GAIA When EU Waste the Climate

7/30/2019 GAIA When EU Waste the Climate

1/13

WHEN THE EU WASTES

the CLIMATEThe EU Policy of Subsidising Energy

from Burning Waste

is Worsening the Climate

Joan-Marc SimonGlobal Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives

www.no-burn.orgJune 2010

ZeroWastefor

ZeroWarming

gaiagaia


2/13

i When the EU Wastes the Climate

WHEN THE EU WASTES THE CLIMATEThe EU Policy of Subsidising Energy from Burning Waste is Worsening the Climate

1. ABSTRACT 1

2. CLIMATE CHANGE WORSENED BY GREEN ENERGY FROM INCINERATION 1

3. SUBSIDISING INCINERATION CONTRADICTS EU LAW 2

4. WHY IS THE SYSTEM GIVING WRONG INCENTIVES? 3

5. ENERGY PRODUCED BY INCINERATORS IS NEITHER RENEWABLE NOR GREEN 3

6. INCINERATION: GREEN ENERGY? 5

7. HOW TO FIX THE SITUATION 6

8. CASE STUDIES 7

FLANDERS, BELGIUM 7

FRANCE 8

ITALY 9

SPAIN 9

9. CONCLUSIONS 11

June 2010

by Joan-Marc Simon

GlobalAllianceforIncineratorAlternaves

www.no-burn.org

[email protected]

GAIAisaworldwideallianceofmorethan600grassrootsgroups,non-governmentalorganizaons,and

individualsinover89countrieswhoseulmatevisionisajust,toxic-freeworldwithoutincineraon.

Acknowledgments:

InFrance:CNIID-CentreNaonaldInformaonIndependantesurlesDechets,www.cniid.org

InSpain:ISTAS-InstutoSindicaldeTrabajoAmbienteySalud,www.istas.ccoo.es

In Italy: Ambiente Futuro, www.ambintefuturo.org

Coverphotoby:CentreNaonalDInformaonIndpendantesurlesDchets(CNIID),France

hp://www.cniid.org/


3/13

When the EU Wastes the Climate 1

Leading sciensts and bioenergy experts

fromUSandEuropehavebeenannouncing

that an accounng mistake in Clean

Development Mechanism (CDM) will

cause the measures intended to ghtclimate change to eecvely increase GHG

emissions1. Proper accounng can enable

bioenergy to contribute to greenhouse gas

reducons; improper accounng can lead to

increases in greenhouse gas emissions both

domescally and internaonally.

The root of the problem lies in a mistaken

understanding of Intergovernmental Panel

on Climate Change (IPCC) guidance. Whenreporng their GHG emissions, energy

companiesarenotincludingtheCO2released

fromburningbiomass(plantmaer).What

this means is that technically, countries

couldcutdowntheirforests,turntheminto

deserts and use the trees to replace coal,

andtheywouldsllreceivecreditfromthe

CDMforreducingemissionsfromcoal,even

whileincreasingoverallemissions.

Basedonthismistakenunderstandingofthe

IPCCguidance,theEUhasdeneditspolicy

1. ABSTRACT

ThisworkanalysesthecontradiconsofEU(EuropeanUnion)policywhenpromongandfunding

afalserenewableenergy-thatis,theenergyfromburningwaste.

AbigpartoftheenergyproducedbyEuropeanincineratorsisconsideredtoberenewableenergy,

whichallowsthemtoreceiveconsiderableratepremiumsandsubsidies.Thishastheeectofa

falsegreensubsidytoburnwastethatcouldberecycledorcomposted.Inrealitythesesubsidies

endupcreangtheoppositeoftheintendedeect:moregreenhousegas(GHG)emissionsinthe

shortterm,lesssustainabilityandlessincenvetogreentheeconomy.

on Renewable Energy (2009/28/EC) which

includes the energy from burning biogenic

waste (paper, cardboard, food waste, some

texles,etc.)asrenewableenergy.Thishas

triggeredagoodamountofsubsidiestobe

deployedtoburningwastewhen:

subsidizing incineraon contradicts

thespiritoftheEUwastelaw,

energy from incinerators is neither

green nor renewable.

