2003 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY REPORT

Edison Spa31 Foro Buonaparte20121 MilanTel. +39 02 6222.1

www.edison.it 2 0 0 3 E N V I R O N M E N TA L A N D S A F E T Y R E P O R T

Contents

EDISON TODAY 1

Financial Highlights 2

Simplified Structure of the Edison Group 3

Industrial Operations 4

EDISON AND THE ENVIRONMENT 8

Policy for Quality, Safety and the Environment 9

Emissions into the Atmosphere 10

Water Management 12

Waste Generation and Management 14

Soil and Subsoil Protection 15

Controlling Electromagnetic Fields 17

Environmental and Safety Accounting 18

Technological Innovation 20

Management Systems and EMAS Registration 21

Occupational Health and Safety 23

Training 25

ANALYSIS of ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE 26

Electric Power Sector 28

Hydrocarbons Sector 32

DETAILED ANALYSIS OF INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES 34

Glossary 51

Professional Opinion 54

20

03

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NTA

L AN

D S

AF

ET

Y R

EP

OR

T

Cover photo:Soldanella alpina



Contents

EDISON TODAY 1







Water Management 12








Training 25





Glossary 51


20

03

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NTA

L AN

D S

AF

ET

Y R

EP

OR

T


Emissions per kWh produced1998 - 2003

SOx - 82.5%NOx - 43.9%Particulate matter - 77.4%CO2 - 16.8%

Water usage per kWh produced1998 - 2003

- 45%

Environmental and safety expenditures2000 - 2003

107.7total in millions of euros

In 2003 compared with 2002

Accident frequency index – Edison personnel

- 37%

Serious accident index – Edison personnel

- 71%

Hours of specific environmental and

safety training per employee

+ 38%

E D I S O N A N D T H EE N V I R O N M E N T

E D I S O N A N D S A F E T Y

Thalictrum aquilegifolium

Hydrocarbons Sector (1)Electric Power Sector (1)

(1) Includes all of the facilities operated by Edison.

Edison Today

Edison is Italy’s largest private sector energy group. The Group, which includes Edison Spa and its subsidiaries, produces, transports and sells electric power and natural gas.

In 2003, the Group continued to implement

its ambitious growth program, which calls

for expanding production capacity in both

of its core businesses: electric power and

natural gas. The electric power operations,

which are already building an 800-MW

facility in Altomonte, began construction of

thermoelectric power plants in Torviscosa

(800 MW) and Candela (400 MW). The

goal of the growth program is to raise

installed capacity to 14,000 MW by 2008.

This objective includes 50% of the power

generated by Edipower, an affiliated

company that is also building new power

plants. These plants will add 3,000 MW to

Edipower’s generating capacity, bringing the

total to 8,000 MW by 2008.

This report reviews the performance of all

of the production units operated by Edison

and its subsidiaries, even when the Group

does not have full ownership of the

facilities.

In keeping with the method used in

previous Environmental Reports, the

activities of the production facilities

included in this Report and the resulting

impact on the environment are treated as if

they were 100% attributable to the Edison

Group.

Edison is not the operator of the Edipower

affiliate. As a result, the data for Edipower

are not included in this Report.

• Thermoelectric power plants

• Hydroelectric power plants

• Wind farms

• Transmission network

4 separate business units that op-

erate 27 combined-cycle power

plants fueled with natural gas and

2 conventional facilities that use a

mixture of fuels, for a combined

capacity of more than 4,200 MW

42 power plants with a total

capacity of about 1,500 MW

18 wind farms with a total

capacity of about 200 MW

about 3,200 km of medium and

low-voltage power lines

• Gas and oil fields

• Natural gas and water

distribution

5 onshore gas fields

3 offshore oil fields

2 natural gas storage facilities

4 operating units that distribute

natural gas and drinking water to

about 170,000 customers

Edison Group Facilities Included in the Environmental Report

Edison’s ForoBuonaparteheadquarters in Milan.

Edison Today2

Financial Highlights

Core businesses(Energy and Corporate)

2003 2002 2003 (*) 2002 (*)

Edison Group

Net revenues 6,287 12,640 5,141 4,418

EBITDA 1,103 1,607 1,087 1,002

EBITDA/net revenues 17.5% 12.7% 21.1% 22.7%

EBIT 415 579 439 291

EBIT/net revenues 6.6% 4.6% 8.5% 6.6%

Net financial expense (5) (283) (643) (283) (502)

Income before extraordinary items,

taxes and minority interest 132 (64) 156 (211)

Group interest in net income (loss) 144 (697) 339 (400)

Capital expenditures 352 932 328 624

Net invested capital (1) 10,156 11,681 10,171 11,210

Net borrowings (1) 4,143 6,461 4,364 6,220

Stockholders’ equity

before minority interest (1) 6,013 5,220 5,807 4,990

Group interest in stockholders’ equity (1) 5,213 4,476 5,014 4,265

ROI (3) 4.15% 4.00% 4.48% 2.67%

Debt/Equity ratio (1) 0.69 1.24 0.75 1.25

Number of employees (1) (2) 3,970 5,948 2,342 2,391

Stock market prices (in euros) (4)

- common shares 1.4869 1.0815

- nonconvertible savings shares 1.3047 1.0821

- warrants outstanding 0.5610 -

Earnings (loss) per share

- basic 0.0396 (0.334)

- diluted 0.0327 (0.334)

(1) Year-end amounts.(2) Companies consolidated on a line-by-line basis and Group interest in companies consolidated by the proportional method.(3) Computed based on the assets of the Group’s core businesses (Energy and Corporate) after deducting the value of equity

investments held as fixed assets.(4) Simple arithmetic mean of the prices for the last calendar month of the fiscal year.(5) Losses of 44 million euros incurred on the sale of financial equity investments have been classified as extraordinary items.(*) The data are taken from a statement of income and balance sheet prepared in accordance with IAS 35.

Edison Today3

Simplified Structure of the Edison Group

SereneThermoelectric Power Generation63%

* Data not included in this report.

FinelProduction of electric power60%

Electric Power Hydrocarbons

ENERGY OTHER ACTIVITIES

Edison(Hydroelectric Division)

Production of electric power

Edison(Hydrocarbons Division)

Production, importation and sale ofhydrocarbon products

IWH *Water

Edison(Thermoelectric Division)

Production of electric power

Edison InternationalHydrocarbon exploration

and production

Tecnimont *Engineering

Edison Energie SpecialiProduction of electric power

Edison ReteElectric power

transmission network

Edison TradingTrading and risk management

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Edison DGNatural gas distribution 100%

Edison per VoiNatural gas sales 100%

Edison T&SNatural gas transmission and storage 100%

SGMNatural gas transmission 71.34%

50%

100%

ISEProduction of electric power75%

Edipower *Production of electric power40%

Edison EnergiaPurchasing and distribution

of electric power

Edison Today4

Industrial Operations

Electric Power Sector

Edison is present in the electric power business both directly and through subsidiaries and affiliatedcompanies. The Group produces electric power using:• Renewable sources (hydroelectric and wind power generation);• natural gas (combined-cycle thermoelectric power plants fueled with natural gas);• steel-mill gases, which are a byproduct of steel making (thermoelectric power plants fueled with steel-

mill gases, supplemented with natural gas and fuel oil).

The production system consists of 27

thermoelectric power plants, 42

hydroelectric power plants and 18 wind

farms located throughout Italy, with total

installed capacity of almost 6,000 MW. In

2003, these facilities produced in excess of

35 billion kWh of electricity.

In addition to the production operations, the

Group operates a transmission network of

3,200 km of high- and medium-voltage

lines, which it uses to deliver electric power

to end users.

In the downstream part of the business,

Edison became the top player in the

deregulated market in 2003, serving 60

large users and 111 consortia in the

market reserved for customers who

consume in excess of 1 million kWh, and

600 businesses that consume more than

100,000 kWh. Also in 2003, the Group

established the Department that will handle

trading in the Electric Power Exchange.

Thermoelectric Power PlantsCombined-Cycle Power Plants Firedwith Natural GasThe Group operates 25 cogenerating,

combined-cycle power plants that are fired

with natural gas. Their combined generating

capacity is 3,000 MW. In 2003, work began

on two new power plants, a 400-MW

facility in Candela (FG) and an 800-MW

unit in Torviscosa (UD), while construction

of an 800-MW power plant in Altomonte

(CS) continued on schedule.

These three power plants, which are

scheduled to go on stream in 2005, will

produce competitively priced energy for the

deregulated market. In addition, the Group

is currently developing new projects that

could add a further 2,000 MW to its

capacity by 2008.

The Process – The cogenerating,

combined-cycle process uses a gas turbine,

fueled with natural gas, to actuate an

electric power generator. The turbine’s

exhaust fumes are used to produce steam,

part of which powers a turbine attached to

an electric power generator. The rest of the

steam is sold to industrial users.

Environmental Impact – Combined-cycle

technology offers a higher yield and a lower

environmental impact than the system used

in conventional thermoelectric power plants.

Because it uses natural gas, it produces no

particulate matter or sulfur oxides

emissions, and emissions of nitrogen oxides

can be drastically reduced by using DLN

(Dry Low NOx) combustion systems.

Electricpower

Electricpower

Steamturbine

Steam tofactories

Naturalgas

Gas turbine

Boiler

Combined-Cycle Power Plant – Diagram

The Terni power plantwas Italy’s first facilitydevoted exclusively tothe deregulated market.

Edison Today5

Power Plants Fueled withsteel-mill gasesThe thermoelectric power plants operated

by ISE in Taranto and Piombino (LI) are

fueled with steel-mill gases, a byproduct of

the blast furnaces and coke ovens that

adjoining steel mills use to manufacture

cast iron, coke coal and steel. A portion of

this gas is recycled directly by the steel

mills. The remainder, which would otherwise

be flared, wasting energy, is utilized by the

ISE power plants.

In addition to conventional thermoelectric

power plants (combined capacity of about

500 MW) that are fueled by steel-mill

gases combined with natural gas and fuel

oil, the Taranto and Piombino facilities

include highly innovative combined-cycle

systems (installed capacity of more than

700 MW), that use a mix of steel-mill gases

and natural gas. The world’s first use of this

technology in a large-scale power plant

occurred at Taranto’s Unit 3 in 1997. This

successful experiment was duplicated in

2001 at Piombino’s Unit 3.

Hydroelectric Power PlantsThe Group’s hydroelectric facilities include

42 power plants, located primarily in the

Italian Alps, with an installed capacity of

about 1,500 MW.

The hydroelectric power plants use a range

of different technologies, which are

distinguished by the way in which water is

used:

• Running water plants make direct use of

the flow of rivers;

• Storage facilities use an upstream

storage basin that, acting as a reservoir,

makes it possible to regulate the flow of

water.

The Taranto power plantwas the first power-generating facility in theworld to use recycledsteel-mill gases.

The Santo Stefanohydroelectric powerplant, in Italy’s Vatellina.

Edison Today6

The Process – In the case of hydroelectric

power plants, water is the clean “fuel” used

to produce electricity. This water, which is

commonly called turbine powering water, is

collected in reservoirs (created by dams of

different types) and channeled through

canals and tunnels to a “charging reservoir,”

from which it flows through penstock and

rotates a turbine/alternator unit to generate

medium-voltage electricity.

The turbine powering water is then returned

to its source without any significant

chemical or physical alteration.

Environmental Impact – The Group’s

hydroelectric facilities generate clean

energy because they do not release

emissions into the atmosphere and do not

alter either the chemical or physical

properties of the water they use.

Storage-type power plants have a bigger

environmental impact than running water

plants because they require large water-

storage basins. In order to minimize their

impact, they have been designed to release

a continuous flow of water (minimum vital

water flow) that is sufficient to support the

flora and fauna of the ecosystems that exist

below the dams. Major projects completed

in this area in 2003 involved the

construction of systems to provide a

minimum vital water flow at the Santa

Giustina and Mollaro Dams (see page 13).

Wind FarmsThe Group’s activities in this area are

headed by Edison Energie Speciali, which

operates 18 wind farms with a total

installed capacity of about 200 MW. A

number of additional wind farms are

currently under construction.

The Process – A wind farm is an array of

wind turbines that convert the kinetic energy

of wind into electricity. A system consisting of

propeller blades attached to a

generator/transformer produces electric

power, which is then fed into the transmission

grid, generally by means of underground

power lines. Current technology uses a new

generation of three-blade wind turbines that

have a capacity of about 0.6 MW per unit.

Environmental Impact – Wind farms

generate totally clean energy, with no

emissions and no other significant impact.

The main environmental concerns can be

addressed during the design and

construction phases, seeking to minimize

the impact of the facilities, particularly from

a visual standpoint.

