– or –
Please login or register to participate.
.
 
+

Wannes Fuel exhausts from Diesel are leading to health problems in urban environments. Even if new sales of ICE is banned in favour of e.g. electric cars, we still will deal with Diesel-generated pollution for at least 20 years.

Back in 2001, reducing sulphur was considered as the key to lower emissions by UNEP, where benefits far outweigh the costs. I was wondering if this is still the case. (
http://www.unep.org/[…]/publowsulfurpaper.pdf ).
In 2009, European Fuel Directive limited sulphur content to 10ppm to limit the health effects (mainly reducing NOx and particle matter). Germany and Sweden have gone further and their average sulphur content is approaching 0 ppm.

Sweden even has gone further than just reducing sulphur and has MK1 fuel on the market, which is better than EN590 fuel (see here for comparisons from 2012: http://slb.nu/slb/rapporter/pdf8/slb2012_008.pdf ) I was wondering whether there are plans to update the European Fuel directive towards such a more environmentally friendly fuel (and why not use MK1 as an example?)

While reducing environmental impact is important, I feel all good measures are embedded in a global economic model. As such, we also need to take into account economic profitability of European refineries and related jobs and tax revenues in a global context. I have the following questions: How high is the infrastructure investment cost to reduce sulphur? How much are the variable costs per liter? How much lower is the energy content after sulphur reduction (plus translation in monetary value)? (Same questions would apply to MK1)

As for the environmental benefits, are there numbers available on the effect of merely a sulphur reduction (and not combined with the other benefits of MK1)?

As I know lobbying will probably be strong on European level to achieve this, I would like to convince the Belgian government, who's looking to fix the current budget deficit, to adopt a tax on the sulphur content. I would like more ammunition for this. 1,5€ct per liter in Germany had already an impact it seems.

Rating
0
Last created by Wannes
Sep 24, 2016 05:23 PM
+

massimo Hello,
I noticed, since a week or so, that the near real time air quality map I usually reached from the address
http://maps.eea.europa.eu/Hub/AirQuality/ is no more avaliable to the public. Is this due to policy changes or to technical reasons related to the web server side?
Thank you in advance.

Best Regards,
Massimo D'isidoro

Rating
0
Last discussed by EEA
Sep 21, 2016 12:41 PM
+

SV1GZ *** THE NUCLEAR SAFETY IS NO POLITICS ZONE ...S.O.S... ***

To: I.C.C.'Prosecutor,U.N.,European Authorities,Interpol,Europol,Eurojust,Embassies,Others...
Κοινοποίηση πρός Εισαγγελείες[Α.Π.+Εφετών+Πρωτοδικών] Αθηνών,Ε.Υ.Π.,Ελλην. Αστυνομία
Your reference are our past+present+future relevant(in wide meaning) communications...

                        THE NUCLEAR SAFETY IS NO-POLITICS ZONE...
{As a reference :
https://www.rt.com/[…]/ }
& THE HYPER-CATASTROPHIC POLITICS OF DENIAL OF EXTREME SEVERE NUCLEAR ACCIDENT (IF A NUCLEAR FISSION PLANT EXPLODE
                                      AS NUCLEAR BOMB!...)
{As reference: https://www.change.org/p/eu[…]ers&utm_medium=copyLink }

By Joseph-Christos Kondylakis,Nuclear Physicist/specialized in Nuclear Fission(Applied + Theoretically),Mikras Asias 13,Agios Nikolaos,Anavissou,19013 Attiki,Greece,Thursday-15-Sept-2016

The Biggest Problem in the International Nuclear Safety is the Human factor that is related directly or/and indirectly with the nuclear system(s) as the Management of Nuclear Human Resources, the Nuclear workers, the Nuclear system(s) Suppliers, the Politicians(including Diplomats) and Others that can have Vital influence(s) in the Safety & Security of the Nuclear system(s)...

The less studied, but VITAL Problem of the above mentioned, in wide meaning, as Nuclear Human factor, is their LACK OF PERCEPTION of Nuclear Physics/Nuclear Fission(Applied+Theoretically) which is Mandatory! in order to Understand what is Importand & Vital & in Priority for the Nuclear System(s) Safety & Security...This VITAL Problem is very much magnified because they act as Gatekeepers decision makers ,with often having a stoped mind from their dayly Routine!! (or very often having a job obtained by using connections or/and social networks, as f.e is the Rule! in Greece & elsewhere...) .Also these Gatekeepers they often do not communicate VITAL information to the PROPER!! Scientist(s)/Engineer(s) (actualy very often they are Unable to know who ,in reality of knowledge & intelligence, is the Proper Person(s), who often may be Different from its job title...), and they do not Motivate and Utilize the source(s) of VITAL Nuclear information in PREVENTION !!! of Nuclear Catastrophes, but often they De-motivate him and also High Barriers are put in these VITAL nuclear information sources, for variety of Criminal reasons...