2. Climate Change

Worsened By Green

Energy From Incineration

Photo

Court

esyofCNIID


4/13

2 When the EU Wastes the Climate

Commissionacknowledges that prevenon,

reuse and recycling generate less GHG

emissions than incineraon or landll, yet

50%oftherecyclablesinEuropeareeitherburntorlandlled2.Moreover,EUlegislaon

encourages burning a waste stream that

could be anaerobically digested and then

composted,bringingthecarbonbacktothe

soil and hence helping, together with the

fullyandtrulyrenewableenergycomingfrom

anaerobicdigeson,ghtclimatechange.

The Waste Framework Direcve spells out

a waste hierarchy in which prevenon,

reuseandrecyclinghavepreferencebefore

incineraon with energy recovery and

disposal.Composngshouldthereforehave

priority over burning since biodegradablewastecanbecompostedandenergycanbe

extractedfromitviaanaerobicdigeson.

In reality, the premiums given to energy

from incineraon play a crical role in

making incineraon more aracve than

environmentally and economically sound

oponssuchasrecyclingandcomposng.

Hence,Europeanlegislaonpresentsaclearcontradicon between what it preaches

and what it really promotes; the European

3. Subsidising

Incineration Contradicts

EU Law

PhotobyCNIID

In Europe the greensubsidies or renewable

energies end up promoting

burning waste instead o

recycling. This gives wrong

incentives to the markets

and contradicts the wastehierarchy.


5/13


Because recycling and composng do not

generate electricity, they are deemed

ineligible for renewable energy premiums

inthecurrentsystemwhilstburningwaste,

which generateselectricity ineciently and

is a step lower in the waste hierarchy, sll

managestogetsuchreward.Thissystemof

premiums is awed. By favouring only the

produconofenergyiteecvelypenalises

savingenergy.

Prevenon, reuse and recycling save big

amountsofenergy,materialsandemissions

-insomecasesupto25mestheenergy

producedbyincineraon.Foreveryproduct

that is burnt a complete new process of

extracon, process, manufacture and

transporthastotakeplace.Yettheseenergy

savingsarenotaccountedforanywhereand

the market not only does not take theminto account but, with the premiums, also

penalises these most environmentally and

economicallysoundopons.

The European legislaon fails to translate

into policy the energy savings that

prevenon,reuseandrecyclingbringtothe

economy.Generangrealrenewableenergy

-notenergyfromincineraon-isimportant

but even more important is to reduce the

demand of energy and this can be done

dramacallyifwasteisprevented.

Ontopofthesystemofpremiums,thecurrent

Waste Framework Direcve upgrades most

incineraonplantstothelevelofrecovery.

Thispushforincineraononthelegislaon

sideiscomplementedontheeconomicside

withbillionsofEUregionalandcohesionfunds

and loans from the European InvestmentBankgoingtosubsidisethebuildingofnew

incineratorsalloverEurope.

The European Direcve 2009/28/EC3 on

the use of energy from renewable sources

classies burning biomass as a renewable

energy. The denion of biomass (Arcle2) includes biodegradable waste, which

opens the door to allow premiums on

the generaon of energy from burning

biodegradables.Everymemberstatedecides

on the percentage of biodegradable waste

presentinthewasteandhenceeligibletobe

subsidisedasrenewableenergy.However,in

memberstatessuchasFranceorSpain100%

of the electricity produced in incinerators,

regardless of the biodegradability of the

waste,iseligibleforpremiums.Italyfollowed

the same scheme but decided to change

it in 2007 thanks to the popular pressure

and following the EU Direcve now it only

subsidisesburningbiodegradablewaste.

Whenitcomestoclimatechange,thecarbon

emissionsofthenextdecadesarecrucialto

avoidthepointofnoreturninwarmingthe

planet. It is therefore necessary to reduce

carbon emissions in the shortest possible

termwhilstdecarbonisingoureconomies.

4. Why is the System

Giving Wrong Incentives?

by avouring only the

production o energy

the system is efectively

penalising the savings oenergy

5. Energy Produced by

Incinerators is Neither

Renewable nor Green


6/13


However legislaon discounts the biogenic

carbon-from30to50%ofthetotalcarbon

emissions depending on dierent naonal

laws-whichconsiderablyreducesthecarbon

emissionsthatcount-thisisanaccounng

rule that does not reduce the total CO2

emissions.

This is highly misleading because it puts

burning biodegradable waste at the same

levelascomposngandanaerobicdigeson.