Anemometer

Podassembly

Blade rotor

Control systemand electro-mechanicalcomponents

Wind farms (cross section of a wind turbine)

Spillway

Charging reservoir

Tail race

Penstock

Power plant

Electrical station

Hydroelectric Power Plant – Diagram

The Piano del Casino(Benevento) wind farm.

Edison Today7

Hydrocarbons Sector

The Group engages in onshore and offshore exploration and production of hydrocarbon products,mainly natural gas. Edison is constantly searching for and developing new reserves and expanding itslogistics infrastructure while taking advantage of the opportunities created by the recent deregulation of the natural gas market to increase its market share through the use of imported gas.

Direct hydrocarbon production continued to

decrease in 2003 (756 million cubic meters

of natural gas equivalents, or 4% less than

in 2002). However, increased imports

helped sustain a surge in domestic sales,

which rose to more than 9.6 billion cubic

meters of natural gas, for a 13% share of

the Italian market.

Hydrocarbon Exploration, Productionand TransmissionIn Italy, Edison extracts and produces natural

gas and crude oil from 73 concessions and

permits and operates two storage

concessions. Outside Italy, the Group

controls 10 concessions and permits.

Edison’s natural gas transport operations

supply their industrial customers and the

Group’s own thermoelectric power plants

through a proprietary transmission network

(about 1,200 km of high-pressure pipelines

and two storage centers) and transmission

agreements.

The Process – The gas centers are used to

treat gas drawn from extraction wells and

storage fields prior to feeding it into the

distribution network. Crude oil extracted

from offshore deposits must also be

processed to achieve the quality needed for

distribution.

Environmental Impact – The main

environmental impact of the hydrocarbon

production operations is the water from the

drilling wells that is extracted together with

hydrocarbon products. This water is either

reinjected into the wells or treated as

effluent and disposed of pursuant to law.

Natural Gas DistributionEdison has about 170,000 residential

customers in northeastern and central Italy.

The Group has also established alliances

with local distributors in the Friuli Venezia

Giulia region and in some provinces of the

Emilia, Tuscany and Marche regions.

The Process – Natural gas is drawn from

medium- and high-pressure pipelines at

outlet structures and distributed to end

users through a network of low-pressure

pipelines. Special pressure-reduction

stations are distributed at different points

along the pipeline network.

Environmental Impact – One of the issues

faced by the natural gas distribution

operations is how to manage natural gas

leaks.

These leaks can be caused by service

disruptions (pipeline breakage) or can

occur at valves and joints due to normal

wear. An effective network monitoring

program, regular replacement of worn pipes

and an efficient emergency repair service

can help improve the safety of all parties

involved and reduce leaks significantly.

The Alba Marina, a fuel-oil storage ship.

E D I S O N A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T

Traunsteineria globosa

Corporate Standard No. 8, which is applied by

Edison and its subsidiaries and affiliates, sets

forth specific guidelines according to which:

• Edison undertakes to operate incompliance with current safety and

environmental protection regulations,while at the same time seeking the

continuous improvement of its

performance in protecting its employees,

the employees of its contractors, the

people who live near its facilities and the

environment that surrounds its factories

and those of its customers.

• Edison will ensure that all of its operating

units issue, introduce, develop and/or

update safety and environmental protection

programs, making sure that executives,

managers, office staff and factory workers,

and Edison itself, through them:

- behave in a manner that is consistent

with pertinent laws and with corporate

specifications and standards, taking into

account future regulatory

developments;

- design their facilities and operate them

in a fashion that is in compliance with

current legislation and reflects the bestavailable technologies;

- use products and materials that have

the lowest possible impact on theenvironment during their production,

utilization and disposal.

• Edison will cooperate with theappropriate Associations andAuthorities in developing standards that

are progressively more responsive to the

needs of the environment and that

protect the safety and health of the

Company’s employees.

• Edison will work closely with its hostcommunities, pursuing with unflagging

determination the safety and health of its

employees, of surrounding communities

and of the environment.

Edison’s commitment to quality, safety

and the environment also includes its

determination to:

• acknowledge that the needs of its

customers and an assessment of their

level of satisfaction are fundamental

criteria that should be taken into account

when supplying products and/or services;

• adopt adequate criteria for the proper useof natural and man-made energy

resources, with special emphasis on the use

of electric power, natural gas, thermal energy,

renewable or like resources, and water;

• promote at its sites the use of quality,

environmental and safety managementsystems that are consistent with

international standards, implementing

them in an integrated fashion after

conducting the assessments and

evaluations required to ensure their

compliance with corporate policies;

• take into account the expectations of all

stakeholders and promote the initiatives

needed to meet those expectations;

• make suppliers aware of the Company’s

objectives and involve them in the

improvement process;

• disseminate outside the Companyinformation regarding its policies and

strategies in the areas of quality,

environmental protection and safety,

establishing an ongoing dialog with public

authorities, customers, stockholders, and

the public at large.

All Edison employees, and especially its

executives and managers in their respective

areas of authority, must remain vigilant and

regularly check that these principles are

complied with.

April 2003

Giulio Del NinnoChief Executive Officer

Edison and the Env i ronment9

Policy for Quality, Safety and the Environment

Edison manages its operations by pursuing excellence in the areas of quality, the environment andsafety. Its goal is the continuous improvement of its performance in terms of customer satisfaction,respect for the environment and protection of the health and safety of its employees and all otherstakeholders.


Emissions into the Atmosphere

With regard to the effects that the Group’s facilities have on the environment, emissions produced bythermoelectric power plants that generate electric power and steam, and natural gas leaks from high-and low-pressure pipeline networks have the biggest impact.

Emissions from ThermoelectricPower PlantsThe most significant environmental impact

of the thermoelectric power plants is the

emission of byproducts from the

combustion of fossil fuels.

Combined-cycle facilities fueled with

natural gas (CCGTs) produce no sulfur

oxides or particulate matter emissions and

offer a higher yield while producing lower

emissions of nitrogen oxides and carbon

dioxide than conventional thermoelectric

power plants.

Because of the particular fuel mix they use,

the thermoelectric power plants operated

by the ISE subsidiary, which are fired with

steel-mill gases supplemented with natural

gas and fuel oil, produce sulfur oxides

(SOx) and particulate matter.

The environmental impact of these facilities

should be measured in the context of their

energy recovery characteristics: The steel-

mill gases they use, which contain large

quantities of CO and CO2., are used as fuel

instead of being flared. The Taranto and

Piombino (Livorno) power plants permit the

recovery of substantial quantities of energy,

but have higher specific emissions than

combined-cycle facilities fueled with

natural gas.

As in the past, the overall performance of

the Group’s thermoelectric power plants

was excellent in 2003. The slight increase

in nitrogen oxides compared with the

previous year reflects greater use of steel-

mill gases by the ISE thermoelectric power

plants.

Leaks of Natural Gas byHydrocarbon Sector FacilitiesLeaks of natural gas from transmission and

distribution networks are measured through

a combination of computations and actual

measurements.

Leaks in high-pressure gas pipelines can

occur when new users are hooked up,

maintenance is performed or a malfunction

occurs.

The volume of leaks that occur during new

user hookups and maintenance is

computed based on the number of remedial

actions taken and the characteristics of the

pipeline in question. For malfunction-related

leaks, the volume is computed according to

the characteristics of the pipeline and the

duration of the malfunction.

For gas distributed through medium- and

low-pressure distribution networks, the

volume of leaks is measured based on the

damage caused to the distribution network.

Damage is typically caused by road

construction and digging to repair other

underground utilities and by corrosion of

metal pipes due to stray electrical current.

Specific emissions from ∆ ∆thermoelectric power plants 2003 2002-03 1998-03

SOX g/kWh equiv. 0.174 -1.5 % -82.5 %

NOX g/kWh equiv. 0.422 +2.0 % -43.9 %

Particulate matter g/kWh equiv. 0.011 -10.9 % -77.4 %

CO2 incl. steel-mill gases g/kWh equiv. 629 -0.6 % -16.8 %

CO2 excl. steel-mill gases g/kWh equiv. 394 -0.3 % -4.4 %

Gas distributed through medium- andlow-pressure pipelines 2002 2003 ∆

Gas distributed 106 m3 254 266 +4.7%

Gas leaks 106 m3 1.76 1.69 -4.1%

Gas leaks / Gas distributed % 0.69 0.63 -8.7%

0

60

40

20

80

100

SOx NOx CO2 FuelParticulate

Conventional thermal power plant**Combined-cycle power plant (CCGT)*

Comparison between conventional and combined-cycle power plants

Emissions into the atmosphere

* Fired with natural gas (efficiency 56%)** Fired with fuel oil (sulfur 1%, efficiency 39%)

The Marghera Levante(Venezia) power plant.


In 2002, Edison developed a new method of

estimating the amount of gas released into

the atmosphere whenever a leak is detected

due to:

• scheduled annual inspection of the

medium- and low-pressure network;

• reports of leaks by outsiders;

• damage to underground pipes during

construction work by other utilities.

Using this method, the amount leaked has

been estimated at 1.687 million m3 — 0.63%

of the 270 million m3 of natural gas

distributed.

Emissions Trading By ratifying the Kyoto Protocol (Law No.

120 of June 1, 2002) the European Union

agreed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions

(including carbon dioxide and methane gas)

by 8% from their 1990 levels over a period

of five years, from 2008 to 2012. Italy

agreed to cut emissions by 6.5%. This is a

fairly ambitious goal, considering that Italy

has a low energy density and that Italian

emissions of greenhouse gases have risen

significantly since 1990 and will continue to

increase unless the government begins to

implement national policies and programs.

The adoption of Directive 2003/87 of

October 13, 2003, which “creates a system

for trading greenhouse gas emission

allowances (Emissions Trading) within the

European Union,” represented a major

landmark for the EU because it created the

first of a series of tools that will be used to

reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Starting on January 1, 2005, all operators of

facilities that engage in any of the activities

covered by the Directive (in the electric

power industry, combustion installations of

over 20 MW) will be required to obtain a

greenhouse gas emissions permit. The

operators of these installations will be

allocated emission allowances, which they

will be required to surrender at the end of

each reference period in sufficient number

to cover all of the emissions produced by

their installations.

Operators who fail to surrender sufficient

allowances to cover the emissions actually

generated by their installations will be

assessed an excess emission penalty. The

establishment of an Emissions Trading

scheme will permit open market trading of

emission allowances and will enable

operators to meet their obligations and

avoid penalties (40 euros per ton of CO2

from 2005 to 2007 and 100 euros from

2008 to 2013).

The so-called “Link Directive,” which deals

with similarly flexible mechanisms (CDM -

Clean Development Mechanism and JI -

Joint Implementation) that can be used in

countries with economies in transition and

in developing countries, is still being

debated. The development of JI and CDM

industrial projects that are highly energy

efficient or use renewable resources

generally entails lower marginal costs than

those required to achieve the same

emission reduction objectives in

industrialized countries. The use of JI/CDM

credits could help operators achieve their

emission reduction targets at a lower cost.

At this time, the Italian and European

regulatory framework is continuing to

evolve: The EU has just published

guidelines for monitoring and reporting

emission levels and provided guidance on

how to apply the criteria it established for

developing national plans that are

consistent with Directive 2003/87/CE.

Member States, which include Italy, are

busy preparing national emission allowance

allocation plans, which they will use to

allocate emission allowances to individual

installations. Once they have been reviewed

and approved by the EU Commission, these

national allocation plans will be used to

launch an ET system by January 1, 2005.

The Cellino Attanasio(Teramo) gas center.


The use of increasingly efficient technologies

and the development of closed-circuit air and

water cooling systems has produced a

steady improvement in the Group’s

performance indicators and reduced water

usage to 52 liters per kWh of electric power

generated (45% less than in 1998).

Managing Hydroelectric FacilitiesIn the case of hydroelectric power plants,

water is the clean “fuel” used to produce

electricity.

Prior to being fed to the turbines, the water

undergoes only limited filtration by means

of special grates placed at intake

structures.

The main environmental management

issues are how to mitigate the impact of

water flow diversion on surrounding

ecosystems and how to check and verify

the safety of water intake structures, dams

in particular.

Dam Monitoring and Control ServiceEdison’s Hydroelectric Division devotes a

significant portion of its resources to making

sure that its large dams and smaller water

containment structures are safe.

Large dams fall under the jurisdiction of the

Italian Dam registry, which carries out

semiannual inspections. Smaller structures

are under the jurisdiction of local agencies,

which check them regularly.

The Technical Department of the

Hydroelectric Division employs six

specialists whose sole job is to check the

stability and safety of 26 large dams and

numerous smaller water containment

structures.

The Division’s monitoring and control

programs also cover tunnels, penstock,

canals and other major hydraulic systems.