As explanatonary cases , let mention the case of a General Director of the International “Atomic”(NUCLEAR!!!) Energy Agency who is a lawyer !!! or a Chairman of Board of Governors of I.”A”.E.A. who has studied...Arts!!!(Master of Arts) or a General Director of Nuclear Safety of Japan who is...Economist, or the General Director of the Greek “Atomic”(NUCLEAR!!!) Energy Commission who may be...Civil Engineer or mechanical engineer or a Diplomat in an Embassy who is...tired to obtaining very often communications from an unknown nuclear physicist/specialized in Nuclear Fission or from a Greek Jew Prime Minister & a Mason President of Greek Democracy who they know and they are very happy to have the only one in Greece nuclear physicist/specialized in Nuclear Fission(Applied+Theoretically) with Zero!! his pension income for more than 20 months!!...although it exist an order from a Criminal Prosecutor in Athens from May 2015 to have start receiving his pension into 20 days...

Note: Recently , the European Organization for Nuclear Research ,C.E.R.N.,issued a ticket to this author for use of services of C.E.R.N. for Investigation of this Incident...

Rating
0
Last created by SV1GZ
Sep 19, 2016 05:43 PM
+

meyull Schon heute wäre eine weitgehende Deckung des Strombedarfs in Europa durch Offshore-Windenergie möglich, die zu Kosten von weniger als 3 Cent/kWh erzeugt werden kann.
Diese Möglichkeit habe ich in einer Konzeption dargelegt.
Bei den Kosten für Material, Herstellung und Montage ist dieses Konzept konkurrierenden Projekten und Konzepten überlegen und da die Anlagen nahezu vollständig recycelbar sind, ist das Konzept auch nachhaltig.
Warum wagt keiner der Experten für Windenergieanlagen eine Diskussion mit mir?
Warum kneifen alle?
Worum geht es bei dieser Diskussion?
Ich bin der Meinung, dass die gegenwärtig eingesetzten WEA nicht optimal sind.
Was finde ich ungenügend?
Alle Laufräder / Rotoren von Dampf-, Gas- und Wasserturbinen, wie auch die Flugzeugtriebwerke haben Rotorblätter mit einer Verwindung und der Rotorkreis ist nahezu vollständig mit Rotorblättern besetzt. Dem gegenüber besitzen die Rotoren von Windturbinen nur 2-3 Rotorblätter ohne signifikante Verwindung, die nur als Ganzes gedreht werden können. Warum unterscheiden sie sich so wesentlich von den Rotoren der anderen Strömungsturbinen?
Ich bin der Meinung, dass dies der Tatsache geschuldet ist, dass man kein Rotorblatt mit steuerbarer Verwindung in der benötigten Länge herstellen kann. Die Rotorblätter haben keine signifikante Verwindung, weil sie dann bei Windgeschwindigkeiten oberhalb der zulässigen Windgeschwindigkeit immer schneller würden und dies schließlich zu Schäden führen würde. Das Profil in Nabennähe ist nahezu kreisförmig und damit keinesfalls aerodynamisch optimal, doch man braucht diesen kreisförmigen Querschnitt, weil nur der die notwendige Steifigkeit liefert. Mehr als drei Rotorblätter sind nicht sinnvoll, weil schon diese drei den Platz an der Nabe voll ausfüllen. Bei einem 4. Rotorblatt müsste die Nabe deutlich größer sein und da ging Fläche verloren, der zusätzlliche Gewinn würde die zusätzlichen Kosten (etwa 200.000 Euro) nicht rechtfertigen. Form und Profil der Rotorblätter sind ein Kompromiss und dabei haben die Festigkeitsforderungen die höhere Priorität. In der derzeitigen Bauart sind Rotordurchmesser von mehr als 200 m kaum möglich, da man schon jetzt bei den Materialien das festeste und steifste Material (kohlefaserverstärktes Kompositmaterial) einsetzt.
Da man bei der eingesetzten Bauart überall an Grenzen stößt, habe ich ein Konzept erarbeitet, welches all diese Nachteile vermeidet. Der Rotor wird aus zwei Komponenten zusammengesetzt, wobei die mechanischen Anforderungen vom einem Speichenrad erfüllt werden. Jeder kennt Rennräder und weiß welch hohen Belastungen diese standhalten und dabei sehr leicht sind. Riesenräder mit Durchmessern von mehr als 160 m baut man heute schon mit herkömmlichen Konstruktionsmaterialien (Stahl). Entwicklungen von 200 m Durchmesser wurden sind bekannt.
Auf diesen Speichen sitzen dann die eigentlichen Rotorblätter, die dann nur gering mechanisch belastet werden, weil sie sofort alle auf sie einwirkenden Kräfte an die Speiche abgeben. Solche Rotorblätter können daher eine steuerbare Verwindung aufweisen und von der Nabe bis zum äußeren Ring ein aerodynamisch optimales Profil besitzen. Auch die Anzahl der Rotorblätter wird nun nicht durch die Festigkeit bestimmt, sondern allein durch die Aerodynamik.
Einen weiteren Vorteil bieten solche Ringrotoren, denn der Ring kann den Generator direkt antreiben und macht daher ein Getriebe überflüssig.
Welcher Experte mag sich dazu äußern? Ich würde mich sehr darüber freuen.
In einer zweiten Diskussionsrunde könnte man dann die Stabilität von WEA auf dem offenen Meer betrachten, auch da habe ich Kritik und Lösungsvorschläge zu bieten. Die oben genannten Kosten sind mit schwimmenden WEA zu erreichen, die sich auf dem offenen Ozean befinden. Ein schneller und kostengünstiger Transport der Energie über mehr als 2000 km ist Bestandteil des Konzeptes.

