science-based Risk Governance Council (RGC) for NMs is being developed. The framework will provide a toolkit for independent NMs' risk governance and integrates needs and views of stakeholders. An extension of this framework to relevant advanced materials and emerging technologies is also envisaged, in view of future foundations of risk research in Europe and globally.
International audience ; Nanotechnologies have reached maturity and market penetration that require nano-specific changes in legislation and harmonization among legislation domains, such as the amendments to REACH for nano materials (NMs) which came into force in 2020. Thus, an assessment of the components and regulatory boundaries of NMs risk governance is timely, alongside related methods and tools, as part of the global efforts to optimise nanosafety and integrate it into product design processes, via Safe(r)-by-Design (SbD) concepts. This paper provides an overview of the state-of-the-art regarding risk governance of NMs and lays out the theoretical basis for the development and implementation of an effective, trustworthy and transparent risk gover nance framework for NMs. The proposed framework enables continuous integration of the evolving state of the science, leverages best practice from contiguous disciplines and facilitates responsive rethinking of nanosafety governance to meet future needs. To achieve and operationalise such framework, a science-based Risk Governance Council (RGC) for NMs is being developed. The framework will provide a toolkit for independent NMs' risk governance and integrates needs and views of stakeholders. An extension of this framework to relevant advanced materials and emerging technologies is also envisaged, in view of future foundations of risk research in Europe and globally.
From Crossref journal articles via Jisc Publications Router ; History: epub 2020-07-23, issued 2020-07-23 ; Article version: VoR ; Publication status: Published ; Funder: European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program; Grant(s): 814425, 814572
In: Isigonis , P , Afantitis , A , Antunes , D , Bartonova , A , Beitollahi , A , Bohmer , N , Bouman , E , Chaudhry , Q , Cimpan , M R , Cimpan , E , Doak , S , Dupin , D , Fedrigo , D , Fessard , V , Gromelski , M , Gutleb , A C , Halappanavar , S , Hoet , P , Jeliazkova , N , Jomini , S , Lindner , S , Linkov , I , Longhin , E M , Lynch , I , Malsch , I , Marcomini , A , Mariussen , E , de la Fuente , J M , Melagraki , G , Murphy , F , Neaves , M , Packroff , R , Pfuhler , S , Puzyn , T , Rahman , Q , Pran , E R , Semenzin , E , Serchi , T , Steinbach , C , Trump , B , Vrcek , I V , Warheit , D , Wiesner , M R , Willighagen , E & Dusinska , M 2020 , ' Risk Governance of Emerging Technologies Demonstrated in Terms of its Applicability to Nanomaterials ' , Small , vol. 16 , no. 36 , 2003303 . https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.202003303
Nanotechnologies have reached maturity and market penetration that require nano-specific changes in legislation and harmonization among legislation domains, such as the amendments to REACH for nanomaterials (NMs) which came into force in 2020. Thus, an assessment of the components and regulatory boundaries of NMs risk governance is timely, alongside related methods and tools, as part of the global efforts to optimise nanosafety and integrate it into product design processes, via Safe(r)-by-Design (SbD) concepts. This paper provides an overview of the state-of-the-art regarding risk governance of NMs and lays out the theoretical basis for the development and implementation of an effective, trustworthy and transparent risk governance framework for NMs. The proposed framework enables continuous integration of the evolving state of the science, leverages best practice from contiguous disciplines and facilitates responsive re-thinking of nanosafety governance to meet future needs. To achieve and operationalise such framework, a science-based Risk Governance Council (RGC) for NMs is being developed. The framework will provide a toolkit for independent NMs' risk governance and integrates needs and views of stakeholders. An extension of this framework to relevant advanced materials and emerging technologies is also envisaged, in view of future foundations of risk research in Europe and globally.
From Crossref via Jisc Publications Router ; History: epub 2020-07-23, issued 2020-07-23 ; Article version: VoR ; Funder: European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program; Grant(s): 814425, 814572
From Crossref via Jisc Publications Router ; History: epub 2020-07-23, issued 2020-07-23 ; Article version: VoR ; Funder: European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program; Grant(s): 814425, 814572
Nanotechnologies have reached maturity and market penetration that require nano‐specific changes in legislation and harmonization among legislation domains, such as the amendments to REACH for nanomaterials (NMs) which came into force in 2020. Thus, an assessment of the components and regulatory boundaries of NMs risk governance is timely, alongside related methods and tools, as part of the global efforts to optimise nanosafety and integrate it into product design processes, via Safe(r)‐by‐Design (SbD) concepts. This paper provides an overview of the state‐of‐the‐art regarding risk governance of NMs and lays out the theoretical basis for the development and implementation of an effective, trustworthy and transparent risk governance framework for NMs. The proposed framework enables continuous integration of the evolving state of the science, leverages best practice from contiguous disciplines and facilitates responsive re‐thinking of nanosafety governance to meet future needs. To achieve and operationalise such framework, a science‐based Risk Governance Council (RGC) for NMs is being developed. The framework will provide a toolkit for independent NMs' risk governance and integrates needs and views of stakeholders. An extension of this framework to relevant advanced materials and emerging technologies is also envisaged, in view of future foundations of risk research in Europe and globally.
Nanotechnologies have reached maturity and market penetration that require nano‐specific changes in legislation and harmonization among legislation domains, such as the amendments to REACH for nanomaterials (NMs) which came into force in 2020. Thus, an assessment of the components and regulatory boundaries of NMs risk governance is timely, alongside related methods and tools, as part of the global efforts to optimise nanosafety and integrate it into product design processes, via Safe(r)‐by‐Design (SbD) concepts. This paper provides an overview of the state‐of‐the‐art regarding risk governance of NMs and lays out the theoretical basis for the development and implementation of an effective, trustworthy and transparent risk governance framework for NMs. The proposed framework enables continuous integration of the evolving state of the science, leverages best practice from contiguous disciplines and facilitates responsive re‐thinking of nanosafety governance to meet future needs. To achieve and operationalise such framework, a science‐based Risk Governance Council (RGC) for NMs is being developed. The framework will provide a toolkit for independent NMs' risk governance and integrates needs and views of stakeholders. An extension of this framework to relevant advanced materials and emerging technologies is also envisaged, in view of future foundations of risk research in Europe and globally. ; This study received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 814425 (RiskGONE) and No 814572 (NanoSolveIT). ; Peer reviewed