In 2003, the Dam Monitoring and Control

Service devoted about 10,000 man hours to

field checks and office work.

Water Management

Edison uses water mainly to cool its thermoelectric power plants and, in the case of cogeneratingfacilities, to produce steam, which, in turn, is either used to generate additional electric power or is sold to users outside the Group. The largest users of water are thermoelectric power plants with open-cyclecooling systems. These facilities account for 97% of the Group’s total water consumption.

Water from rivers and canals Other water sources

Sea water

0.8%

6.1%93.1%

2003 – Water sourcesEdison Group

Electric Power Sector Water resources used (l/kWh)

0

40

80

120

2000 2001 2002 20031998 1999

Hydroelectric Division Turbine powering water (m3/kWh)

0

2

4

6

2000 2001 2002 20031998 1999

The Noce River nearthe Santa Giustina(Trento) Dam.


Safety checks are made using modern

control tools and sophisticated automated

monitoring systems that analyze, in real

time, the condition of the structure they are

checking.

The Dam Monitoring and Control Service is

part of the quality management system

adopted by the Hydroelectric Division in

2002. The quality verification process has

enabled Edison to analyze its control

system and raise the quality of the controls

and tools it uses even higher.

Minimum Vital Water Flow (MVW)Edison’s hydroelectric power plants comply

with all of the laws and local regulations

that set the minimum vital water flow

necessary to support fish and other animal

life in the surrounding environment and

preserve the landscape. In order to quickly

bring the S. Giustina Dam into compliance

with MVW regulations, water was released

through the dam spillways.

This solution however was not ideal. The

water that was released was was not being

used to generate power, and the outflow

from the spillways, while spectacular to see

(it formed a waterfall almost 100 feet tall),

created noise and humidity problems in the

environment surrounding the dam.

Edison then decided to cut an opening

halfway up the dam. A special cannon that

shoots a jet of water at 19,000 psi was

used to drill through 45 feet of concrete at

a point where the water pressure is about

120 psi.

To drill through a 500-foot-high dam with

the largest artificial lake in the Trentino Alto

Adige Region behind it was clearly not a

run-of-the-mill job. Edison was the first

operator in Europe to carry out such a

project.

In addition to cutting an opening through

the dam, the project included the

construction of a penstock through which

the water released for MVW compliance

purposes is channeled to a 2.5-MW mini

power plant, thereby satisfying both power

generation and environmental needs.

The same process was used on a dam in

Mollaro (TN), where the mini power plant

built below the dam has a capacity of 650

kW.

These two new mini power plants will both

go on stream in 2004.

The coping of theGioveretto Dam.

Construction of aMVW system at the S. Giustina Dam.


Waste from Regular OperationsThe waste generated by regular operations

has been increasing, slowly but steadily, in

lockstep with the growth of Edison’s output

of electric power. Typical waste includes

spent lubricating oil and refuse from small

maintenance jobs.

The waste from thermoelectric power plants

can also include air filters, washing water

from turbogas facilities and sludge

produced by effluent treatment facilities.

Hydroelectric power plants produce

significant amounts of grate waste, which is

removed from river water prior to its use for

hydroelectric generation. Normally, this kind

of waste is classified as grate waste from

river water.

The hydrocarbon operations that engage in

well drilling and production tend to

generate substantial quantities of fluids,

such as aquifer water and drilling fluids.

The operations that distribute gas and

water to residential customers often

produce significant amounts of soil and

rubble, the result of digging for pipe

maintenance purposes.

In 2003, the waste produced by the

Group’s regular operations totaled 16,000

tons, or 7.6% more than in 2002. Over 60%

of this waste was recycled. Edison’s waste

management goal is to minimize waste

generation and increase the portion that

can be recycled.

Waste from One-time ProjectsThe term “one-time projects” refers to the

construction of new plants and the

restructuring, renovation and/or demolition

of old facilities, when such projects are not

part of regular operations.

Since 2001, in order to monitor more

effectively the handling of the waste

generated by these projects, which are

generally contracted out, Edison has been

managing the disposal process directly.

As a result, Edison is now able to report

separately on the amount of waste

generated by regular operations versus the

amount of waste originating from one-time

projects.

In 2003, the waste generated by one-time

projects totaled 33,569 tons, equal to 67%

of all waste generated by the Group.

The projects that generated the greatest

amount of waste were those involving soil

remediation. The largest of these projects is

the reclamation of the former Falck

facilities near Sesto S. Giovanni (MI), which

is still ongoing.

The demolition of decommissioned plants

and buildings also contributes large

amounts of waste. A good example is the

demolition of the old cooling towers of the

Marghera Azotati (VE) power plant. The

demolition generated more than 9,000 tons

of waste and rubble, almost all of which

was recycled.

Waste Generation and Management

In recent years, a growing awareness of the problem posed by waste generation has led to a more efficientwaste management, which has been made possible by employing better methods of classifying andaccounting for waste, particularly with regard to waste produced as a result of one-time projects, which aregenerally contracted out.

0

14,000

7,000

21,000

2001 2002 2003

Hazardous waste Nonhazardous waste

Waste from regular operations (t)

TreatedTo landfills Recycled

2003 – Waste from regular operationsby final disposal

60.4%25.6%

14.1%

Mineral property closingsOther

New constructionSoil remediationDemolitions

2003 – Waste from one-time projects (t)by source

2%

30%

50%

4%

14%


Remediation of Polluted SitesThe start of projects for the characterization

and subsequent remediation or safety

assurance of industrial sites was made

possible by the enactment of Legislative

Decree No. 22 of 1997 (the so-called

Ronchi Decree), which introduced several

innovations, including the concept of the

remediation of polluted sites, thereby filling

a major gap in Italy's system of laws.

Decree No. 471, which was issued on

October 25, 1999 to implement the Ronchi

Decree, established the criteria, procedures

and methods for ensuring the safety,

remediation and environmental reclamation

of polluted sites.

Edison has been actively involved in dealing

with polluted sites, carrying out preliminary

investigations and research even before the

enactment of the legislation mentioned

above. As a result, Edison’s energy

operations have identified 10

manufacturing sites in major industrial

areas that could be polluted as a result of

activities carried out in the past. At all of

these locations, the Company is working in

cooperation with the public authorities to

achieve compliance with all applicable

technical and administrative requirements

and, when necessary, ensure site safety.

Law No. 426 of 1998 defined certain

industrial areas as being of “national

interest” because they pose a high

environmental risk, and placed them under

the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the

Environment and Territory Protection.

Ongoing Remediation ProjectsThe activities that Edison is carrying out at

sites located within areas defined as being

of “national interest” pursuant to Law No.

426/98 are reviewed briefly below:

• Porto Marghera (VE) – The work being

done at the Porto Marghera site got under

way following the signing of the 1998

Framework Agreement for the Chemical

Industry. In December 2002, after

completing an initial characterization of the

soil in 2000, which resulted in the

definition of several actions that needed to

be taken to ensure the safety of the site,

Edison signed a Supplemental Remediation

Agreement. A Master Plan for the

remediation of the Porto Marghera site was

then signed in 2003. This Plan calls for a

characterization based on a more closely

meshed grid (164 feet x 164 feet squares)

and requires that a determination be made

of the need for emergency measures to

ensure the site’s safety. Moreover, based on

available data, Edison and other companies

located in the “Chemical Peninsula” agreed

to start in March 2004 the controlled

drainage of the aquifer under the Marghera

Levante power plant and subsequent

treatment of the drained water.

• Sesto S. Giovanni (MI) – After completing

the soil characterization in 2002, the

Ministry of the Environment approved the

Final Remediation Plan in July 2003.

Work began the following month and

should be completed in 2004.

• Piombino (LI) – Following approval of the

Characterization Plan in 2002, the work

needed to implement the Plan was

contracted out in 2003 and should be

completed in the first half of 2004. If

appropriate, based on the characterization

Soil and Subsoil Protection

Edison carries out certain projects covered by the Ronchi Decree at several industrial sites that appearto have been polluted by activities carried out in the past.

Once the laying of apipeline is completedthe environment isrestored to its originalstate.


findings, the Company will work with the

appropriate authorities to define a

Remediation Plan.

• Taranto – Following approval of the

Characterization Plan in 2002, the work

needed to implement the Plan was

contracted out in 2003 and should be

completed early in 2005. Based on the

characterization findings, the Company will

work with the appropriate authorities to

define a Remediation Plan.

• Muggia (TS) – The preliminary

characterization work, completed in

previous years, was followed in 2003 by

several Service Conferences at which the

supervisory authorities requested

additional preliminary characterization

data. These data were developed promptly

and transmitted to the authorities, which

must now decide the work that must

follow.

Environmental Restoration andClosing of Mineral PropertiesLaying gas pipelines can cause temporary

and visual alterations of the environment.

The job of laying the pipeline is followed by

restoration work designed to bring the area

affected by the pipeline project to its

original state. By doing this, the impact of

building a pipeline is minimized over the

short run and tends to disappear over the

long run.

The main purpose of restoration projects is

to recreate the preexisting natural balance

by preserving the morphology of the

environment and preventing soil

degradation while reconstituting the original

vegetation cover.

Edison uses all appropriate environmental

engineering techniques. More specifically,

morphological restoration of the vegetation

cover is carried out in a manner that is

consistent with characteristics of the area,

whether it be woodland, farmland or a river

bank.

Closing of mineral properties, on the other

hand, entails ensuring the safety of wells

drilled to explore for or extract hydrocarbons.

The closings are then followed by

environmental restoration work.

The closing of a well requires restoring the

hydraulic status of the formation

transversed by the well to the condition that

existed prior to drilling, avoiding spills of

subsoil liquids, eliminating the risk of

polluting surface water courses, preventing

contact between liquids found at different

strata and reestablishing the original

pressure levels.

These objectives are achieved through the

combined use of bridge plugs and cement

plugs and drilling mud at sufficient density.

In the case of producing wells, the structure

remains in place, but the space used by the

production equipment is reduced to a

minimum. At the end of production and

after well completion, the equipment is

dismantled and the work needed to ensure

the site’s remediation and safety is

performed. This includes:

• Cleaning of the mud storage tanks and

canals with pressurized hot water and

transportation of the mud to an authorized

landfill;

• Demolition of reinforced concrete

structures and foundations and

transportation of the rubble to a landfill;

• Protection of the wellhead from accidental

collisions;

• Fencing of the area surrounding the

wellhead.

A Saint Peter’s fishnear a wellhead at theVega oil platform in theStrait of Sicily.


In the case of dry wells, the restoration of

the job site includes the demolition of all

reinforced concrete structures, the

remodeling of the site’s morphology, the

replacement of previously removed topsoil

and the replanting of the original crops or

trees. To achieve this objective, a detailed

topographical and morphological survey of

the area that requires restoration must be

carried out before beginning the project,

noting the existing crops and the presence

of significant tree species.

Each mineral property closing program

must be approved by the appropriate

mining authorities, as required by law.

With regard to Edison’s existing facilities

(about 3,200 km of high- and medium-

voltage electrical lines), Edison Rete, which

is the Group company involved in electric

power transmission, has asked a qualified

outside consultant to test its electrical

network. Measurements have confirmed

that the network is within the limits of 5

kV/m for electrical field exposure and

0.1mT for magnetic induction exposure, as

defined in the Prime Minister Decree of

April 23, 1992 (subsequently repealed) and

reconfirmed in a Prime Minister Decree

issued on July 8, 2003.

As required by Framework Law No. 36/01,

Edison informed the Ministry of the

Environment and Territory Protection that its

facilities were in compliance with the law

and that, therefore, it was exempt from the

obligation to implement remediation actions

before December 31, 2004.

With regard to power line setback areas,

based on the danger level (10µT) and

quality objective (3µT) for exposure to

electromagnetic fields as defined in the

Prime Minister Decree issued on July 8,

2003, Edison is waiting for APAT and ARPA

to define the computation methods for

determining the applicable setback areas.

In this area, Edison is working closely with

ARPA and supplies the Operator of the

National Transmission Grid the data

necessary to monitor the environmental

impact of magnetic fields in proximity to its

power lines.

When building new power lines, Edison

operates in accordance with applicable

statutes, which require compliance with

quality objectives of 3µT for the magnetic

induction and 5 kV/m for the intensity of

electric fields.

All new power lines are subject to approval

and authorization by the appropriate

authorities.

Controlling Electromagnetic Fields

The laws that govern electromagnetic fields changed significantly in 2003 with the enactment of the decrees that implement Framework Law No. 36/01. These decrees set the exposure limits for low-frequency installations (power lines) and high-frequency facilities (radio and mobile telephonesystems), specify danger levels and provide quality objectives for the protection of the population from magnetic fields.

