You are here: Home / Data and maps / Indicators / Nuclear energy and waste production / Nuclear energy and waste production (ENER 013) - Assessment published Apr 2012

Nuclear energy and waste production (ENER 013) - Assessment published Apr 2012

Indicator Assessmentexpired Created 27 Mar 2012 Published 30 Apr 2012 Last modified 12 Nov 2013, 01:02 PM
Topics: ,
This content has been archived on 12 Nov 2013, reason: Content not regularly updated
Required information is not filled in: Information about the starting date of the publishing schedule is missing.

Key messages

The amount of high level nuclear waste from nuclear electricity production continues to accumulate. In 2009, 34,824 tonnes of heavy metals contained in high level nuclear waste was in storage, up 4.7% since 2008. The annual quantity of spent fuel was approximately 1,828 tonnes of heavy metals in 2009. However, there is a decreasing trend in the annual quantity of spent fuel arisings since 1990. On the other hand, the amount of electricity produced from nuclear power has increased by 12.5% over the period 1990 to 2009 (see ENER27). This decoupling between electricity production and generation of radioactive waste can be explained by the fact that fuel rods are replaced gradually as well as by improvements in fuel burnup and plant efficiency[1].


[1] Energy efficiency  is calculated using an efficiney coefficient of  33% for all reactors (the efficiency of a particular reactor type – CANDU) since  all reactors types are slightly different. However overtime there is a trend towards more efficient reactors in Europe, such as those with breeder reactors/fuel enrichment. However, once a reactor is built, the efficiency assumed is fixed at 33%.

What are the trends concerning the accumulation of high level nuclear waste and the production of spent fuel?

Availability improvements in nuclear power plants in Europe

Note: Last three years Capability Factor over 2008-2010. The indicator shows the ratio of the available energy generation over a given time period to the reference energy generation over the same time period, expressed as a percentage. Both of these energy generation terms are determined relative to reference ambient conditions. The reference energy generation is the energy that could be produced if the unit were operated continuously at full power under reference ambient conditions. The available energy generation is the energy that could have been produced under reference ambient conditions considering only limitations within control of plant management, i.e. plant equipment and personnel performance, and work control.

Data source:

IAEA (2009) Power Reactor Information System (PRIS); August 2009 http://www.iaea.or.at/programmes/a2/

Downloads and more info

Numbers of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities operational in 2011

Note: Reprocessing is an important part of the fuel cycle within the European nuclear fuel industry, as illustrated by the share of European reprocessing facilities to the global total number of facilities. Europe imports most of the uranium consumed by its nuclear power plants as ore, having very little mining production in the region itself

Data source:

NFCIS (2011) Nuclear Fuel Cycle Information System (NFCIS). http://www-nfcis.iaea.org/

 

Downloads and more info

Stored total amount of high level waste (in tonnes heavy metals)

Note: The figure shows the amount of high level nuclear waste continues to accumulate.

Data source:

NEA (2010) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2010 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2010

 

Downloads and more info

Historic series in annual spent fuel arisings (tonnes heavy metals)

Note: The following table refers to nuclear waste: it presents annual spent fuel arisings in nuclear power plants of OECD countries. The data are expressed in tonnes of heavy metal, and include projections and estimates up to the year 2010. Spent fuel arisings are one part of the radioactive waste generated at various stages of the nuclear fuel cycle (uranium mining and milling, fuel enrichment, reactor operation, spent fuel reprocessing). Radioactive waste also arises from decontamination and decommissioning of nuclear facilities, and from other activities using isotopes, such as scientific research and medical activities. The impact of nuclear waste on humans and the environment depends on the level of radioactivity and on the conditions under which the waste is handled, treated, stored and disposed of. While reading this table it should be noted that these data do not represent all radioactive waste generated, and that amounts of spent fuel arisings depend on the share of nuclear electricity in the energy supply and on the nuclear plant technologies adopted.