However,therealityisthat,asacknowledged

bytheIPCC,composngmanagestocapture

andsequesterpartofcarboninthesoils

forsomeyearswhichhelptogainmeinthe

ghtagainstclimatechange4.Plusithaslots

ofposiveexternaliessuchas:

waterandmineralsretenonwhichhelp

toavoiddesercaonandoods,

creaonoflocaljobsinthecolleconand

treatmentofbiowaste, increase soil producvity (replacing

energyintensiveferlisers)and

helpreduceN2Oemissionsfrommineral

ferlisers, which is important since N2O

has a global warming potenal of 310

(310 mes more powerful than CO2

to

trapheat).

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

gCo2(equ)perkWhelectricityequivalent

Coal Fired Coal FiredStations

Oil FiredStations

Incinerator,Electricity only

Incinerator CHP Gas-fired CHP Incinerator,heat only

Emissions including all carbon

Source: Dominic Hogg,March 6, 2006

A Changing Climate for Energy from Waste,Eunomia Consulting,

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

gCo2(equ)perkWhelectricityequivalent

Emissions not counting biogenic carbon

Source: Dominic Hogg,Eunomia Consulting, March 6, 2006

A Changing Climate for Energy from Waste,

Coal Fired Coal FiredStations

Oil FiredStations

Incinerator,Electricity only

Incinerator CHP Gas-fired CHP Incinerator,heat only


7/13


Therefore burning biodegradable waste is

not only notclimateneutralbut,becauseof

opportunity costs and important neglected

externalies, has a negave eect on the

ghtagainstclimatechange.

Burning biogenic carbon is clearly not

green,ratheriteecvelydiscouragesthe

sustainablealternave,whichiscomposng.Plus, by subsidising the energy produced

withbiogeniccarbon(lessthan50%oftotal)

weincenvisetheburningoftheother50%

which normally includes recyclables which,

according to general consensus, will be

beeroprevented,reusedorrecycled.

Itisimportanttounderstandthatthegure

represenng the biogenic percentage of

the waste is not measured, but decidedby polics. Studies show that the eecve

biogeniccarboninthewasteislowerthanthat

normally considered eligible as renewable

energy. The UK esmates are that with

r e c y c l i n g

rates of 60%

the biogenic

carbon is

35% of the

M u n i c i p a l

Solid Waste

(MSW). The

d i f f e r e n c e

between the

p e r c e n t a g e

consideredfor

the subsidy

and the real

content of

biomass -

s o m e t i m e s

up to 20% - equals the amount of fossil

fuels whose burning is being subsidised as

renewableenergy,whichisagainstEUlaw.

Moreover, since biowaste includes a high

amountofwater(upto80%infoodwaste)

itremarkablylowerstheenergyeciencyofenergyrecoverythroughthermaltreatment;

therefore the energy eciency with which

theincineratorsareproducingtheelectricity

which qualies for green premiums in

many cases doesnt surpass 20% and is

typicallybelow25%.Whencomparingwith

windorsolarenergy-withenergyeciencies

above80%-butalsowithallothertypesof

powerstaonsbasedonfossilfuels(whose

eciencies are typically much higher)one wonders why such an inecient and

damagingtechnologyisbeingsubsidised.

6. Green Energy?

Photo

courtesyofGreenpeace

The renewable energy di-

rective distorts the waste

hierarchy. Incineration is

given priority in detrimento compost and anaerobic

digestion.


8/13


Paradoxically,thearcle13.6ofthedirecve

on renewable energy reads, In the case

of biomass, Member States shall promote

conversion technologies that achieve a

conversion eciency of at least 85 % for

residenalandcommercialapplicaonsand

atleast70%forindustrialapplicaons.

But this doesnt apply to burning organic

waste.Thesamedirecverulesthatonly

green power from non-hybrid installaons

(e.g. solar-photovoltaic systems, wind

turbines and hydroelectric power staons)shall have priority. Electricity from hybrid

installaons shall not have priority rights,

as it is deemed too dicult to determine

the proporon of sustainable and non-

sustainable electricity that is produced at

the same moment inthe same installaon.

However, the excepon to this is the

electricity from waste incineraon plants

whichqualiesunderthepriorityrules.

ThespiritoftheWasteFrameworkDirecve

is - through the applicaon of the waste

hierarchy - to encourage the treatment of

biodegradablewasteinaresponsiblemanner

and get real renewable energy out of it.