Edison operates a3,200-km network ofelectrical lines, which itmonitors on a regularbasis.


Environmental and Safety Accounting

The Edison Group has been using a “green accounting” system since 1998.In addition, it adapted to its unique needs the environmental accounting proposals put forth by Eurostat,the Statistical Institute of the European Union, to establish a system of internal procedures andguidelines that it uses to account for costs and investments incurred to protect the health and safety ofits employees.

Outlays incurred for routine maintenance

and investments in technological

development are not counted among the

resources used for environmental protection

and to improve occupational health and

safety, even when the investments are made

to support the use of renewable resources

(for example, building new wind farms).

The criteria for allocating capital

expenditures and operating expenses within

the Group are extremely conservative and

make a distinction between two main

categories:

• Capital expenditures and operating expens-

es incurred to protect the environment and

enhance employee safety and health;

• Capital expenditures and operating

expenses incurred to comply with statutory

provisions governing environmental

protection and occupational safety or to

comply with agreements executed with

national institutions or local governments.

All of the projects that fall into one of these

two groups are then separated by type and

classified into one of the following

categories:

1. Air and climate protection;

2. Water management;

3. Waste management;

4. Soil and aquifer protection;

5. Protection of natural habitats and

landscape, and environmental

remediation;

6. Other environmental projects;

7. Reduction of noise and

electromagnetic fields;

8. Occupational safety and health;

9. Environmental, health and safety training.

Cost of Environmental Protection and Occupational Safety in 2003

(in thousands of euros) Capital exp. Oper. exp. Total

Air and climate protection 722 195 917

Water management 1,438 73 1,511

Waste management 253 1,053 1,307

Soil and aquifer protection 311 210 521

Protection of natural habitats and landscape, and environmental remediation 4,210 18 4,227

Other environmental projects 835 949 1,784

Reduction of noise and electromagnetic fields 101 25 127

Occupational safety and health 5,424 2,194 7,618

Environmental, health and safety training* n. a. 724 724

13,295 5,441 18,736

* For financial reporting purposes, outlays for environmental, health and safety training are treated as operating ex-penses.

The table above does not show the costs incurred to close mineral properties or for environmental remediation of hy-drocarbon well sites, which totaled more than 14 million euros in 2003.

The Armisa powerplant in Valtellina(Sondrio).


Capital Expenditures for EnvironmentalProtection and Occupational Safety in2003Edison’s investments in this area totaled

more than 13 million euros in 2003, an

increase of 21% over the previous year.

The most significant environmental

investments are reviewed below:

• Protection of natural habitats and

landscape – Investments of more than 4

million euros, including about 3.5 million

euros to create minimum vital water flows

at the S. Giustina and Mollaro dams in the

province of Trent.

• Environmental, health and safety – Over 5

million euros invested in various programs

to improve the safety of machinery and

equipment, including more than 600,000

euros for the installation of fall prevention

equipment along certain sections of the

electrical transmission network.

• Air and climate protection – Investments

of 700,000 euros to improve the

performance of thermoelectric power

plants, including the installation of a sulfur

scrubber on the steel-mill gas line at the

Piombino (LI) power plant.

• Water management – Investments of 1.4

million euros, including 0.5 million euros to

reduce effluent impact at the Porto

Marghera (VE) power plants.

Operating ExpensesIn 2003, the Group incurred operating

expenses of 5.4 million euros to manage

activities relating to environmental

protection and the safety of its employees.

These expenses do not include the

resources used in 2003 to close mineral

properties.

Mineral property closings (see page 16)

consist of environmental remediation

projects that must be carried out pursuant

to law when hydrocarbon wells are taken

out of production. In this Report, we have

shown the resources used for mineral

property closings separately. These closings

tend to be very expensive one-time projects

and, therefore, would skew normal trends in

environmental operating expenses.

In 2003, the closing of several offshore

wells absorbed significantly greater

resources than in previous years.

Environmental, health and safety training

Reduction of noise and electromagnetic fields

Air and climate protection

Waste management

Water management

Other environmental protection projects

Soil and aquifer protection

Protection of natural habitats and landscapesand environmental remediations

Occupational safety and health

environmental protection andoccupational safety expenditures in 2003

40.7%

22.6%

9.5%

8.1%

7.0%

4.9%

3.9%

2.8%

0.7%

Breakdown by type of activity of

Outlays for Environmental Protection and Occupational Safety

(in thousands of euros) 2000 2001 2002 2003

Capital expenditures 16,500 19,589 10,975 13,295

Operating expenses 7,009 6,783 7,040 5,441

Total 23,509 26,372 18,015 18,736

Mineral property closings 1,818 2,267 2,224 14,803

In 2003, the Groupinvested more than 5million euros inoccupational healthand safety.


The most significant research projects

carried out in 2003 involved assessing the

potential of micro cogeneration and

developing proprietary superconducting

technologies.

The micro cogeneration assessment

projects were carried out at the Edison

Research Center in Trofarello (TO). In

addition to completing the validation of a

microturbine in a cogeneration

configuration, work continued on a project

carried out in cooperation with the Fiat

Research Center to identify and evaluate

the best technologies operating networks

consisting of small cogenerating and

trigenerating (electric power, heating and

cooling) units. Widespread installations of

these systems at user locations would

reduce the amount of electricity lost and

heat generated during transmission and

would improve environmental protection by

significantly lowering carbon dioxide

emissions.

Other feasibility-related activities carried out

during the year included a project,

scheduled for completion in the first half of

2005, that involves the establishment of a

sophisticated fuel-cell testing laboratory at

the Trofarello Research Center. This

laboratory will be used to test both low-

temperature cells (PEM type) fueled with

hydrogen and high-temperature cells (SOFC

type) fueled directly with natural gas.

The new laboratory will provide a

technology reference point for all Edison

operations interested in the use of

hydrogen and natural gas in fuel cells

utilized for on-site generation.

Work carried out to develop proprietary

superconducting technologies focused on

refining process technologies for producing

superconducting materials with a high

critical temperature.

The Company is currently testing two

different process technologies. One, a

chemical process, involves

electrodeposition, while the other, a physical

process, uses vacuum evaporation. The

second technique has been used to

produce superconducting tape capable of

transmitting three million amperes per

square centimeter, about a thousand times

more than conventional materials. If this

exceptional transmission rate can be

duplicated at the industrial level, it could

produce major economic and environmental

benefits in numerous energy applications.

Technological Innovation

The contribution of research and technological innovation is essential for the achievement of sustainabledevelopment. In recent years, Edison has focused its research and development effort on testing newmethods of energy use that are compatible with the requirements of protecting the environment andusing resources more rationally.

The Edison ResearchCenter in Trofarello(Torino).

Detail of a machineused to test high-temperaturesuperconductingmaterials.


The use of management systems reflects

an approach that goes beyond merely

complying with statutory requirements. It

promotes initiatives and voluntary behavior

that lessen the environmental impact of the

Group’s production facilities and protect

more effectively the health and safety of its

employees and the people who live in the

surrounding communities.

In 1997, Edison began using environmental

management systems that are certified in

accordance with internationally accepted

standards, such as UNI EN ISO 14001.

Subsequently, it adopted occupational

health and safety management systems

and quality management systems that are

consistent, respectively, with the BSI

OHSAS 18001 standard and the UNI EN

ISO 9001 standard.

Since 2002, in order to enhance

communications with all stakeholders, most

of Edison’s production facilities have been

pursuing the EMAS (the EU’s

Ecomanagement and Audit Scheme)

registration path.

Advantages of Management SystemsThe use of management systems enables

all Group organizations to monitor on an

ongoing basis the effectiveness of key

processes with the goals of:

• Ensuring compliance with statutory

requirements;

• Analyzing internal processes critically;

• Empowering employees to contribute to

the achievement of the desired objectives;

• Encouraging contractors to share common

problem-solving approaches;

• Developing new measurement and control

tools;

• Performing audits of processes and

specific issues;

• Analyzing the causes of events and

identifying corrective actions.

AuditingIn 2003, the Group began implementing a

new and more structured auditing process

based on multiple organization levels.

First level audits, which were planned and

formally defined for the first time, consist of

internal audits by Division staff to test

specific aspects of their system, such as

waste management, and the performance

of outside contractors.

Second level audits are audits carried out by

Corporate staff primarily to assess the

performance of the organization as a whole.

Management Systems and EMAS Registration

For several years, Edison has been complying voluntarily with programs designed to promote anecocompatible development model and has promoted the use of specifically designed environmentalsafety and/or quality management systems throughout its organization.

Voluntary Standards Appliedto Management Systems

Scope of Reference Referenceimplementation standard framework

Environment UNI EN ISO International14001:1996

Environment EC Reg. 761/01 EUEMAS

Safety BSI OHSAS International18001:1999

Quality UNI EN ISO International9001:2000

2003 Auditing 1st level audits 2nd level audits 3rd level auditPerformed by Performed by Performed byDivision staff Corporate staff certification agencies

Electric Power Sector 71 21 30

Hydrocarbons Sector 21 6 11

Production units 24 6 1

Total number of audits in 2003 116 33 42

Total number of audits in 2002 n.a. 31 37

Edison EnergieSpeciali, a wind farmoperator, was the firstcompany in Italy toreceive a multisiteEMAS registration.


Third level audits are those performed by

independent agencies for the purpose of

awarding or maintaining certifications.

The implementation of this new, highly

structured and comprehensive audit

process was achieved by involving all

employees of the Environment, Safety and

Quality Departments of the various

Divisions who became qualified as internal

auditors of management systems in 2002

after completing a special training course.

Evolution of the System: From aSingle Site to the Entire OrganizationThe natural evolution of management

systems, made possible in part by the

second revision of the EMAS regulations to

include blanket registrations of entire

organizational systems, has produced a

rationalization of these systems and an

expansion of their scope of implementation

and a progression from systems and

certifications that apply to a single site to

systems and certifications that apply to

entire organizations.

In 2003, following a successful experience

in 2002 by Edison Energie Speciali, a wind

farm operator that was the first organization

in Italy to receive a multisite EMAS

registration, the First Thermoelectric

Division received a blanket certification of

its environmental management system and

is working toward a blanket EMAS

certification for all of its thermoelectric

facilities (11 power plants).

Quality Management SystemCorporate organizations and staff functions

joined the quality management system in

2003 and were awarded quality

certifications. More specifically, the quality

certification of the Engineering Department

and of the companies that engage in gas

distribution, which in 2003 completed the

transition to Vision 2000, was followed by

the certification of the quality management

system used by the Hydroelectric Division.

GoalsOver the next three years, in view of the

positive results achieved thus far using

certified management systems, the Group

will expand the use of management

systems, particularly with respect to

environmental and quality issues.

As for safety, the goal is to certify all of the

Group’s production sites by 2006 (64 sites

have been certified thus far out of a total of

103).

Another goal for 2006 is to secure ISO

14001 environmental certification and

environmental registration for 97 of the

Group’s 103 sites.

Environmental and Safety Certifications Environment Safety

No. of facilities/ UNI EN EC Regulation BSI OHSAS(at 3/31/04) operating units ISO 14001 761/01 EMAS 18001


Thermoelectric power plants 27 25 14 10

Hydroelectric power plants 42 32 - 32

Wind farms 18 18 18 18

Transmission network Business Unit 6 - - pending

Hydrocarbons Sector

Onshore and offshore gas and oil fields 8 3 1 2

Gas storage centers 2 2 1 2

Total 103 80 34 64

Goal for 2006 103 97 97 103

Edison’s goal is tocertify all of itsproduction facilities.


Accident IndicesAccident indices are the best tools available

to measure performance improvements in

protecting the health and safety of Group

employees.

The data for 2003 represent the best

results achieved since we began keeping

track of the accident indices for Company

staff and the employees of contractors.

The results achieved thus far are

encouraging. At the same time, they make

us aware that if we are to maintain this

level of excellence and improve it further

we must adopt an innovative strategy and

use more sophisticated tools. The indices

depicted in the charts below have been

adjusted to eliminate the impact of in-

transit accidents (accidents occurring

between an employee’s home and his/her

regular place of employment) and accidents

resulting in less than three days of missed

work, including the day of the accident.

Our Strategy: Safety ConcernsEveryoneThe strategy we have followed in recent years

has been to involve the entire organization in

the effort to improve safety, changing from a

“top-down” to a “bottom-up” approach.

The main tools used to support this

strategy were the dissemination and

implementation of safety management

systems at all operational facilities

(currently completed at 64 out of a total of

103 sites, with the goal of achieving system

certification for all sites by 2006).

Because these systems require the

involvement of Group staff at all levels of

the organization and of contractor

employees, they are invaluable in helping

plant managers ensure the adoption of

shared uniform rules and achieve a high

level of control. Involvement in safety

programs is also encouraged, with

numerous programs promoted by individual

Divisions and staff functions.