Data source:

OECD (2007) OECD environmental data compendium, part 1, chapter 8; April 2007. Home -> Environmental Indicators -> Modelling and Outlooks -> OECD Environmental Data Compendium  http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data-providers-and-partners/oecd

 IAEA (2003) K. Fukuda, W. Danker, J.S. Lee, A. Bonne, M.J. Crijns; IAEA Overview of global spent fuel storage; Vienna : IAEA, Department of Nuclear Energy, 2003

NEA (2007) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2007 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2007

NEA (2008) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2008 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2008

NEA (2009) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2009 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2009

NEA (2010) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2010 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2010

Downloads and more info

EU Electricity production from nuclear (percentages relative to 1990 level)

Note: EU Electricity production from nuclear (percentages relative to 1990 level). Spent fuels arisings: Data for Bulgaria is not included due to a lack of information. No 2008 and 2009 data available for Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden, so 2007 data rolled. Lithuania closed its last nuclear reactor at the end of 2009.

Data source:

OECD (2007) OECD environmental data compendium, part 1, chapter 8; April 2007 http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/46/38106824.xls

IAEA (2003) K. Fukuda, W. Danker, J.S. Lee, A. Bonne, M.J. Crijns; IAEA Overview of global spent fuel storage; Vienna : IAEA, Department of Nuclear Energy, 2003

NEA (2007) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2007 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2007

NEA (2008) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2008 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2008

NEA (2009) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA); Nuclear Energy Data : 2009 Edition = Données sur l' énergie nucléaire; Paris, France : OECD, 2009

Downloads and more info
  • The amount of high level nuclear waste continues to accumulate. In 2009, 34,824 tonnes of heavy metals contained in nuclear waste was in storage, up 4.7 % since 2008 (see Figure 1).  
  • In 2009, 1,828 tonnes of heavy metals contained in spent nuclear fuel resulted from electricity production from nuclear power plants, an amount which has declined by.. since 1990. Historical series of arising spent fuel are given in Figure 2[1]. Arising amounts of spent fuel depend primarily on the amount of power produced, but also to a large extent on the type of reactor, level of fuel enrichment, fuel burnup and power plant net electric efficiency. For example, as indicated by the given burnup rate (see Table 1 below), a Candu reactor will produce more spent fuel per kWhe than reactors using enriched uranium, such as Pressurised Water Reactor (PWRs) and Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) plants. However, CANDU plants can be refuelled online without slowing the reaction, they, therefore, have a high availability of (about 90. Newer Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors, such as Advance Candu Reactors (ACRs) have light water cooling and slightly enriched fuel.
  • Since 1990, the amount of arising spent fuel has decreased annually. At the same time, the amount of electricity production from nuclear power has increased by 12.5% (see ENER 27 and Figure 3 below).
  • Only a small number of ‘operating’ nuclear facilities have come online in EU-27 since 1990 (WNA, 2011), this includes those in France (10), Slovakia (2), Czech Republic (2) Romania (2), United Kingdom (1) and Bulgaria (1). In addition, several plants in the UK, Lithuania, Germany, Sweden, Slovakia and Bulgaria have been shut down. These trends illustrate increased plant availability in the past decades (see Figure 4 below) and increased net plant electric efficiency from app. 32% to app. 35% (WNA, 2003). They also illustrate the trend in increasing fuel enrichment and fuel burnup and the resulting reduction in spent fuel arising per unit of power. Plant closure results in a peak in spent fuel arising because all the fuel present  in the reactor core is removed. By contrast, during power production only some quarter to a third is removed annually as spent fuel. The effects of plant closure on spent fuel production are most pronounced for the UK with decommissioning at Trawsfynydd (1993), Hinkley Point (2000) and Bradwell (2002) which explain the peaks in the graph (see Figure 2 below).


[1] The information refers to the quantity of heavy metals in nuclear fuel, which make up approximately 85% of the uranium fuel and 60% - 70% of the aggregation of fuel and fuel casing (fuel assembly).