Rating
0
Last discussed by EEA
Sep 19, 2016 09:13 AM
+

RuiweiChen Hello, I have 3 questions concerning the report EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook - 2013, part 1.A.3.b.i - iv.
(1) For the cold-start quotient for calculating the cold-start emissions of road transport, in the table 3-46 on page 64, part 3.4.3.2, this coefficient is less than 1 for VOC if the temperature is higher than 24°C, or for PM if the temperature is higher than 22°C. In these cases, perhaps the cold emissions are less than the hot ones for theses two pollutants, but with the equation (10) in page 42 to calculate the corresponding cold emissions, the results would be negative. Would there be a different formula to calculate the cold emissions for these cases?
(2) Still for the cold emissions, the beta reduction factors are available for post-Euro 1 gasoline vehicles till Euro 4, in table 3-44 on page 63. Is there factors for post-Euro 5 vehicles? Same question for diesel light commercial vehicles of table 3-63, on page 74.
(3) For calculating the cold emissions for post-Euro 1 light commercial vehicles (gasoline or diesel), the part 3.4.3.8 (last paragraph) and 3.4.8.9 (page 73) indicate using the equation (32) on page 66, in which the hot emission is based on Euro-4 vehicles, while the parameter tables recommended are for Euro 2 -- Euro 4 vehicles (table 3-44 for gasoline light commercial vehicles, and table 3-63 for diesel ones). I am wandering if we could use the equation (29) on page 63 instead.
 
Thank you in advance for your kind answers.

Rating
0
Last discussed by RuiweiChen
Sep 16, 2016 09:36 AM
Rating
0
Last discussed by EEA
Sep 16, 2016 08:51 AM
+

VesnaB Dear EEA team,
 
We kindly ask for your expert guidance on solving the below described problems in regards to soil and groundwater contamination with heating oil. If you have any guidelines, best practices or manuals at your disposal, we would appreciate if you could send them to us. In particular, we are looking for possibilities of speeding up passive natural bioremediation processes in the soil and ground water, contaminated by oil and oil derivatives and on the sensitive area of water protection.

In February 2016, a leakage (ca 20 m3 of heating oil) was discovered within the drinking water protection zone in Maribor, Slovenia.
 
Groundwater in the area is located at a depth of ca 25 m and the thickness of the aquifer, which contains groundwater is from 2 - 10 meters.
A few months after the spill of fuel oil a network of piezometers has been built at this location as well as a fountain pump, by means of which a groundwater depressant funnel has been created, in which a larger quantity of leaking fuel oil has been caught.

The situation is the following:

1. Maintaining depressant funnel and slow, passive natural bioremediation processes in the soil and groundwater, contaminated by petroleum products (oil and oil derivatives) are financially demanding, because pumping and treatment of contaminated water costs ca €1 million per year.
We estimate that the slow, passive bioremediation natural processes in the soil and groundwater would last 10 to 15 years. As natural bioremediation processes we understand spontaneous microbial degradation of fuel oil in the soil above the water surface and groundwater.