Accident frequency index (Fi) – Edison personnel

0

20

10

30

2000 2001 2002 20031989 1990 1999199819971995 19961993 199419921991

27.6

20.0

11.5

9.4 9.08.2

5.5

1.93.0

5.06.2

3.04.0

8.1

10.5

Serious accident index (SAi) – Edison personnel

0

0.6

0.3

0.9

2000 2001 2002 20031989 1990 1999199819971995 19961993 199419921991

0.78

0.45

0.23

0.34 0.34

0.16 0.17

0.04

0.140.210.18

0.07

0.150.18

0.28

Occupational Health and Safety

Edison has always been strongly committed to operating with the utmost respect for the health andsafety of its staff, the employees of its contractors and of the populations living in the vicinity of itsproduction facilities.

Number of Number of Accident fre- Serious acci-accidents days lost quency index dent index

Edison employees 9 181 1.9 0.04

Comparison with 2002 -36% -73% -37% -71%

Contractor employees 26 884 8.4 0.28

Comparison with 2002 -26% -39% -32% -45%

All production facilitieshave adopted andapply SafetyManagement Systems.


The “Zero Risk Contest,” a program that has

been running for several years, has been

particularly successful with Group

employees and their families, who can

submit a drawing, a photograph, a phrase or

an idea on safety or environmental issues.

The best 12 submissions are used to

illustrate the Company calendar, which is

distributed inside and outside the Group.

A New Prevention Tool: Analysis of Potential AccidentsAccident analysis is no longer an adequate

tool because the number of accidents has

been declining steadily (just 9 accidents in

2003 for all Company employees) and

because the data portray only events that

have already caused injury.

Maintaining a positive accident reduction

trend will require the use of preventive

measures and the identification of all

potentially dangerous situations.

With this in mind, the Group has adopted a

method of analysis that takes into account

not just accidents that have occurred but

also potential accidents, which have not

caused property damage or personal injury

but have the potential to do so.

Since it has been statically proven that

potential accidents are much more

numerous than actual accidents, its is

reasonable to assume that an analysis of

potential accidents can be used effectively

to identify all potentially dangerous

situations and eliminate the causes of

future accidents and property damage.

In 2003, only employees of the

Environmental and Safety Departments of

the various Divisions were trained by highly

qualified outside consultants in the method

of analysis chosen by Edison. In 2004, this

training will be extended to managers and

key personnel at the operational units, and

the method will be used in real-life

situations.

A Key Factor: ManagingContractor EmployeesAnother objective that the Group is

pursuing is to narrow the gap between the

accident statistics for Group staff and for

the employees of contractors working at

Group facilities, which, it should be noted,

are already at levels of excellence for the

industry.

Numerous programs carried out during the

past two years (for example, occupational

safety briefings and development of

information technology tools especially

designed to manage basic information and

review the supplier qualification process)

have helped improve the indicators and

should produce further improvements in the

immediate future.

Accident frequency index (Fi) – Contractors

0

30

15

45

27.6

22.4

12.6

23.3

8.412.413.2

18.4

30.6

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Serious accident index (SAi) – Contractors

0

4

2

6

0.330.40 0.41

4.44

3.00

0.610.50

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

0.510.28

Accident prevention is a priority forbusinesses.


Workplace Hygiene and HealthA healthy and safe workplace can be

created only by taking a comprehensive

approach to safety issues.

In addition to the programs described

earlier in this Report, the Group is

constantly providing ongoing training to all

of its employees; replacing existing

materials, products and substances with

alternatives that are less dangerous to

people and the environment; and

monitoring on an ongoing basis chemical,

physical and biological risks to which its

employees or outsiders may be exposed.

With regard to the noise produced by its

facilities, which constitutes the greatest

physical risk to which employees of the

Edison Group are exposed, the staff,

working with plant managers and under the

supervision of the designated plant

physician, defined the paths that should be

followed within the facilities to minimize

noise risks. In 2003, the Group carried out

30 monitoring projects to measure

employee exposure. The danger level of 90

dB(A) indicated in the applicable law No.

277/91 was never exceeded.

The exposure to electromagnetic fields

induced by the use of electrical equipment

was monitored through 8 projects, which

indicated that employee exposure was

significantly lower than the level of

electromagnetic field exposure allowed by

the Prime Minister Decree of July 8, 2003.

Other important monitoring programs

carried out in 2003 included testing to

determine if any asbestos fibers were

present in the air or cement base (6

monitoring projects with a favorable

outcome) and measure employee exposure

to lead (23 monitoring projects with a

favorable outcome).

Ongoing employee training plays a key role in

the continuous improvement in environmental,

safety and quality issue management.

In 2003, about 1,800 employees (1,900 in

2002) were provided with a total of more

than 26,000 hours of training, compared

with 19,400 hours in 2002.

The number of hours provided per

employee increased to 14.8, a substantial

increase (+38%) over 2002.

The main areas covered by these training

programs included:

• fire prevention and first aid (6,000 hours)

• electrical risk (3,700 hours)

• environmental and safety management

systems (2,300 hours)

• chemical risk (700 hours)

• noise risk (600 hours).

Environmental monitoring No. of sitesprojects in 2003 monitored

Noise(employee exposure) 30

Noise(external emissions) 18

Electromagnetic fields 8

Asbestos 6

Lead 23

Other chemical agents 4

Training

Hours of training 2002 2003

Environment 1,962 1,969

Safety 17,457 24,786

Total 19,419 26,755

Hours of training 2002 2003 ∆per employee

10.2 14.8 +38%

Employee training isthe most importantfactor in makingcontinuous progress inoccupational safety.

A N A L Y S I S O F E N V I R O N M E N T A L P E R F O R M A N C E

Anemone nemorosa

Structure and Data of the Analysis of Environmental Performance

Ana lys is o f Env i ronment a l Per fo rmance27

ProcessSection 4

PerformanceIndicators

Section 1 Production

and Product

Section 2 Resources

Section 3 Effects on theEnvironment

Edison has developed a procedure that it

has been using for some years to prepare

its Environmental and Safety Report. This

procedure, which is followed by all Group

companies, defines which data should be

collected, how and when they should be

collected and the checks that must be

made in the field and at operating locations

in order to compile a complete,

understandable and reliable document.

The Analysis of Environmental

Performance, which is a compilation of the

physical data of the Group’s industrial units,

is divided into four sections (1. Production

and Product, 2. Resources, 3. Effects on

the Environment, 4. Indicators) in order to

make the data more readily understandable.

The most significant parameters included in

each Section are reviewed below.

Section 1 – Production and Product

• Production of electric power through

thermoelectric, hydroelectric and wind-

powered facilities

• Production of natural gas, crude oil and

related hydrocarbon products

• Production of demineralized water and

steam

• Distribution of natural gas, water, electric

power and thermal energy.

Section 2 – Resources

• Nonrenewable sources for thermoelectric

generation, including natural gas, steel-

mill gases and fuel oil.

• Nonrenewable sources for other

applications, including diesel fuel, natural gas,

electric power bought from outsiders, etc.

• Renewable sources (e.g., turbine

powering water for hydroelectric

generation).

• Water resources.

• Consumables

Section 3 – Effects on the Environment

• Emissions into the atmosphere: SOX, NOX,

particulate matter, CO, CO2. and natural

gas leaks

• Effluents

• Waste

Section 4 – Indicators

• Specific environmental performance

indicators for each type of activity


Section 1 - Production and Product 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Electric power

Gross electric power production GWh 21,295 21,990 23,037 35,376 36,039

Thermoelectric with natural gas (CCGT) GWh 10,024 10,102 10,109 21,470 22,776

Thermoelectric with mixed fuels GWh 7,768 8,124 9,006 9,341 9,277

Hydroelectric GWh 3,467 3,728 3,736 4,227 3,657

Wind power GWh 35 37 185 337 329

Electric power consumed internally GWh 561 567 611 885 887

Electric power sold GWh 20,953 26,480 28,420 43,626 45,081

Steam

Steam sold to noncaptive customers 103 t 4,027 4,282 4,881 8,943 8,889

Electric power equivalentfrom steam sales (1) GWh equiv. 702 750 927 1,715 1,532

Total production of electric power equivalent (2) GWh equiv. 21,996 22,740 23,964 37,091 37,570

Demineralized water

Demineralized water produced 103 m3 5,992 6,326 6,434 8,882 8,925

Demineralized water sold 103 m3 970 1,021 1,182 1,235 986

(1) Electric power equivalent from steam sold = electric power that could have been produced if the steam had beenused to power a turbine instead of selling it to noncaptive customers. It is computed using a special coefficient foreach power plant, ranging between 0.10 and 0.22 MWh per ton of steam.

(2) Total electric power equivalent = sum of gross electric power produced plus the electric power equivalent fromsteam sold to noncaptive customers.Emission indicators are computed taking into account this factor as well.


0

14,000

28,000

42,000

Gross electric power production (GWh)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Gas-fired thermoelectric power plantsMixed-fuel thermoelectric power plants

Hydroelectric power plants and wind farms

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

Steam sold to noncaptive customers (103 t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999



Section 2 - Resources 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Thermoelectric fuels (3)

Natural gas 106 Sm3 3,058 3,371 3,555 6,333 6,566

Coke-oven gas 106 Nm3 861 547 480 445 518

Blast-furnace gas 106 Nm3 5,789 6,080 6,717 7,045 7,334

Steel-making gas 106 Nm3 481 231 366 320 328

Fuel oil 103 t 458 311 241 151 134

Total fuels(4) 103 TOE 3,935 3,892 4,029 6,225 6,458

TOE from natural gas 103 TOE 2,508 2,764 2,915 5,193 5,384

TOE from steel-mil gas 103 TOE 978 824 878 884 943

TOE from fuel oil 103 TOE 449 304 236 148 131

Water resources

Total water resources 103 m3 1,754,153 1,662,786 1,695,048 1,878,488 1,879,310

Only for hydroelectric power plants

Turbine powering water 103 m3 11,616,004 13,678,437 13,935,116 12,114,767 10,624,573

Minimum vital water flow releases 103 m3 724,600 724,600 847,000 751,775 679,600

Consumables

Chemicals t 11,053 10,932 11,340 19,192 19,871

(3) Lowest caloric output of fuels: natural gas = 8,200 kcal/Sm3; coke-oven gas = 4,250 kcal/Nm3; blast-furnace gas= 900 kcal/Nm3; steel-making gas = 1,900 kcal/Nm3; fuel oil = 9,800 kcal/kg.

(4) TOE = ton oil equivalent, an energy unit of measure equal to 107 kcal.

0

2,500

5,000

7,500

Fuel consumption (103 TOE)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Fuel oil Steel-mill gas Natural gas

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

Total water resources (106 m3)

2000 2001 2002 20031999


Section 3 - Effects on the Environment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Emissions into the atmosphere from thermoelectric power plants

SO2 t 13,935 7,384 6,892 5,734 5,835

NOX t 12,778 11,117 9,859 13,447 14,169

Particulate matter t 761 580 554 401 369

CO t 1,552 1,615 1,484 2,383 2,418

CO2 t 14,152,741 14,304,540 15,189,772 20,588,68621,136,136

emissions attributable to the use of steel-mill gases (5) t 6,788,891 6,771,619 7,508,892 7,744,982 7,902,554

Emissions avoided by using renewable energy sources (6)

CO2 t 2,451,540 2,635,396 2,744,578 3,194,796 2,789,990

Effluents

Total effluents 103 m3 1,744,091 1,649,884 1,661,887 1,858,086 1,860,354

Industrial effluents 103 m3 8,628 9,671 7,778 11,388 15,319

Cooling water 103 m3 1,735,463 1,640,213 1,654,110 1,846,698 1,845,035

Waste from regular operations

Total waste t 3,796 7,266 9,293 7,707 8,519

Non-hazardous waste t 3,310 5,394 7,775 6,892 7,350

Hazardous waste t 485 1,872 1,517 816 1,169

- recycled t 1,330 2,889 6,084 5,368 5,175

- sent to landfills t 1,905 2,586 1,577 1,150 2,093

- treated t 561 1,790 1,632 765 1,243

Waste from one-time projects (7)

Total waste (7) t 4,148 12,651 30,942

Non-hazardous waste t 4,001 11,827 29,630

Hazardous waste t 147 824 1,312

- recycled t 2,972 7,365 24,758

(5) CO2 from the use of steel-mill gases. Steel-mill gases are a byproduct of steel manufacturing. They have very highconcentrations of CO2 and CO (concentrations by volume ranging between 20 and 30% for CO2 and between20 and 50% for CO, with peaks of 70% in steel-making gas).