What are the main developments concerning the spent fuel reprocessing and storage of high level nuclear waste in Europe?

Indicative specifications for different reactor types

Note: Indicative specifications for different reactor types. For example, as indicated by the given burnup rate, a Candu reactor will produce more spent fuel per kWhe than light water reactors (LWR).

Data source:

IEE (2005) Nuclear reactor Types : an Environment & Energy FactFile; The Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE); London, UK : The Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE), 2005

Downloads and more info

Spent nuclear fuel reprocessing

    The amount of spent fuel arising in Europe is not equivalent to the amount of high level waste that is ultimately stored, since part of this spent fuel is reprocessed. Former Eastern bloc member states appear to have exported part of their produced spent fuel to Russia, with Bulgaria appearing to have exported spent fuel as late as 2006 (Bellona, 2008).

    Reprocessing is an important part of the fuel cycle within the European nuclear fuel industry, as illustrated by the share of EEA32 reprocessing facilities, which is equal to the number in the rest of the world (see Figure 5). Europe imports most of the uranium consumed by its nuclear power plants as ore, having very little mining production in the region itself. This means that the environmental and human health impacts associated with uranium mining play a much lesser role in the European context. Imported ore is processed into fuel in Europe and part of the produced fuel is exported to the USA. While in other parts of the world the fuel is stored after consumption, in Europe a significant portion of the spent fuel is reprocessed, hence reducing the amount of high level waste that requires final disposal. For more technical details on spent fuel reprocessing see (EdF, 2007), (Harvard, 2003) and (MIT, 2003) and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Spent fuel from France, Japan, Netherlands, and Belgium is reprocessed in La Hague in Normandy. This plant has the capacity to reprocess 1700 tonnes of fuel per year in its UP2 and UP3 facilities. The recycling rate is high, extracting 99.9% of the plutonium and uranium, and leaving just 3% of used material as high level wastes. By 2009, some 27,000 tonnes of fuel from LWRs had been recycled at LA Hague (WNA 2011). Most reprocessed uranium (RepU) is converted and stored in the interim period for eventual re-enrichment and/or exported to Russia (about 500tU per year is sent to Seversk) (WNA 2011).

     

    High level nuclear waste storage

      Spent nuclear fuel is the most highly radioactive waste. It decays rapidly at first, i.e. after 40 years the level of radioactivity has typically dropped to 1/1000th of the initial value. But it takes around 1000 years to drop to the level of the original uranium ore which was needed to produce that quantity of spent fuel (WNA, 2003). The potential impact of high level nuclear waste on humans and the environment depends on the level of radioactivity and on the conditions under which the waste is managed. The majority of member states currently store spent fuel and other high level radioactive wastes in above ground storage facilities. However, deep geological disposal in an underground repository is currently favoured as a long-term option by many countries. Finland, in particular, has advanced plans for deep geological storage sites for used fuel on Olkiluoto Island (WNA 2011). Lower level radioactive wastes are commonly stored in surface disposal sites.

      What are the most recent developments concerning the nuclear reactor design and what are the likely consequences on the environment and human health?

      New technology (e.g. 3rd/4th generation)

