Suchergebnisse

Although the application of internal insulation to existing perimeter walls poses significant challenges in terms of building physics and loss of habitable space, it is sometimes an inevitable choice because of practical or legislative constraints. Innovative solutions are then required to deliver satisfying performances and reduce nuisance to inhabitants of residential buildings in case they are going to remain in their flats during the retrofit works. Three systems for inner thermal retrofitting purposes have been designed and produced as prototypes. Two of them are composed by silica aerogel containing fibrous material: the first one is a rigid flat laminated panel, the second one is a rollable solution with a fabric finishing layer. The third insulating system is a perlite based board with a hydrophobic layer. All the materials composing the retrofit solutions have been characterized by means of laboratory tests in order to measure their main hygrothermal properties. In fact, some parameters are fundamental for determining the hygrothermal performance of the composite systems: thermal conductivity, at dry and wet state (moisture dependant), water vapour diffusion resistance factor, hygroscopic sorption at isotherm condition and water absorption coefficient. All those measured data were necessary for optimizing the solutions, guaranteeing energy efficiency and vapour open layers to systems that are intended for installation on existing walls.

Vector control using long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) accounts for most of the malaria burden reductions achieved recently in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). LLINs and IRS are highly effective, but are insufficient to eliminate malaria transmission in many settings because of operational constraints, growing resistance to available insecticides and mosquitoes that behaviourally avoid contact with these interventions. However, a number of substantive opportunities now exist for rapidly developing and implementing more diverse, effective and sustainable malaria vector control strategies for LMICs. For example, mosquito control in high-income countries is predominantly achieved with a combination of mosquito-proofed housing and environmental management, supplemented with large-scale insecticide applications to larval habitats and outdoor spaces that kill off vector populations en masse, but all these interventions remain underused in LMICs. Programmatic development and evaluation of decentralised, locally managed systems for delivering these proactive mosquito population abatement practices in LMICs could therefore enable broader scale-up. Furthermore, a diverse range of emerging or repurposed technologies are becoming available for targeting mosquitoes when they enter houses, feed outdoors, attack livestock, feed on sugar or aggregate into mating swarms. Global policy must now be realigned to mobilise the political and financial support necessary to exploit these opportunities over the decade ahead, so that national malaria control and elimination programmes can access a much broader, more effective set of vector control interventions.

Vector control using long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), accounts for most of the malaria burden reductions achieved recently in low and middleincome countries (LMICs). LLINs and IRS are highly effective, but are insufficient to eliminate malaria transmission in many settings, because of operational constraints, growing resistance to available insecticides, and mosquitoes that behaviourally avoid contact with these interventions. However, a number of substantive opportunities now exist for rapidly developing and implementing more diverse, effective, and sustainable malaria vector control strategies for LMICs. For example, mosquito control in high income countries (HICs) is predominantly achieved with a combination of mosquito -proofed housing and environmental management, supplemented with large-scale insecticide applications to larval habitats and outdoor spaces that kill off vector populations en masse, but all these interventions remain under-utilized in LMICs. Programmatic development and evaluation of decentralized, locally-managed systems for delivering these pro-active mosquito population abatement practices in LMICs could therefore enable broader scale up. Furthermore, a diverse range of emerging or re-purposed technologies are becoming available for targeting mosquitoes when they enter houses, feed outdoors, attack livestock, feed on sugar, or aggregate into mating swarms. Global policy must now be realigned to mobilize the political and financial support necessary to exploit these opportunities over the decade ahead, so that national malaria control and elimination programmes can access a much broader, more effective set of vector control interventions.

The Working Group III (WGIII) contribution to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) assesses literature on the scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigation of climate change. It builds upon the WGIII contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and previous reports and incorporates subsequent new findings and research. Throughout, the focus is on the implications of its findings for policy, without being prescriptive about the particular policies that governments and other important participants in the policy process should adopt. In light of the IPCC's mandate, authors in WGIII were guided by several principles when assembling this assessment: (1) to be explicit about mitigation options, (2) to be explicit about their costs and about their risks and opportunities vis-a-vis other development priorities, (3) and to be explicit about the underlying criteria, concepts, and methods for evaluating alternative policies. This summary offers the main findings of the report.

The Working Group III (WGIII) contribution to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) assesses literature on the scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigation of climate change. It builds upon the WGIII contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and previous reports and incorporates subsequent new findings and research. Throughout, the focus is on the implications of its findings for policy, without being prescriptive about the particular policies that governments and other important participants in the policy process should adopt. In light of the IPCC's mandate, authors in WGIII were guided by several principles when assembling this assessment: (1) to be explicit about mitigation options, (2) to be explicit about their costs and about their risks and opportunities vis-a-vis other development priorities, (3) and to be explicit about the underlying criteria, concepts, and methods for evaluating alternative policies. This summary offers the main findings of the report.