(6) Emissions of CO2 avoided using renewable energy sources: Avoided emissions are computed using a coefficientof 0.7 kg of CO2 per kWh produced using renewable energy sources (hydroelectric and wind power), which is rec-ommended in the White Paper on the Production of Energy from Renewable Sources published by the CIPE in1999.

(7) Waste from one-time projects: Waste generated by the construction, decomissioning, expansion or renovation offacilities. In 2003, most of this waste was generated by the demolition of decommissioned power plants and en-vironmental remediation projects.


0

7,000

14,000

21,000

and particulate matter (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

SOxNOxParticulate matter

Emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides

0

8,000

16,000

24,000

CO2 produced by thermoelectric power plants (103 t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Emissions attributable to steel-mill gasTotal CO2 produced

0

4,000

8,000

12,000


2000 2001 2002 20031999

Nonhazardous wasteHazardous waste


RecycledTo landfillsTreated

15%

25%

60%



Section 4 - Indicators 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Consumables

Consumption of chemicals kg/GWh 519 497 492 543 551

Water resources

Utilization of water resources l/kWh 82 76 74 53 52


SO2 g/kWh 0.654 0.336 0.299 0.162 0.162

g/kWh equiv. 0.634 0.325 0.288 0.155 0.155

NOX g/kWh 0.600 0.506 0.428 0.380 0.393

g/kWh equiv. 0.581 0.489 0.411 0.363 0.377

Particulate matter g/kWh 0.036 0.026 0.024 0.011 0.010

g/kWh equiv. 0.035 0.025 0.023 0.011 0.010

CO g/kWh 0.073 0.073 0.064 0.067 0.067

g/kWh equiv. 0.071 0.071 0.062 0.064 0.064

CO2 (including steel-mill gases) g/kWh 665 651 659 582 586

g/kWh equiv. 643 629 634 555 563

CO2 (excluding steel-mill gases) g/kWh 346 343 333 363 367

g/kWh equiv. 335 331 321 346 352

Effluents

Effluents l/kWh 82 75 72 53 52


Waste generated kg/GWh 178 330 403 218 236

Utilization of water resources (l/kWh)

0

40

80

120

2000 2001 2002 20031999

nitrogen oxides (g/kWh equiv.)

0

0.3

0.6

0.9

2000 2001 2002 20031999

SO2 NOx

Emissions of sulfur oxides and

particulate matter (g/kWh equiv.)

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Emissions into the atmosphere:

Emissions into the atmosphere (g/kWh equiv.)

0

250

500

750

2000 2001 2002 20031999

CO2 including emissions attributable to steel-mill gasesCO2 excluding emissions attributable to steel-mill gases



Hydrocarbon production

Total production (1) 106 m3 gas equiv. 1,974 1,738 1,944 1,918 1,964

Direct production (2) 106 m3 gas equiv. 1,042 917 639 791 756

natural gas (2) 106 m3 299 249 201 189 160

crude oil (2) 103 barrels 4,678 4,205 2,758 3,790 3,753

Gas associated with the extraction of crude oil 106 m3 8.4 7.5 4.3 5.8 5.8

Gasolene extracted t 125.4 123.7 127.8 97.6 67.7

Hydrocarbon distribution

Natural gas distributed 106 m3 2,663 3,577 4,424 6,538 10,074

- portion sold outside Italy 106 m3 39 33 273 313 375

Group-owned gas pipelines in use km 3,263 3,300 3,720 4,182 4,122

Number of residential customers 58,546 93,056 113,782 116,161 112,882

Crude oil distributed 103 barrels 3,030 2,598 2,222 2,475 2,455

- portion sold outside Italy 103 barrels - - - - -

Distribution of drinking water

Drinking water distributed 103 m3 2,245 7,610 7,866 8,026 8,303

Group-owned or leased water conduits in use km n.a. 76 76 332 335


(1) Total hydrocarbon production includes the output of crude oil and natural gas fields operated by joint ventures inItaly and abroad. A m3 of gas equivalent is a unit of measure equal to 8,200 kcal, which is used to measure thecombined output of natural gas and crude oil normally expressed in m3 and barrels, respectively.

(2) Direct hydrocarbon production is the production from fields of which Edison is the operator.The data listed in the Resources, Effects on the Environment and Indicators refer to the direct hydrocarbon pro-duction.

Hydrocarbons Sector

0

700

1,400

2,100

Hydrocarbon production (106 m3 gas equiv.)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Total hydrocarbon productionDirect production

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

Natural gas sales (106 m3)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

1,500

3,000

4,500

Crude oil sales (106 barrels)

2000 2001 2002 20031999



Fuels and electric power

Fuel oil t 8,544 8,748 9,208 9,114 9,398

Diesel fuel t 4,973 4,707 5,359 4,019 4,495

Electric power purchased MWh 14,670 19,676 20,780 17,029 18,359

Natural gas purchased or consumed internally 106 m3 9.6 9.6 7.5 8.0 7.6

Total fuels and electric power 103 TOE 23 23 22 21 22

Water resources

Total water resources 103 m3 17,727 17,727 17,105 16,984 15,218

Consumables

Chemicals t 106 93 54 79 78



SOX t 568 582 706 700 625

NOX t 100 101 99 96 96


CO t 19 20 17 17 16

CO2 t 63,364 64,113 68,343 66,970 59,474

Natural gas leaks

High-pressure transmission 106 m3 0.380 0.130 0.092 0.293 0.089

Medium-/Low-pressure transmission 106 m3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.759 1.686

Effluents

Total effluents 103 m3 17,941 17,846 17,113 17,005 15,236

Waste from regular operations (3)

Total waste t 3,954 2,117 3,888 7,143 7,467


Hazardous waste t 1,147 81 78 169 117

- recycled t 566 616 726 3,742 4,471

- sent to landfills t 1,575 277 357 130 154

- treated t 1,812 1,224 2,805 3,271 2,841


Total waste t n.d n.d n.d n.d 2,627

(3) The increase in waste generation that occurred during the last two years is attributable to the operations that dis-tribute natural gas. In 2002, these operations started using a new computation method that attributes to Edisonthe waste handled by outside contractors.

Hydrocarbons Sector

0

250

500

750

Emissions into the atmosphere (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999


0

0.7

1.4

2.1

Natural gas leaks from high-pressure and medium/low-pressure transmission networks (106 m3)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

n.a.n.a.n.a.

0

3,000

6,000

9,000


2000 2001 2002 20031999


D E T A I L E D A N A L Y S I S

Lilium bulbiferum

Det a i led Ana lys is35

The performance of the Group’s two

operating Sectors is analyzed on the

following pages, which also show in detail

the operating parameters for each industrial

activity:

• Combined-cycle thermoelectric with

natural gas (CCGT)

• Thermoelectric with mixed fuels

• Hydroelectric

• Wind power

• Hydrocarbon production, transportation

and storage

• Distribution of gas and water to

residential customers

Detailed Analysis by Industrial Activity

Fired with mixedfuels (steel-mil

gas, natural gasand oil)

Electric PowerSector

Industrial Activities

Hydroelectric

Wind Power

HydrocarbonsSector

Industrial Activities

Hydrocarbonproduction andtransportation

Combined-cyclefueled withnatural gas

(CCGT)

Thermoelectric

Distributionof gas and water

to residentialcustomers


Electric Power SectorCombined-cycle Thermoelectric Power Plants Fired with Natural Gas (CCGT)


Electric Power


Thermoelectric Division 1

Marghera Levante (VE) power plant GWh 3,469 3,776 2,938 4,626 4,818

Marghera Azotati (VE) power plant GWh 1,999 1,552 1,746 1,744 1,992

Bussi (PE) power plant GWh 977 944 974 891 1,003

San Quirico (PR) power plant GWh 1,007 959 938 1,010 1,030

Porto Viro (RO) power plant GWh 847 962 955 1,017 1,016

Castelmassa (RO) power plant GWh 400 387 402 391 408

Spinetta (AL) power plant GWh 200 206 198 199 197

Sarmato (PC) power plant GWh 1,126 1,197 1,098 1,171 1,263

Terni power plant GWh 118 593 575 725

Jesi (AN) power plant GWh 268 1,080 1,180

Verzuolo (CN) power plant GWh 364 880

Thermoelectric Division 2 (1)

Sesto San Giovanni (MI) power plant GWh 395 398

Settimo Torinese (TO) power plant GWh 348 351

Porcari (LU) power plant GWh 682 716

Nera Montoro (TR) power plant GWh 389 351

Boffalora (MI) power plant GWh 583 364

Cologno Monzese (MI) power plant GWh 322 308

Milazzo (ME) power plant GWh 1,141 1,146

Celano (AQ) power plant GWh 828 906

Acerra (NA) power plant GWh 701 758

Serene Spa (1)

Cassino (FR) power plant GWh 765 734

Melfi (PZ) power plant GWh 772 770

Rivalta (TO) power plant GWh 353 365

Sulmona (AQ) power plant GWh 373 353

Termoli (CB) power plant GWh 748 744


Steam

Steam sold to noncaptive customers 103 t 3,721 4,015 3,876 7,401 7,484

Electr. power equiv. from steam sales (2)GWh equiv. 636 694 684 1,344 1,307

Total production of electr. power equiv.(3)GWh equiv. 10,661 10,795 10,794 22,815 24,083

Demineralized water

Demineralized water produced 103 m3 5,992 6,326 6,434 8,882 8,925

Demineralized water sold 103 m3 970 1,021 1,182 1,235 986

(1) The operating data for the power plants of the Thermoelectric Division 2 and of Serene Spa are consolidated since2002, following their acquisition in 2001.

(2) Electric power equivalent from steam sold = electric power that could have been produced if the steam had beenused to power a turbine instead of selling it to noncaptive customers. It is computed using a special coefficient foreach power plant, ranging between 0.10 and 0.22 MWh per ton of steam.

(3) Total electric power equivalent = sum of gross electric power produced plus the electric power equivalent fromsteam sold to noncaptive customers. Emission indicators are computed taking into account this factor as well.

0

8,000

16,000

24,000


2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

3,000

6,000

9,000

Steam sold (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999




Fuels

Total fuels 103 TOE 2,072 2,082 2,057 4,140 4,374

Natural gas 106 Sm3 2,527 2,539 2,509 5,049 5,334

Water resources


Consumables

Chemicals t 9,890 10,094 10,596 18,236 17,972

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

Total fuels (103 TOE)

2000 2001 2002 20031999




NOX t 5,738 5,642 4,945 9,416 9,816

Thermoelectric Division 1

Marghera Levante (VE) power plant t 2,428 2,561 1,664 1,559 1,650

Marghera Azotati (VE) power plant t 1,052 862 919 948 1,125

Bussi (PE) power plant t 517 497 494 463 525

San Quirico (PR) power plant t 543 493 479 545 551

Porto Viro (RO) power plant t 438 500 497 540 533

Castelmassa (RO) power plant t 293 288 245 257 294

Spinetta (AL) power plant t 163 142 133 145 160

Sarmato (PC) power plant t 304 301 305 309 321

Terni power plant t 159 147 171

Jesi (VE) power plant t 51 182 171

Verzuolo (CN) power plant t 50 143

Thermoelectric Division 2 (4)

Sesto San Giovanni (MI) power plant t 87 81

Settimo Torinese (TO) power plant t 214 220

Porcari (LU) power plant t 138 155

Nera Montoro (TR) power plant t 236 188

Boffalora (MI) power plant t 127 102

Cologno Monzese (MI) power plant t 106 106

Milazzo (ME) power plant t 169 140

Celano (AQ) power plant t 312 300

Acerra (NA) power plant t 677 690

Serene Spa (4)

Cassino (FR) power plant t 686 652

Melfi (PZ) power plant t 597 644

Rivalta (TO) power plant t 289 310

Sulmona (AQ) power plant t 284 231

Termoli (CB) power plant t 350 353

CO t 377 367 412 1,143 1,203

CO2 t 4,784,516 4,815,015 4,745,818 9,750,261 10,268,487

Emissions avoided through cogeneration (4)

CO2 t 644,774 695,037 690,123 1,262,644 1,264,030

(4) Emissions avoided through cogeneration: CO2 emissions that would have been generated by gas-fired conven-tional boilers to produce steam sold to noncaptive customers. The computation was made assuming a boiler effi-ciency rating of 0.9 and a natural gas emissions coefficient of 2.35 t per natural gas TOE.