2. The possibility of accelerating decomposition of oil and oil derivatives in the soil and groundwater with the methods of artificial remediation that is encouraged by:
• the addition of specialised microorganisms,
• adding the missing nutrients (phosphorus, nitrogen)
• and supplemental oxygen with different technologies (bioventing principles).

3. Due to the location of the incident area in the water protection zone the solution is not eligible for dissolution by adding different chemical substances, which might threaten the quality of groundwater as a source of drinking water for Maribor.

Conclusion:
We kindly ask you, at your option what Guidelines, manuals, examples of good practice, "priciples and practices" regarding the possibility of speeding up of passive natural bioremediation processes in the soil and underground water, contaminated by petroleum products (contaminated by oil and oil derivatives) and on the sensitive area of water protection.

dr. Vesna Blažeka, advisor
Institute for Ecological Engeering d.o.o.

Rating
0
Last discussed by EEA
Sep 13, 2016 02:21 PM
+

SV1GZ To: U.N. , European Authorities , International & National Nuclear Energy Authorities , Embassies of Nations , Criminal Prosecutors , Interpol , Europol, Others...
Κοινοποίηση πρός Εισαγγελείες[Α.Π.+Εφετών+Πρωτοδικών] Αθηνών+Ε.Υ.Π.+Ελλην. Αστυνομία

From: Joseph-Christos Kondylakis,Nuclear Physicist/specialized in Nuclear Fission(Applied+ Theoretically), Mikras Asias 13,Agios Nikolaos,Anavissou,19013 Attiki,Greece,
 tel+fax:+30-2291055275 , Wednesday-17-August-2016

VERY APPROXIMATE,QUANTITATIVE,VERIFICATION OF THE INTUITIVELY ESTIMATION OF ABOUT HUNDRED MILLIONS TO BILLION(S)? HUMAN DEATHS, IF A NUCLEAR FISSION REACTOR EXPLODE AS NUCLEAR BOMB! IN A NUCLEAR PLANT OF ABOUT 4x1000 MWe (OF FOUR NUCLEAR FISSION REACTORS )...
Your reference is my previous article of Tuesday-9-August-2016 with title “ ULTRA VITAL CONSIDERATIONS IN INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SAFETY & SECURITY...”
(Study carefully the scientific article “Theoretically and under very special applied conditions a nuclear fission reactor may explode as
nuclear bomb...” by Joseph-Christos Kondylakis , 2010 , that exist in the Internet site :
http://nuclpart.phys.uoa.gr/HNPS/Files/ANP2010.pdf )

A-Consideration : The planet Earth surface is about 5.1 x 10 exponent[14] square meters , and the atmosphere layer of the lower 10 Km is about 5.1 x 10 exponent[18] cubic meters . A human breath about 20 cubic meters air per day and in 50 years he/she breath about 3.65 x 10 exponent[5] cubic meters. A population of planet Earth of 6 Billions in 50 years breath about 2 x 10 exponent[15] cubic meters of air , viz about 0.5 x 10 exponent[-3] of the lower 10 Km atmosphere of planet Earth. A Nuclear Fission Plant with 4 Nuclear Reactors, each producing 1000 MWe has with its 4 Storage places(pool & dry) of used nuclear fuel about 20 Tones of Plutonium(Pu) or 2x10 exponent[13] micrograms of Pu and 1 microgram of Pu if inhalled by a human may cause Cancer!...Therefore a 6 Billion population of planet Earth in 50 years will breath about 2x10 exponent[13] / 0.5 x exponent[3] = 4 x exponent[10] viz about 40 Billions Cancer “units”/”deaths” !!!...

B-Consideration : One pool of storage of used nuclear fuel of a Nuclear Fission Reactor of about 1000 MWe contains MORE Radioactivity than this which was released in northern hemisphere from ALL of the Nuclear Weapons tests,Compined... [Reference: “Nuclear Plant Security” by USA'Congress Senate Committee on Environment & Public work,2002, page 110]
The CANCER disease very much increased because of Nuclear Weapons tested in atmosphere , and this effects Billions of Humans....IF a Nuclear Fission Reactor of 1000 MWe explode in a Nuclear Fission Plant of 4 Nuclear Reactors , Four(4) used Nuclear Fuel Storage places(wet & dry) will go to atmospheric circulation All over the planet Earth,stratospherically, with the Plutonium in inhalled particles sizes...