      • Technological development in the last decade has resulted in improved versions of existing LWR reactor designs, such as the EPR, AP-1000, ESBWR and ABWR: the so-called generation III or III+ designs. These have a somewhat higher net electric efficiency compared to current updated generation II reactors (35% - 39% compared to 33% - 35%, (TUD, 2006)) and allow for higher fuel burnup, higher fuel assay (quantity of fuel in total material) and a higher percentage of MOX in the fuel. These specifications mean less fuel is required per kWhe and a larger percentage of spent fuel can be reprocessed. They are also intrinsically safer than updated generation II reactors and the first few generation III reactors are in operation in Japan (WNA 2011).
      • Development of new reactor designs is coordinated in the so-called Generation IV International Forum (GIF). This is a US-led grouping (set up in 2001 and joined by the EU in 2005), which has identified six reactor concepts for further investigation. They will not be in operation before 2020 at the earliest (WNA 2011). These reactor designs contain different levels of automatic safety controls which are likely to minimize the risk of human failure in operating the plant (the main cause of the Cernobyl accident). Higher operational temperature will also result in higher energy efficiency. Whilst Generation III reactors recycle plutonium and some uranium, Generation IV are expected to have full actinide recycle.
      • In 2010, the European Commission launched the European Sustainable Nuclear Industrial Initiative (ESNII). This will support three Generation IV reactors as part of a wider programme to promote low-carbon technologies. Of particular focus is the Astrid sodium-cooled fast reactor (France), the allegro gas-cooled fast reactor (central and eastern Europe) and the lead-cooled fast reactor (Belgium) and additional nuclear applications include hydrogen production, desalination plants and industrial heat.
      • Parallel to the Generation IV forum, a more radical Generation III reactor is being developed - the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) - in South Africa and China. Net efficiency will be 41%, burnup will be at least 80 GWday/tU but may be increased eventually to 200 GWday/tU. At a burnup of 90 GWday/tU the amount of spent fuel per unit of delivered electricity will be 60% less than for current Generation II reactors (WNA 2011).

      What is the cost structure of the nuclear power projects?

      Cost structure of nuclear power projects

      Note: Cost structure of nuclear power projects

      Data source:

      ECN (2007) M.J.J. Scheepers, A.J. Seebregts, P. Lako F.J. Blom, F. van Gemert; Fact finding kernenergie : t.b.v. de Ser-Commissie Toekomstige Energie voorziening; Petten, The Netherlands : ECN, 2007

      Downloads and more info

      Cost estimates on final disposal (million euros)

      Note: Estimated operational costs range from €ct1,2/kWhe to €2,0/kWhe, including dismantling and waste disposal. Costs for insurance may make up 30% of total operational costs. The table shows the cost estimates for final disposal of spent fuel in Finland (5,600 tonnes HM).

      Data source:

      Kukkola (2005) T. Kukkola, T. Saanio; Cost Estimate of Olkiluoto Disposal Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel; March 2005

      Downloads and more info

      Nuclear power is expensive to build, but cheap to operate and in most parts of the world it is competitive with both gas and coal plants. Costs of nuclear power production are a subject of intense discussion and estimates range from very low costs of e.g. 2 €ct/kWhe to more than 10 €ct/kWhe (ECN, 2007). Production cost estimates for the intended EPR (European Pressurised Reactor) power plants in France amount to €ct 4,6/kWhe. Differences between estimated production costs are mainly due to differences in the applied depreciation methodology, depreciation period and interest rates. For investment costs a fairly narrow range is mentioned. Dismantling costs are covered by a fund created from sales during the operational lifetime of the plant.

      Estimated operational costs range from €ct1,2/kWhe to €2,0/kWhe, including dismantling and waste disposal. Costs for insurance may make up 30% of total operational costs. Cost estimates for final disposal of spent fuel in Finland (5,600 tonnes HM) are estimated, see figure 8.

      Nuclear power being a base load power production technology competes primarily with coal and large scale hydropower. Compared to coal a new Nuclear Power Plant requires approximately twice the investment for the same capacity, excluding construction interests. Operational costs for a new coal power plant amount to approximately €ct 2/kWhe, including fuel costs (€ 2/GJ) (CE, 2006). In Europe, the nuclear industry still benefits from state subsidies but accurate, transparent information on the level of these subsidies is not available. A new report published by Earth Track[1] in February 2011 takes a critical view on the continuous dependency of the nuclear power sector on subsidies. The report considers the following as the main subsidies:  the shift of construction and operating costs and operating risks from investors to taxpayers and ratepayers, transferring a range of  risks ranging from cost overruns and defaults to accidents as well as nuclear waste management on to the taxpayer.