0

4,000

8,000

12,000

Emissions of nitrogen oxides (t of NOx)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

Emissions of carbon dioxide (103 t of CO2)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Emissions from thermoelectric power plantsEmissions avoided through cogeneration




Effluents


Waste from regular operations (5)

Total waste t 1,253 3,401 5,906 6,098 6,537

Non-hazardous waste t 880 1,866 4,639 5,549 5,620

Hazardous waste t 373 1,535 1,267 549 916

- recycled t 328 989 4,190 4,629 4,550

- sent to landfills t 463 701 220 762 766

- treated t 461 1,712 1,496 707 1,219


Total waste t 2,285 5,080 29,140

Non-hazardous waste t 2,138 4,393 27,967

Hazardous waste t 147 687 1,174

- recycled t 2,196 1,486 23,406

(5) Since 2001, the Group has accounted separately for waste from one-time projects, such as waste generated bythe construction, decomissioning, expansion or renovation of facilities. In 2003, most of this waste was generatedby the demolition of the old cooling towers of the Marghera Azotati (VE) power plant and the remediation of theformer Falck site in Sesto S. Giovanni (MI).

0

3,000

6,000

9,000


2000 2001 2002 20031999


Disposal of waste from regular operations in 2003

RecycledTreatedTo landfills

12%

19%

69%



Consumables

Consumption of chemicals kg/GWh 987 999 1,048 849 789

Water resources

Water resources l/kWh 52 51 46 29 28


NOX g/kWh 0.572 0.559 0.489 0.439 0.431

g/kWh equiv. 0.538 0.523 0.458 0.413 0.408

CO g/kWh 0.038 0.036 0.041 0.053 0.053

g/kWh equiv. 0.035 0.034 0.038 0.050 0.050

CO2 g/kWh 477 477 469 454 451

g/kWh equiv. 449 446 440 427 426

Effluents

Effluents l/kWh 51 50 45 28 28




Emissions of nitrogen oxides (g/kWh equiv.)

0

0.25

0.50

0.75

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Emissions of carbon dioxide (g/kWh equiv.)

0

200

400

600

2000 2001 2002 20031999


Electric Power SectorThermoelectric Production with Mixed Fuels (steel-mill gases, supplemented with natural gas and fuel oil)


Electric power


- Taranto power plants GWh 7,242 7,502 7,297 7,531 7,535

- Piombino (LI) power plants GWh 526 622 1,709 1,810 1,742


Steam

Steam sold to noncaptive custom. 103 t 306 268 822 1,542 1,405

Electric power equivalentfrom steam sales GWh equiv. 65 56 243 371 225

Total production of electric power equivalent GWh equiv. 7,833 8,180 9,249 9,712 9,502


Fuels (1)

Natural gas 106 Sm3 532 832 1,046 1,284 1,233

Coke-oven gas 106 Nm3 861 547 480 445 518

Blast-furnace gas 106 Nm3 5,789 6,080 6,717 7,045 7,334

Steel-making gas 106 Nm3 481 231 366 320 328

Fuel oil 103 t 458 311 241 151 134

Total fuels 103 TOE 1,863 1,810 1,972 2,085 2,085

TOE from natural gas 103 TOE 436 682 858 1,053 1,011

TOE from steel-mill gases 103 TOE 978 824 878 884 943

TOE from fuel oil 103 TOE 449 304 236 148 131

Water resources

Total water resources 103 m3 1,224,970 1,136,815 1,218,815 1,236,921 1,204,618

Consumables

Chemicals t 1,163 838 744 956 1,899

(1) Lowest caloric output of fuels: natural gas = 8,200 kcal/Sm3; coke-oven gas = 4,250 kcal/Nm3; blast-furnace gas= 900 kcal/Nm3; steel-making gas = 1,900 kcal/Nm3; fuel oil = 9,800 kcal/kg.

0

4,000

8,000

12,000


2000 2001 2002 20031999

Piombino power plants Taranto power plants

0

700

1,400

2,100

Total steam sold (103 t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

800

1,600

2,400

Total fuel consumption (103 TOE)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

TOE from fuel oil

TOE from steel-mill gasesTOE from natural gas




SO2 t 13,935 7,384 6,892 5,734 5,835

NOX t 7,040 5,475 4,914 4,031 4,354

Taranto power plants t 6,513 4,783 3,987 3,279 3,580

Piombino (LI) power plants t 527 692 927 752 774


CO t 1,175 1,248 1,072 1,240 1,214

CO2 (including steel-mill gases) t 9,368,225 9,489,525 10,443,954 10,838,425 10,867,649

CO2 (excluding steel-mill gases) t 2,579,334 2,717,906 2,935,062 3,093,443 2,965,095

Emissions avoided through cogeneration (2)

CO2 t 95,019 77,349 153,501 295,351 270,242

Effluents

Total effluents 103 m3 1,224,347 1,135,035 1,195,779 1,234,053 1,201,377


Total waste t 1,186 2,526 962 893 932

Non-hazardous waste t 1,143 2,387 838 821 840

Hazardous waste t 43 139 123 73 92

- recycled t 554 1,159 805 508 261

- sent to landfills t 616 1,289 105 335 665

- treated t 16 79 52 50 5


Total waste t 1,087 1,656 389

Non-hazardous waste t 1,087 1,598 317

Hazardous waste t - 58 72

- recycled t 776 506 94

(2) Emissions avoided through cogeneration: CO2 emissions that would have been generated by gas-fired conven-tional boilers to produce steam sold to noncaptive customers. The computation was made assuming a boiler effi-ciency rating of 0.9 and a natural gas emissions coefficient of 2.35 t per natural gas TOE.

(3) Since 2001, the Group has accounted separately for waste from one-time projects, such as waste generated bythe construction, decomissioning, expansion or renovation of facilities.


0

5,000

10,000

15,000

and particulate matter (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Sulfur oxides SOx

Nitrogen oxides NOx

Particulate matter

Emissions of sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

Emissions of carbon dioxide (103 t of CO2)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

CO2 from natural gas and fuel oil

CO2 from steel-mill gases

0

1,300

2,600

3,900


2000 2001 2002 20031999

Hazardous waste

Nonhazardous waste




Consumables

Consumption of chemicals kg/GWh 150 103 83 102 205

Water resources

Water resources l/kWh 158 140 135 132 130


SOX g/kWh 1.794 0.909 0.765 0.614 0.629

g/kWh equiv. 1.779 0.903 0.745 0.590 0.614

NOX g/kWh 0.906 0.674 0.546 0.432 0.469

g/kWh equiv. 0.899 0.669 0.531 0.415 0.458

Particulate matter g/kWh 0.098 0.071 0.062 0.043 0.040

g/kWh equiv. 0.097 0.071 0.060 0.041 0.039

CO g/kWh 0.151 0.154 0.119 0.133 0.131

g/kWh equiv. 0.150 0.153 0.116 0.128 0.128

CO2 including steel-mill gases g/kWh 1,206 1,168 1,160 1,160 1,171

g/kWh equiv. 1,196 1,160 1,129 1,116 1,144

CO2 excluding steel-mill gases g/kWh 332 335 326 331 320

g/kWh equiv. 329 332 317 319 312

Effluents

Effluents l/kWh 158 140 133 132 129



Emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxidesand particulate matter (g/kWh equiv.)

0

0.6

1.2

1.8

2000 2001 2002 20031999

SOx NOx Particulate matter

Emissions of carbon dioxide (g/kWh equiv.)

0

500

1,000

1,500

2000 2001 2002 20031999

CO2 including steel-mill gasesCO2 excluding steel-mill gases


Section 1 - Production 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Electric power


Eastern Region GWh 3,071 3,281 3,299 2,778 2,358

Western region GWh 353 402 392 1,161 1,040

Caffaro Energia (1) GWh n.a. n.a. n.a. 242 213

Pentima power plant (2) GWh 44 46 45 46 45



Water resources

Turbine powering water 103 m3 11,616,004 13,678,437 13,935,116 12,114,767 10,624,573

Other water resources 103 m3 n.a. n.a. 14,784 18,939 25,920

Minimum vital water flow releases 103 m3 724,600 724,600 847,000 856,775 679,600

(1) Caffaro Energia, a hydroelectric generator with installed capacity of about 100 MW, became a wholly ownedsubsidiary of Edison in 2002.

(2) The Pentima power plant is owned by ISE. This power plant, which has no staff, is controlled online from ISE’sPiombino (LI) power plant.

Electric Power SectorHydroelectric Production

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

Electric power production (GWh)

2000 2001 2002 20031999


Electric Power SectorHydroelectric Production


Avoided emissions (3)

CO2 103 t 2,427 2,609 2,615 2,959 2,560

Effluents

Total effluents 103 m3 n.a. n.a. 14,694 18,976 27,264


Total waste t 1,358 1,339 1,336 705 1,031

Non-hazardous waste t 1,288 1,142 1,210 511 889

portion consisting of grate waste t 794 602 353 313 89

Hazardous waste t 70 197 126 194 142

- recycled t 475 742 892 228 363

- sent to landfills t 799 597 366 425 663

- treated t 84 - 79 52 -


Total waste t 5,305 1,334

Non-hazardous waste t 5,226 1,267

Hazardous waste t 78 67

- recycled t 5,196 1,258


Water resources

Turbine powering water m3/kWh 3.35 3.67 3.73 2.87 2.91


Waste generated kg/kwh 0.392 0.359 0.358 0.167 0.282



0

100,000

200,000

300,000

Avoided CO2 emissions (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

500

1,000

2,000


2000 2001 2002 20031999


Turbine powering water (m3) per kWh produced

0

2

4

6

2000 2001 2002 20031999


Section 1 - Production 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Electric power

Gross electric power production GWh 35 37 185 337 329

Northern District GWh 3 3 6 5 8

Central District GWh - - 35 144 144

Southern District GWh 32 34 143 188 178


Consumables

Chemicals t n.a. n.a. 0.33 0.02 0.01


Avoided emissions (1)

CO2 t 24,479 25,900 129,332 235,906 230,300


Total waste t - - 1.7 11.3 19.6

Non-hazardous t - - 0.2 11.2 0.8

Hazardous t - - 1.5 0.1 18.9

- recycled t - - - 3.3 0.8


Total waste t 176.9 -



Electric Power SectorWind Farms

0

150

300

450

Electric power production (GWh)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

Avoided CO2 emissions (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999


Hydrocarbons SectorProduction, Transportation and Storage of Natural Gas and Crude Oil


Hydrocarbon production

Direct production (1) 106 m3 of gas equiv. 1,042 917 639 791 756

Natural gas 106 m3 299 249 201 189 160

Crude oil 103 barrels 4,678 4,205 2,758 3,790 3,753

Hydrocarbons distributed in Italy

Natural gas 106 m3 2,450 3,421 4,144 6,231 9,694

Crude oil 103 barrels 3,030 2,598 2,222 2,475 2,455

Gas pipelines in use km 1,200 1,171 1,156 1,300 1,300

Gas associated with the extractionof crude oil 106 m3 8.4 7.5 4.3 5.8 5.8

Gasolene extracted t 125 124 128 98 68

Number of producing gas wells 56 53 52

Number of storage gas wells 20 22 21

Number of producing oil wells 46 49 47


Fuels and electric power

Fuel oil t 8,544 8,748 9,208 9,114 9,398

Diesel fuel t 4,612 4,598 4,480 4,019 4,495

Electric power purchased MWh 14,670 18,438 19,680 16,335 18,359

Natural gas purchased or consumed internally 106 m3 9.1 9.1 6.5 7.5 7.6

Total fuels andelectric power 103 TOE 22 22 21 21 22

Water resources


Consumables

Total chemicals t 106.3 89.6 50.6 75.7 74.4

Glycol t 12.0 15.2 29.9 15.2 14.7

Process chemicals t 94.3 74.4 20.7 60.5 59.7

(1) Direct hydrocarbon production is equal to the production from fields for which Edison is the operator.The data shown for Resources, Effects on the Environment and Indicators refer to direct hydrocarbon production, as defined above.