Unfortunately, EU renewable energy policy

does exactly the opposite and eecvely

subsidisesalessenvironmentallyfavourable

opon.

Thereisarealdangerthattheeortsofthe

EU to ght climate change will give results

onlyinthestascsbutnotinreality.

Energy from incineraon is neither green

nor renewable, hence, premiums to the

produconofenergyfromwasteshouldbe

stopped.

Energy savings in waste:When it comes to energy balances, the

biggestpotenalimpactofthewastesector

isinenergysavingsthroughtheprevenon

ComposngfacilityinNetherlands.PhotobyJoanMarcSimon/GAIA

7. How to Fix theSituation?


9/13


and hence reducon of waste and through

reuse.Therecyclingofwasteismoreenergy

intensivethanprevenonbutitissllbeer

for the environment than incineraon with

energy recovery5. This is recognised by the

Waste Hierarchy of the Waste Framework

Direcve and the only thing lacking isimplemenngitandsengtherightdrivers

and nancial incenves. It is therefore

crucialtoshipremiumsandsubsidiesfrom

incineraontothemostfavourableopons.

Renewable energy from waste:

Renewable energy can be extracted from

biodegradable waste through anaerobic

digeson and extra benets can be reaped

when bringing the carbon back to the soil.Studies show thatcomposng green waste

savesasmuchCO2asincineraon6.However,

when on top of direct CO2 emissions we

includesecondaryeects,suchasthepower

ofcomposttosequestercarbonorthefact

that incineraon hinders prevenon, reuse

and recycling, the eects of composng

notably overtake those of incineraon as a

wastetreatment.

When composng is complemented with a

prioranaerobicaldigesonprocess,thetotal

netsavingsareconsiderable.Plusanaerobic

digeson and composng dont distort

the treatment of the other waste streams;

on the contrary, a separate collecon of

biodegradable waste has the posive

externalityofallowingforahigherrecycling

eciencyoftheremainingwaste.

Premiums and subsidies:

The current system of premiums and

subsidies for incineraon in Europe clearly

favours the less environmentally-sound

opon and contradicts the goals that the

legislaonismeanttoachieve.Itisurgentto

shitheeconomicdriverstogetsoundwaste

andresourcemanagementinEurope.Atthe

least, a good system of market incenves

should denitely favour energy savings as

muchasitfavoursgeneraonofenergy.

Therefore,ifthereisnowilltoremovethe

current unfair system, the only sensible

approach compable with the current

premiums is the denion of an EU

methodology to account for the energy

savings of prevenon, reuse and recycling

whichshouldalsobeeligibleforpremiums.The fact is that having only premiums for

energy generated creates a big market

distoron.

The direcve on Renewable Energies

2009/28/EChasDecember2010asadeadline

for transposion. It is very important that

in the next months the member states

take the iniaveof priorisingthe properapplicaonoftheWasteHierarchyaheadof

themisleadingguidancethatisgivenbythe

RenewableEnergydirecve.

AnalysisofthesituaonindierentEuropean

countries:

FLANDERS, BELGIUM

In Flanders, incineraon is subsidised as

renewableenergyonlyforthegeneraon

of electricity.

Approximately 48% of the electricity

producedinanincineratorisconsideredto

begeneratedfrombiogenicsourcesandthus

renewable. The companies receive green

electricity cercates for this energy. This

subsidyis20to25pertonofwasteinput.

ConsideringthatinFlanders1.3milliontons

of wastes are incinerated per year we can

esmateasubsidyofbetween26and33

million.ThismeansthateveryFlemishcizen

paysaround5tosubsidiseincineraonand

0tosubsidisecomposngorrecycling.

8. Case Studies


10/13


It is important to note that the denion

ofbiogeniccarbonusedinFlandersisquite

wide and for instance 40% of wool in any

wool/nylon sweatshirt is considered to

be biogenic carbon and hence taken into

account as renewable energy when burnt.

The formula used to calculate this is alsodubious since non-biogenic energy can be

usedtodrybiogenicwaste.

FRANCE

Following the European Direcve on

renewable energy (2001/77/CE now

2009/28/EC),Francehasbeenimplemenng

a reducon of taxes on energy from waste

since 2006. In France, incineraon is

considered a source of renewable energy

(50%). But also all the energy produced is

consideredtoberecoveredenergywhich

allowsalltheenergytoqualifyfornancial

benets.At the sameme,inFrancethere

is a compulsory fee to buy the electricityproducedbyincineratorsandalowerVATtax

(5.5%insteadof19%)forthoseincinerators

thatrecoverheat.