      [1] http://earthtrack.net/files/uploaded_files/nuclear%20subsidies_report.pdf

      Indicator specification and metadata

      Indicator definition

      The indicator measures spent nuclear fuel arising from nuclear electricity production in the Member States that had nuclear powered electricity production capacity between 1990 and 2009 (data for Bulgaria missing). It provides an indication of the situation of radioactive waste accumulation and storage.

      Original measurement units:
                      Spent fuel: tonnes of heavy metal (tHM)
                      Nuclear electricity generation: terawatt hours (TWh)


      According to the World Energy Council http://www.worldenergy.org nuclear waste falls into the following four broad categories:

      • Very low-level waste (VLLW) contains negligible amounts of radioactivity, which can, depending on the clearance level, be disposed of in a dedicated surface site or with domestic refuse.

      • Low-level waste (LLW) contains small amounts of radioactivity and negligible amounts of long-lived waste.

      • Intermediate-level waste (ILW) contains higher amounts of radioactivity and does require shielding in the form of lead, concrete or water. It is further categorised into short-lived and long-lived. The former is dealt with in a similar way to LLW and the latter to HLW.

      • High-level waste (HLW) is highly radioactive, contains long-lived radioactivity and generates a considerable amount of heat.

      HLW accounts for 10% by volume of radioactive waste generated and contains about 99% of the total radioactivity. This includes fission products and spent fuel.

      Units

       Spent fuel: tonnes of heavy metal (tHM)
       Nuclear electricity generation: terawatt hours (TWh)


      Policy context and targets

      Context description

      Decisions concerning the use of nuclear energy are up to Member States: the principle of subsidiary grants member states autonomy in deciding their energy mix.

      Public concern about environmental and safety considerations has led to plans to phase out nuclear power in certain Member States (such as Germany, Spain, Sweden and Belgium), with some others either declaring or considering moratoria on the building of new nuclear plants. On 30th May 2011, the German government decided to stand by the previous government’s plans to close all reactors by 2022 (WNA 2011). Italy completely phased-out nuclear power following a referendum in 1987. In Sweden the Barseback nuclear power plant closed in 2005. Sweden is the only country to have a tax discriminating against nuclear power.

      On the other hand, some Member States are currently discussing the construction of new nuclear capacity. In Finland (Olikiluoto-3) and France (Flamanville-3), the process of building additional capacity, based on new nuclear designs such as the European Pressurised Water Reactor (EPR), is ongoing. Both are planned to start-up in 2012. Furthermore, in Romania, the Cernavoda 2 reactor was completed in 2007. Meanwhile, several countries, like the Netherlands, Belgium and Hungary have decided to extend the life-time of existing NPPs. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland agreed in 2007 on the construction of a NPP (Visaginas) in Lithuania. The Advanced Boiling Water Reactor is expected to operate from 2020. Bulgaria also plans to build two new reactors (Belene 1 and 2) and there has been strong governmental support for nuclear. The most up to date information on NPPs can be found in the Power Reactor Information System (PRIS) of the IAEA (IAEA, 2009).

      On June 25th 2009 the European Council adopted Directive for setting up a Community framework for nuclear safety (COM(2008) 790 final). The Directive is a major step for achieving a common legal framework and a strong safety culture in Europe.

      Main policy documents

      • EURATOM Treaty (1957)

      The Euratom Treaty helps to pool knowledge, infrastructure and funding of nuclear energy. It ensures the security of atomic energy supply within the framework of a centralised monitoring system.

      • Council Directive (Euratom) setting up a Community framework for nuclear safety; COM(2008) 790 final

      Provides binding legal force to the main international nuclear safety standards (IAEA Safety Fundamentals and the Convention on Nuclear Safety). The Directive also reinforces the independence and resources of the national competent regulatory authorities.

      • Council Directive establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations (2009)

       National responsibility of Member States for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations is the fundamental principle on which nuclear safety regulation has been developed at the international level, as endorsed by the Convention on Nuclear Safety. That principle of national responsibility, as well as the principle of prime responsibility of the licence holder for the nuclear safety of a nuclear installation under the supervision of its national competent regulatory authority, should be enhanced and the role and independence of the competent regulatory authorities should be reinforced by this Directive.