0

400

800

1,200

Total hydrocarbon production (106 m3 gas equiv.)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

150

300

450

Natural gas produced (106 m3)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

Crude oil produced (103 barrels)

2000 2001 2002 20031999




SOX t 568 582 706 700 625

NOX t 100 101 99 97 96


CO t 19 20 17 18 16

CO2 t 63,364 64,113 68,343 68,092 59,474

Natural gas leaks 106 m3 0.380 0.130 0.092 0.293 0.089

Effluents


Discharged effluent 103 m3 222 128 19 29 24

Reinjected effluent 103 m3 6 6 3 19 17

Cooling water 103 m3 17,713 17,713 17,092 16,957 15,195


Total waste t 3,459 1,581 3,234 3,615 3,092


Hazardous waste t 1,147 81 78 169 117

- recycled t 71 80 72 213 96

- sent to landfills t 1,575 277 357 130 154

- treated t 1,812 1,224 2,805 3,271 2,841

Waste from one-time projects

Total waste t 2,627



CO2 g/m3 of gas equiv. produced 60.79 69.92 106.95 86.04 78.68

Effluents

Total effluentsm3/m3 of gas equiv. produced 0.017 0.019 0.027 0.021 0.020


Waste generatedg/m3 of gas equiv produced 3.32 1.72 5.06 4.57 4.09

Hydrocarbons SectorProduction, Transportation and Storage of Natural Gas and Crude Oil

0

250

500

750

Emissions into the atmosphere (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999


0

7,000

14,000

21,000

Total effluent disposal (103 m3)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

1,500

3,000

4,500


2000 2001 2002 20031999



Hydrocarbons SectorDistribution of Natural Gas and Drinking Water to Residential Customers

Section 1 - Distribution and Product 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Natural gas

Natural gas distributed 106 m3 164 203 264 254 266

Gas pipelines in use km 2,063 2,129 2,564 2,882 2,822


Average wait for new hookups days 17.4 18.3 15.8 18.0 6.0

Drinking water

Drinking water distributed 103 m3 2,245 7,610 7,866 8,026 8,303

Water conduits in use km - 76 76 332 335



Consumables

Odorizer t n.a. 3.00 3.50 3.21 3.67

0

100

200

300

Natural gas distributed via pipeline (106 m3)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

Drinking water distributed (106 m3)

2000 2001 2002 20031999




Computed natural gas leaks (1) 106 m3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.759 1.686

CO2 equiv. from natural gas leaks 103 t n.a. n.a. n.a. 36.50 34.99

Waste (2)

Total waste t 495 536 654 3,528 4,375

recycled t 495 536 654 3,528 4,375



Computed natural gas leaks m3/m3 gas distrib. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.007 0.006

Waste

Total waste g/m3 gas distrib. 3.0 2.6 2.5 13.9 16.5

(1) Since 2002, the Group has been using a method to compute volumes leaked based on estimates of individualleaks from the low-pressure and medium-pressure gas pipelines.

(2) The increase in waste generated is attributable to a new computation method adopted in 2002. This new methodattributes to Edison the waste handled by outside contractors.

Hydrocarbons SectorDistribution of Natural Gas and Drinking Water to Residential Customers

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

Waste generated (t)

2000 2001 2002 20031999

Natural gas leaks (leaks as a % of total natural gas distributed)

0

0.4

0.8

1.2

2000 2001 2002 20031999

n.a. n.a. n.a.

Gloss ary51

Aquifer water: Water found together with natural

gas and crude oil in hydrocarbon deposits and ex-

tracted together with the hydrocarbons.

Asbestos: A fibrous mineral of silicate origin used

as a thermal insulator (some types of fibers have

been found to be carcinogenic and are gradually be-

ing removed from production).

Barrel: Standard volumetric unit of measure used for

crude oil. It is equal to 42 U.S. gallons (159 liters)

and is abbreviated bbl.

BSI OHSAS 18001: An international standard is-

sued by the British Standards Institute that establish-

es the requirements of a safety management system

and allows an organization to draw up a safety policy

and establish objectives, taking into account legislative

aspects and information on significant risks.

CO: Carbon monoxide, a toxic gas coming from in-

complete combustion of the carbon present in fossil

fuels.

CO2: Carbon dioxide, a natural component of the at-

mosphere and a gas produced by the combustion of

fossil fuels that contributes to the greenhouse effect.

Cogeneration: Simultaneous production of electri-

cal and thermal energy (in the form of steam).

Combined cycle (CCGT, Combined Cycle Gas

Turbine): A facility for the production of electrical

power consisting of a gas turbine whose hot exhaust

fumes are used to produce steam, which in turn

drives a steam turbine.

Demineralized water: Water purified of mineral

salts and used in thermoelectric plants for the pro-

duction of steam.

Effect on the environment: A significant conse-

quence having a (positive or negative) qualitative or

quantitative impact on the environment (emission re-

leased or avoided, waste generation, etc).

Electromagnetic fields: Non-ionizing radiation

caused by the presence of electrical currents.

EMAS: European Union Regulation 761/2001 con-

cerning voluntary compliance by industrial compa-

nies with an EU system of ecomanagement and au-

diting.

Emissions trading (ET): System developed by the

European Union to allow trading in greenhouse gas

emission allowances. This system is the first in a se-

ries of tools that will be used to achieve greenhouse

gas reduction targets.

Environment: The context in which an organization

operates, including the air, water, land, natural re-

sources, plants, animals, people, and their interrela-

tions.

Environmental consequence: The output of an ac-

tivity (product or service) that may interact with the

environment.

Environmental, safety and quality management

system (EMS, SMS, QMS): The portion of the

general management system that includes the orga-

nizational structure, planning activities, responsibili-

ties, practices, procedures, processes, and resources

for developing, implementing, and maintaining a stat-

ed environmental, safety and/or quality policy.

Environmental, safety and quality policy: A state-

ment made by an organization indicating its inten-

tions and principles in connection with its overall en-

vironmental, safety, and quality performance. It pro-

vides a reference for the activity being done and for

defining goals and targets with regard to the envi-

ronment, safety, and quality.

Environmental, safety or quality audit: A system-

atic and documented verification process for deter-

mining and assessing, based on objective evidence,

whether the environmental, safety, or quality man-

agement system implemented by an organization

complies with its stated environmental, safety, or

quality policy.

Fi: The number of accidents multiplied by one million

and divided by the number of hours worked.

Fuel oil: A mixture of products from the distillation of

petroleum used as a fuel for the production of heat,

categorized as HSC (high sulfur content > 2.5%),

MSC (medium sulfur content > 1.3% and < 2.5%),

LSC (low sulfur content > 0.5% and < 1.3%), and

VLSC (very low sulfur content < 0.5%).

Glossary

Gloss ary 52

Gas associated with the extraction of crude oil:

Gas found together with oil in a hydrocarbon de-

posit. This gas can be used, flared or reinjected into

the hydrocarbon deposit.

Glycol: A product used in gas compression plants to

dewater natural gas extracted from wells.

Grate waste from river water: Debris that collects

at intake structures where the water used for hydro-

electric power generation is filtered.

Greenhouse effect: A phenomenon by which the

Earth’s temperature is raised due to the excessive

presence of certain gases (CO2. CH4. N2O, HCFS, PCFS,

SF6) that prevent radiation from escaping the Earth.

Legislative Decree: It has the full force of a normal

law since its inception because it is enacted by the ex-

ecutive branch by virtue of a specific authorization from

Parliament. Since it is issued under the authority of the

legislative branch, it need not be converted into a law.

Minimum vital water flow (MVW): The minimum

quantity of water determined by law that must be re-

leased by hydroelectric dams.

Ministry Decree: Each Minister, within the jurisdic-

tion of his/her Ministry, may issue regulatory decrees

without legislative authority, provided they do not

conflict with national laws. They serve only regulato-

ry purposes.

Natural gas: A gaseous fossil fuel consisting of

methane and small traces of other hydrocarbons.

Nm3: Normal cubic meter, a volume of gas at 0 °C

and 0.1 MPa.

NOX: Nitrogen oxides (primarily NO and NO2), gas-

es produced by the combustion of fossil fuels. They

contribute to the formation of ozone in the lower at-

mosphere and acid rain.

One million m3 of gas equivalents: One million cu-

bic meters of gas equivalents, corresponding to 830

TOE.

Particulate matter: In the case of emissions into the

atmosphere coming from a combustion process, all the

solid microscopic particles dissipated in the exhaust.

PCB: Polychlorobiphenyls, hazardous substances

used as insulating fluids in electrical equipment

(transformers and/or capacitors) that are gradually

being eliminated from production.

Power: Work performed in a unit of time or energy

produced in a unit of time, generally stated in watts

(W) or multiples thereof, such as kilowatts (kW),

equal to 1,000 watts, or megawatts (MW), equal to

1,000 kilowatts.

Prime Minister’s Decree: This measure, which

serves guidance purposes, is issued by the Prime

Minister on exceptional occasions, with the contri-

bution of his/her cabinet, or only some of the Minis-

ters, for the purpose of providing solutions to prob-

lems already covered by the existing laws.

Reinjected water: Aquifer water coming from

drilling wells which is reinjected into the wells, when

allowed.

SAi: The number of days lost due to accidents, mul-

tiplied by one thousand and divided by the number of

hours worked.

Sm3: Standard cubic meter, a volume of gas at

15.6°C and 0.1 MPa.

SOX: Sulfur oxides, gases produced by the combus-

tion of fossil fuels containing sulfur. They contribute

to the formation of acid rain.

Steel-mill gases: Gases generated in steel mills by

coke ovens and blast furnaces as byproducts of the

production of cast iron, coke coal and steel. These

gases are used as fuel in certain thermoelectric

plants for the production of electrical power.

TOE: Ton oil equivalent, a conventional unit of ener-

gy equivalent to 10 million kcal, used to quantify any

source of energy in terms of its thermal value.

UNI EN ISO 14001 Standard: An international

standard setting the requirements for an environ-

mental management system that allows an organi-

zation to draw up an environmental policy and es-

tablish objectives, taking into account legislative as-

pects and information on significant environmental

impacts.

UNI EN ISO 9001 Standard: An international stan-

dard that establishes the criteria that a system must

follow in providing services and products in order to

ensure the satisfaction of the customer’s require-

ments and expectations.

Uni ts o f Measure53

Basic and supplemental IS unitsQuantity Unit Symbol

Length Meter mMass Kilogram kgTime Second sElectrical current Ampere AAbsolute temperature Kelvin KLight intensity Candela CdMolecular substance Mole MolPlane angle Radian RadSolid angle Steradian Sr

Commonly used prefixesFactor Prefix Symbol

Multiple1012 Tera T109 Giga G106 Mega M103 Kilo k

Submultiple10-1 Deci d10-2 Centi c10-3 Milli m10-6 Micro µ

Units derived from the ISQuantity Unit Symbol

Space and timeArea Square meter m2

Volume Cubic meter m3

Velocity Meters per second m/sAngular acceleration Radians per second squared rad/s2

Frequency Hertz Hz = cps

Mechanical quantitiesDensity Kilograms per cubic meter kg/m3

Force Newton N= kg • m/s2

Energy, work, quantity of heat Joule J=N • mPower Watt W=J/sPressure, effort Pascal Pa=N/m2

Electrical and magnetic quantitiesElectrical charge Coulomb C=A • sElectrical potential, voltage Volt V=W/AElectrical field intensity Volts per meter V/mCapacitance Farad F=C/V=A • s/VCurrent density Amperes per square meter A/m2

Magnetic field intensity Amperes per meter A/mMagnetic flux Weber Wb=V • sMagnetic flux density Tesla T=Wb/m2

IS units and conversion factors for some commonly used unitsTo convert from to Multiply by

VolumeLiter l Cubic meter m3 0.001

PressureBar bar Pascal Pa 100000Atmosphere atm Pascal Pa 101325

Energy, WorkCalories cal Joule J 4.1868Watt-hour Wh Joule J 3600

PowerCalories/hour cal/h Watt W 0.0011628

Specific EnergyCalories/kilogram cal/kg Joule/kilogram J/kg 4.1868

Units of Measure

Pro fess iona l Op in ion54

Pro fess iona l Op in ion55

Public Information

Edison supplies information on the technical and

environmental performance of its industrial sites

to all interested parties and the public in general.

Edison’s 2003 Environmental and Safety Report is

available at the head office of Edison S.p.A., Foro

Buonaparte 31, 20121 Milan, and at its website

(www.edison.it).

Readers can use the website to express opinions

or request information and explanations regarding

Edison’s 2003 Environmental and Safety Report.

The 2003 Environmental and Safety Report was

prepared by the Environmental Protection, Safety

and Quality Department at Edison’s head office in

cooperation with the Institutional Communications

and Image Department.

Our thanks to everyone who contributed to this

Report.

Published by EdisonForo Buonaparte, 3120121 MilanTel. +39 02 6222.1

Art DirectionM Studio, Milan

PhotographsEdison Photo ArchivesGerardo BozzettoCamera ChiaraEye Studio

Special thanks to Gerardo Bozzetto, head of the Environmental Protection, Safety andQuality Department Edison, for the alpine floraphotographs from his collection.

Milan, May 2004

Milan

Rome

Head offices

Thermoelectric power plantsin operation

Thermoelectric power plantsin planning/under construction

R&D center

Hydroelectric power plants

Wind farms

Gas fields

Oil fields

Storage concessions

Planned LNG terminal

Electrical network

Gas pipeline network

Gas pipelinesin planning/ under construction

EDISON IN ITALY



Contents

EDISON TODAY 1







Water Management 12








Training 25





Glossary 51


20

03

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NTA

L AN

D S

AF

ET

Y R

EP

OR

T


Date post:	22-Mar-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

2003 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY REPORT

Documents