Småhus, flerbostadshus och förskolebyggnader - Svanen

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Nordisk Miljømerking Hus, leiligheter og barnehager 089/versjon 2 Høringssammenstilling, oppdatert 10. august 2010 Comments from Nordic Ecolabelling Thank you for your comments on the requirements on lead. Lead is on the List of Priority Substances in the Nordic countries, and they have a policy to reduce the emissions of lead. Det Økologiske Råd, Danmark Kapitel 3 Krav til facade og tagbeklædning (afsnit 028) giver mulighed for op til 10 % kobber og zink. Dette giver risiko for en forurening af regnvandet. F.eks. stiller Københavns Kommune skrappere krav og tillader ikke kobber og zink jf. forslag til Miljø i byggeri og anlæg, maj 2009. Nordisk Miljømerkings kommentar Vi vill inte förbjuda legeringar och ytbehandlingssytem, därav är gränsen inte satt till noll. JM AB Sverige Aluzink, Rheinzink m.fl. szinklegeringar är förekommande som fasad- coh täckningsmaterial i byggbranschen. Det finns ett flertal fältstudier på läckage från sådana material och i många fall visar de sig ha ett väldigt lågt läckage av zink. Vi uppmanar Svanen att fundera över om det går att lägga in gränsvärden för läckage istället för ett totalförbud. Veidekke Bostad Sverige Aluzink? Det finns en utredning som talar om att Aluzink är bra, är det inte godkänt enligt detta krav? Det konsultföretaget Tyrens (Birger Wärn) har tidigare gjort en bedömning att Aluzinken är bättre än t ex plastisolen som takmaterial. Kontrollera alla uppgifter som syftar till att ”förbjuda” produkter. International Zinc Association The International Zinc Association-Europe hereby objects to the proposed restriction on zinc roofs and claddings. Our comments are based on the knowledge related to the durability and recycling capacity of zinc and the results from a comprehensive risk assessment and risk reduction strategy initiatives at EU level. The risk assessment on zinc and zinc compounds was carried out within the framework of Council Regulation 793/93/EEC on Existing Chemicals. The risk assessment dossier, led by The Netherlands acting as the Rapporteur country, has been agreed by the European Commission’s Technical Committee for New and Existing Substances (TC-NES) and further reviewed by the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER). As explicitly mentioned in the conclusions, the findings of this report are that the current uses of zinc and zinc compounds do not lead to the elevated regional levels found in surface water and sediment. An EU Risk Reduction Strategy (RRS) was developed by the Rapporteur, agreed by the EU member states and was published in the Official Journal of the European Union in 112 (165)
Nordisk Miljømerking Hus, leiligheter og barnehager 089/versjon 2 Høringssammenstilling, oppdatert 10. august 2010 2008. This strategy does not include any restrictions on the use of any zinc products, including cladding and roofing. Instead, the strategy recognises that the observed elevated levels in some locations in Europe are derived from point sources from industrial installations, historical contamination and high background concentrations of geogenic origin. Indeed, releases from corrosion of zinc products during service life were carefully assessed within the risk assessment process and no risks were associated to the use of zinc in building applications. This included detailed evaluations of releases under current atmospheric corrosivity and the fate of these releases. Notably, much of the information on this aspect has been generated by the Royal Institute of Technology’s Department of Corrosion Science in Stockholm. Moreover, zinc emissions to surface waters have actually decreased drastically within past decades due to: (1) the introduction of industrial on-site treatment plants; (2) the introduction of municipal waste water treatment plants; (3) better optimization of fertilizer usage Zinc is a natural and essential element. It is present in water, air, soil and sediments and may come from various sources – anthropogenic and natural. For example, a recent study has investigated the different sources contributing to elevated zinc levels in the Ruhr river basin, in Germany (Hüffmeyer et al. 2009). Results have shown that the most contributing sources of zinc were coming from geogenic inputs (historical mining activity together with elevated natural background concentrations). Indeed, the most significant zinc emissions contributing to elevated zinc levels in water, as identified in Risk Reduction Strategy are coming from point sources from industrial installations, historical contamination from old industrialised areas, and high natural background concentrations due to local geology. There are many beneficial effects of using zinc in cladding and/or roofing. One of the most important factors to be considered is probably zinc recyclability. Indeed, zinc is 100% recyclable and 95% of old rolled zinc is effectively recovered and reused in different applications. The success of rolled zinc recycling is due to a very well structured market and the high scrap value. The main users for rolled zinc scraps are secondary zinc refiners, brass and oxide producers. Another important factor is zinc's life cycle performance, which is measured relative to contributions to current worldwide priorities like climate change, energy demand, and the consumption of natural resources. When measured throughout the life cycle of zinc products, the global environmental performance of zinc against these priorities has been demonstrated to be very good. Zinc building products such as roofs and cladding can last for generations, and after their useful life they can be recovered and re-used over and over again. Among the requirements for the Nordic Ecolabelling, chemical building products must not be classified. Zinc metal is not classified for any of the endpoints mentioned under #O15 of the Nordic Ecolabelling document. Indeed, the release rate of zinc ions from massive form is too small to warrant classification for human health or for the environment. Therefore, according to this criterion, there is no reason to 113 (165)
Page 1 and 2:
Høringssammenstilling for Hus, fle
Page 3 and 4:
P8 Høyere andel virke fra sertifis
Page 5 and 6:
Nordisk Miljømerking Hus, leilighe
Page 7 and 8:
2. Om høringen Nordisk Miljømerki
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62: Nordisk Miljømerking Hus, leilighe
Page 99 and 100: Peab PGS AB Sverige BASTA täcker i
Page 111: Nordisk Miljømerking Hus, leilighe
Page 155 and 156: Tabell 5: Norske høringssvar Høri
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165:
show all

Småhus, flerbostadshus och förskolebyggnader - Svanen

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?