C-Consideration : The Chernobyl Nuclear Accident,USSR,1986 caused until 2009 about 1 Millions Deaths [Reference: Alexey V. Yablakov , et all ,” Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for the People and the Environment “ , in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,USA, 2009 ] and only about 5% of its Plutonium went outside the plant and most of it in NON inhalled size particles and not very far because of the fire dispersion and NOT of nuclear explosion...Imagine now a Nuclear Accident when All plutonium(100%) of the Nuclear Core AND of the Storage places of the PLANT (possibly with 4 Nuclear Reactors) will go to Stratospheric circulation All over the planet Earth , in Inhalled sizes particles of Pu , viz about 20x20 = 400 more Deadly Pu than the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident...

Your further references are our previous+future relevant communications + other references...

This article is devoted in the RESPONSIBILITY!!! of NUCLEAR HUMAN MANAGEMENT + NUCLEAR HUMAN FACTOR AND in the RESPONSIBILITY!!! OF ALL! RELEVANT AUTHORITIES...
Ιδιαιτέρως το αφιερώνω εις την ΥΠΕΥΘΥΝΟΤΗΤΑ!!! των Προέδρου + Εισαγγελέως του Αρείου Πάγου και εις το Σύστημα της Δικαιοσύνης[Δικαστήρια+Αστυνομία+Ε.Υ.Π.] & εις την Διεθνή Δικαιοσύνη...

To: I.C.C.'Prosecutor,European Authorities,Embassies of Nations,International “Atomic”(NUCLEAR) Energy Agency,Euratom,Interpol,Europol,Eurojust,Others...
Κοινοποίηση πρός Εισαγγελείες[Α.Π.+Εφετών+Πρωτοδικών] Αθηνών+Ε.Υ.Π.+Ελλην. Αστυνομία

From: Joseph-Christos Kondylakis,Nuclear Physicist/specialized in Nuclear Fission(Applied+ Theoretically),former Manager of Systems Design & Development in Canada,etc, creator of the original fundamental scientific articles “Theoretically and under very special applied conditions a nuclear fission reactor may explode as nuclear bomb...” and “The Unified theory of oncology” & others, postal address: Mikras Asias 13,Agios Nikolaos,Anavissou,19013 Attiki,Greece,tel+fax:+30-2291055275 , Friday-26-August-2016

                                                       Dear Sir(s) or Madam(s)

THEY CREATE BIG PROBLEMS TO ME WHICH PUT BIG BARRIERS TO ME TO WORK ON SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON VITAL THEMES AS IN THE INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SAFETY OF EXTREME SEVERE NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS, IN THEORETICAL ONCOLOGY WHICH CAN GUIDE & ACCELERATE THE APPLIED ONCOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND IN OTHER FIELDS...

[1] By Violating the Order from May 2015 of the Prosecutor of Criminal court who ordered my pension organization I.K.A. to start giving my pension into 20 days ,because I work in Vital themes of International Nuclear Safety , they have me,Illegaly, for more than 20 months! with Zero! Pension...

[2] They STOP ALL my telephones & fax communications with ALL faculties,Departments and Persons in the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki,Greece (from which I graduated with a B.Sc with Excellent degree) and they STOP my email communications with the Physics Dept. of McGill University,Canada(from which I graduated with a M.Sc with Canadian scholarship) and also STOP my communications with others organizations...

[3] NO Mass Media communication and journal publish my original fundamental scientific research...

[4] HUGE properties taxes ask from me the Greek Government,while it does NOT give my pension...

[5] NONE protection I have from the Greek Justice system, while many times I ask its help...

[6] HUGE Problems create to me the Petitions'Committee of European Parliament f.e as NOT registering many of my Petitions and Deleting Petitions of mine from its Internet submit site,etc,...

[7] I canNot receive a Vital book for my research, with title “Managing Nuclear projects” by J. Devgun
,2013 because it costs 175 Euro and Think that THE NUCLEAR HUMAN MANAGEMENT IS THE VITAL FACTOR IN NUCLEAR CATASTROPHES,etc ...

[8] Other additional Problems...

so how I can continue my Original Fundamental Scientific Research in International Nuclear Safety,Oncology and in other fields , for the big benefits of Humanity & planet Earth?...S.O.S....

Rating
0
Last discussed by EEA
Aug 31, 2016 03:12 PM
 
Loading