For the electricity, nowadays the fees are

from4.5to5cents/kWhplusapremium

for energy eciency from 0 to 0.3 cents/

kWh7. The naonal company Electricite de

France(EDF)isobligedtobuythisenergyat

the established prices. In winter, when thedemandishigher,thefeescan

beincreasedwhichcausessome

incinerators to stock waste in

autumn and burn it when the

priceofenergyishigher.

Despitethegeneroussubsidies

toburnwaste-mostofwhich

couldberecycled-theindustry

connuestoaskforincreasesinthefees.Inmesofhighenergy

prices, there have been cases

inwhichgeneratorshavebeen

plugged into the grid to sell

moreelectricityandhenceget

moresubsidies.

In contrast, the French

incineratorsemittheequivalent

CO2 of 2.3 million cars and on

topofthatemitabignumber

dangerouspollutants8.

The naonal group CNIID

(Centre Naonal dInformaon

Independante sur les Dechets)

denounced in 2009 the

contradiconwiththepolluter

pays principle and the waste

hierarchy (2008/98/EC) that

incineratorsgettaxexempons

and premiums whilstPhoto

CourtesyofCNIID


11/13


constantlydiscouragingreuse,recyclingand

composng9. On the contrary, because of

itsharmfulimpactontheenvironmentand

climatechange,incineraonshouldbetaxed.

A new law from 2009 introduces a general

tax on pollung acvies (taxe gnralesur les acvits polluantes-TGAP)whichis

appliedtothewasteenteringanincinerator.

However this tax does not take into

accounttheimpactthatincineraonhason

climatechange-boththeGHGsemiedby

incineraonandtheemissionsthatcouldbe

savedifthewastewererecycled,composed

orreusedinsteadofbeingburnt.

ITALY

Between 2001 and 2007, the direcve

2001/77 was - intenonally - wrongly

implemented and resulted in 7% of the

electricity subsidising incineraon of

biodegradableandnonbiodegradablewaste

asgreenenergy.Thisissllbeingappliedfor

old incinerators whilst new ones fall under

2009/28direcveandonlyconsiderenergyfrom biogenic carbon to be renewable.

However, the percentage of renewable

energy has been arbitrarily established at

51%,whichisremarkablyhigherthanwhat

scienc invesgaons have demonstrated.

Theunitsubsidyhasbeendenedinsucha

waytoensureatargetpriceofenergyfrom

incinerators at 20 cents/kWh, i.e. three

mes higher than the typical market price

forenergy,whichisabletoreducethecost

ofincineraonbysome150/tonne.

The organisaon Dirio al Futuro10 is

requesng the company responsible for

electricity distribuon (Gestore del Servizio

ElericoNazionale)topaybacktotheItalian

cizensthe40billionthatsince2001Italian

cizens paid to nance renewable green

energy and instead ended up nancing

burning resources and generang more

polluon. That is, every Italian cizen has

subsidisedincineratorswithmorethan650

duringthelast9yearswithmoneymeantto

nancerenewableenergy.

SPAIN

In Spain, the premiums for energy from

incineraon are regulated according to the

Royal Decree 661/2007 and they will be

reviewedin2010.

Thesystemisverycomplexandthepremiums

mainlydependonhowmuchgasand/oroil

isaddedtothewastetoincreaseitscaloric

value(sothattheycanjumpfrom20%to35-

40% energy eciency and hence get morepremiums) and on whether the plant sells

theenergydirectlytothemarketoragreesto

sellitforaregulatedxedprice(6,449cents

/kWh).Ifitsellstheenergytothemarket,

thereareupperandlowerlimitsfortheprice

tomakesurethattheplantcoversthecostof

burningwaste.

In Spain, the energy produced by burning

municipal solid waste in 2008 was 2732GWh. The price of electricity in 2009 was

between 32.25 and 51.13/MWh but due

totheuctuaonofpricesandthedierent

composion of waste it is very dicult to

know how much money is generated in

premiumsorbyjustsellingtheenergyfrom

theSpanishincinerators.