      • IAEA Safety Standards, Fundamental Safety Principles, No. SF-1 (2006)

      States the fundamental safety objective as being to protect people and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation. Ten safety principles are stated and their intent and purpose are briefly explained. The safety objective and the ten safety principles provide the grounds for establishing requirements and measures for the protection of people and the environment against radiation risks, and for the safety of facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks.

      • IAEA Convention on Nuclear Safety (1994)

      Achieve and maintain a high level of nuclear safety worldwide through the enhancement of national measures and international co-operation including, where appropriate, safety-related technical co-operation; to establish and maintain effective defences in nuclear installations against potential radiological hazards in order to protect individuals, society and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation from such installations; to prevent accidents with radiological consequences and to mitigate such consequences should they occur.

      • European Sustainable Nuclear Industrial Initiative (ESNII) (2010).

      This will support three Generation IV reactors as part of a wider programme to promote low-carbon technologies. Of particular focus is the Astrid sodium-cooled fast reactor (France), the allegro gas-cooled fast reactor (central and eastern Europe) and the lead-cooled fast reactor (Belgium), and additional nuclear applications include hydrogen production, desalination plants and industrial heat.

      Targets

      No targets have been specified

      Related policy documents

      Methodology

      Methodology for indicator calculation

      Average annual rate of growth calculated using: [(last year / base year) ^ (1 / number of years) - 1]*100

      Methodology for gap filling

      No methodology for gap filling has been specified. Probably this info has been added together with indicator calculation.

      Methodology references

      No methodology references available.

      Uncertainties

      Methodology uncertainty

      For the production of electricity, data have traditionally been compiled by Eurostat through the annual Joint Questionnaires (although there is no separate questionnaire for nuclear energy), shared by Eurostat and the International Energy Agency, following a well-established and harmonised methodology. This year for the first time greater disaggregation is available in Eurostat and we have aggregated the product codes (107030, 31, 32, and 33) to calculate gross electricity generation from nuclear power (former product code 107003). The primary energy from nuclear is calculated based on the electricity generation from nuclear with a 33.3 % efficiency rate. Methodological information on the annual Joint Questionnaires and data compilation can be found on Eurostat's website in the section on metadata on energy statistics http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/metadata, also see information related to the Energy Statistics Regulation from the same link.

      Data sets uncertainty

      Data on spent fuel arisings have been compiled by the OECD using data from member Governments. This is a consistent ongoing process that is updated annually. However, no information is available for Bulgaria. During 2008 and 2009, no data was available for Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden, which decreases the overall accuracy of the indicator. The use of spent fuel arisings as a proxy for overall radioactive waste is itself slightly uncertain because of the various inconsistencies in classification of radioactive waste between Member States, although it does provide a ‘reliable representation of the production of radioactive waste situation and its evolution over time’ (OECD, 1993).

      Rationale uncertainty

      No uncertainty has been specified

      Data sources

      Generic metadata

      Topics:

      Energy Energy (Primary topic)

      Tags:
      fuels | electricity | energy | heavy metals | nuclear energy | nuclear plants
      DPSIR: Pressure
      Typology: Descriptive indicator (Type A - What is happening to the environment and to humans?)
      Indicator codes
      • ENER 013
      Dynamic
      Temporal coverage:
      1990-2010
      Geographic coverage:
      Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Earth, Estonia, Europe, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia (FYR), Malta, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States

      Contacts and ownership

      EEA Contact Info

      Anca-Diana Barbu

      Ownership

      EEA Management Plan

      2011 2.8.1 (note: EEA internal system)

      Dates

      European Environment Agency (EEA)
      Kongens Nytorv 6
      1050 Copenhagen K
      Denmark
      Phone: +45 3336 7100