Ifweassumethepriceof6,449/MWhfor

the producon of electricity of 2008, then

of 2.732 GWh Spanish cizens subsidised

incineraonwith177millionperyear.That

is, every Spanish cizen pays 4 a year to

subsidiseincineraonand0tosubsidise,for

example,compost.Onceagain,inacountry

with problems of advanced desercaon

itisdiculttoarguewhyitispreferableto

subsidise the opon of burning biowaste

beforebringingthecarbonbacktothesoil.


12/13


The current situaon regarding premiumstoincineraon-forthebiogenicfraconor

thewholeMSWishighlydangerousforthe

European Union because it sets the wrong

market incenves and it is highly probable

thatincreasesthecarbonemissions.

Moreover,theamountofwasteincinerated

in Europe will increase considerably during

the coming years thanks to the favourable

reclassicaon of incineraon in the newWasteFrameworkDirecveandthebillions

ofeurosgivenbytheEuropeanCommission

intheformofRegionalandCohesionFunds

and the contribuon of the European

InvestmentBankwithcreditsandloans.

Some 100 incinerators might be built in

southernandeasternEuropeinthecoming

years(mostofthemwithEUhelp).Oncethe

current west-European pracces of giving

premiums to energy from incineraon are

appliedtothenewincineratorswecouldsee

how, if all Europeans subsidise incineraonliketheBelgians,theFrenchortheSpanish,

2.5 billion per year would go to subsidise

the energy produced by incinerators in

Europe.Thisishalfofthecostofbuildinga

European-widesmart-grid11.

IfEuropeistofollowtheItalianpaern(72/

capita/year) up to 36 billion of taxpayers

money-notincludingthebillionsinstructural

and cohesion funds already invested inbuildingthefurnaces-wouldgotosubsidise

theenergythatsoinecientlyisproducedin

incinerators.WiththismoneyEuropecould

buildtheEUsmartgridinonly7years!

9. Conclusion

astepickersatCOP15,UNFCCC

Copenhagenstressclimate

netsofwastereducon,

cycling,reusingandcomposng.

otobyDaveCiplet


13/13


Europelivesinmesofeconomiccrisisand

rising public decits which forces the EU

and the member states to streamline their

supporng measures and encourage the

reallyrenewableenergies.Studiesprovethat

alotmoreenergyissavedifwasteprevented

orrecycled,yettheseenergysavingsarenotonlynotaccountedforbutalsodiscriminated

inthesubsidiesandprimesscheme.

Itishenceurgenttore-channeltheowof

publicmoneyfromsubsidiesandpremiums

toincineraontorealrenewableandgreen

technologies.

Endnotes:

1 Ninety sciensts urge the US Congress

nottoCookthebookshp://216.250.243.

12/90scienstsleer.pdf

2 The study Gone to Waste from FoErevealsthat50%oftherecyclablematerialin

theEUendsupdumpedorburnt(countries

like Germany, Holland or Denmark would

burnitwhilstcountrieslikePoland,Bulgaria

or Greece would bury it). According tothe

studythesematerialswouldhaveaminimum

potenalmonetaryvalueof5.25billion.

3 2009/28/EC hp://eur-lex.europa.eu/

LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:14

0:0016:0062:en:PDF

4 Favoino, Enzo and Hogg, Dominic, The

potenal role of compost in reducing

greenhouse gases. Waste Management

Research2008;26;61,hp://wmr.sagepub.

com/cgi/content/abstract/26/1/61

5Environmentalbenetsofrecyclingan

internaonalreviewoflifecyclecomparisons

forkeymaterialsintheUKrecyclingsector.

WRAP 20106 Kranert, M., Goschall, R., Bruns, C. &

Hafner,G,Energyorcompostfromgreen

waste? A CO2-based assessment. 2010

Waste Management. 30: 697-701.

7 hp://www.developpement-durable.

gouv.fr/energie/renou/se_ren_a4.htm

8 hp://www.invs.sante.fr/recherche/

index2.asp?txtQuery=dioxines+ordures&Su

bmit.x=0&Submit.y=09 hp://www.cniid.org/espace_

telechargement/actualite/dechets_climat_

explicaons.pdf

10 h t t p : / / w w w . d i r i t t o a l f u t u r o . i t /

vertenza.html

11 h t t p : / / w w w . g r e e n p e a c e . o r g /

international/en/publications/reports/

renewables-24-7/

Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	adolfosehnert
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

GAIA When EU Waste the Climate

Documents