Introduction

The global food industry, dominated by ultra-processed foods (UPFs), is increasingly recognized as a significant threat to public health. These foods are linked to a variety of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) including obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer (Fiolet et al., 2018; Srour et al., 2019). Another critical, yet often overlooked dimension of this problem is the declining quality of agricultural products due to poor soils. Modern agricultural practices, which prioritize the use of synthetic fertilizers rich in nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), neglect other essential nutrients. Also the structure & content of the soil carbon has been degraded. This exacerbates further the nutritional deficiencies of both raw and processed foods, compounding the global health crisis (Lal, 2009; Davis et al., 2004).

The Proliferation and Health Impacts of Ultra-Processed Foods

Ultra-processed foods have become a dominant feature of diets worldwide. These foods, characterized by their high content of sugars, unhealthy fats, and sodium, coupled with a lack of essential nutrients, are produced through extensive industrial processes. The convenience and palatability of these foods have made them popular, but their overconsumption is closely linked to a surge in obesity, metabolic disorders, cardiovascular diseases, and certain types of cancer (Monteiro et al., 2019; Fiolet et al., 2018).

Moreover, ultra-processed foods (UPFs), rich in sugar, unhealthy fats, and additives, are designed to be hyper-palatable, triggering addictive responses similar to those seen with drugs by activating the brain’s reward system, particularly through the release of dopamine (Schulte et al., 2015). This addiction is particularly concerning in children, whose developing brains are more susceptible to forming strong food preferences and habits that can persist into adulthood (Gearhardt et al., 2011). The habitual consumption of UPFs, reinforced by aggressive marketing, especially to children, leads to a cycle of cravings and overconsumption, contributing to obesity and related health issues (Ziauddeen, & Fletcher, 2013). This addiction increases the risk of chronic conditions like type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and mental health disorders (Fiolet et al., 2018). Addressing UPF addiction requires public health interventions that limit exposure, particularly among vulnerable populations like children.

1. Obesity and Metabolic Disorders

The consumption of ultra-processed foods is a major driver of the global obesity epidemic. The high-calorie, low-nutrient content of these foods leads to excessive caloric intake without providing the essential nutrients needed for health. According to Fiolet et al. (2018), higher consumption of ultra-processed foods is strongly associated with obesity and related metabolic disorders, a trend that is exacerbated by the declining nutrient density of agricultural products (Davis et al., 2004).

2. Cardiovascular Diseases

Cardiovascular diseases are another significant concern associated with ultra-processed foods. These foods are typically high in trans fats, sodium, and sugars, all of which contribute to heart disease and stroke. Research by Srour et al. (2019) indicates that diets high in ultra-processed foods are linked to an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This risk is further compounded by the low levels of heart-protective nutrients, such as magnesium, found in crops grown in nutrient-depleted soils (Rengel & Graham, 1995; White & Broadley, 2005).

3. Diabetes and Insulin Resistance

The high glycemic load of ultra-processed foods, coupled with low nutrient density, contributes to the growing prevalence of type 2 diabetes. As detailed in a study by Mendonça et al. (2017), diets rich in ultra-processed foods are associated with an increased risk of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. The poor nutritional quality of these foods, derived from crops grown in depleted soils, further aggravates this condition, as the body struggles to manage blood sugar levels without adequate micronutrient support (Zhao et al., 2007).

4. Cancer Risk

Emerging evidence links the consumption of ultra-processed foods to an increased risk of cancer. A study by Fiolet et al. (2018) found that higher intake of ultra-processed foods correlates with a higher risk of overall cancer and breast cancer. The presence of carcinogenic compounds formed during food processing, along with the low levels of protective nutrients in the base ingredients due to poor soil quality, may contribute to this elevated risk (Beach RH, et al., 2019; Fan et al., 2008).

5. Risk of mental disorders

A Harvard study, assessed the impact of dietary habits on mental health. People who consumed the most processed foods – which include items such as sodas, chips, cookies, white bread and ready-to-eat meals – at nine or more servings a day were 50% more likely to develop depression than those who consumed no more than four servings a day. Consumption of many foods and drinks containing artificial sweeteners was associated with a particularly large increase in the risk of depression. The study was observational, meaning that it could not absolutely prove that processed foods cause depression, only that there was an association. Ultra-processed foods can disrupt the proper balance of gut bacteria, which affects how the brain works, the study authors said. Artificial sweeteners can interfere with chemicals in the brain that help nerve cells communicate normally (Samuthpongtorn C, et al.,2023).

The Impact of Soil Degradation on Food Quality and Health

Modern agricultural practices have contributed significantly to the decline in soil health. The focus on maximizing crop yields through the application of NPK fertilizers has led to the neglect of other vital micronutrients such as magnesium, zinc, iron, and selenium, which are crucial for human health (Gupta & Gupta, 2000; Cakmak & Marschner, 1988). Over time, soils become depleted of these nutrients, leading to crops that are less nutritious. Moreover, deterioration of carbon content and structure in soils causes the lover water retention and decreases yield. This soil depletion is not only a concern for raw agricultural products but also for the ultra-processed foods derived from them, further deteriorating the nutritional quality of the global food supply (Davis et al., 2004; Mayer, 1997).

1. Nutrient Depletion and Food Quality

Studies have shown that the nutritional content of crops has been declining over the past several decades. For instance, a comprehensive study by Davis et al. (2004) found significant reductions in the levels of essential nutrients in fruits and vegetables since the 1950s. This decline is attributed to soil depletion caused by modern agricultural practices focused on high yields rather than nutritional quality (Fan et al., 2008). The resulting crops, which are used as raw materials for processed foods, are inherently less nutritious, compounding the health risks associated with UPFs (Welch & Graham, 2004).

2. Degradation of Soil Structure and Carbon Content

The degradation of soil structure and carbon content is a critical issue that exacerbates the declining quality of agricultural products and, consequently, global health. Healthy soil structure is essential for maintaining water retention, nutrient availability, and root growth. However, intensive agricultural practices, such as over-tilling, monocropping, and excessive use of chemical fertilizers, have led to the breakdown of soil aggregates, resulting in soil compaction and erosion (Lal, 2004).

Moreover, these practices deplete the organic carbon content in the soil, which is crucial for soil fertility and microbial activity. Soil organic carbon acts as a key component of soil health, influencing nutrient cycling and the soil’s ability to sequester carbon dioxide, thereby mitigating climate change. The loss of soil carbon not only diminishes the soil’s capacity to support healthy crop production but also contributes to higher atmospheric carbon levels, intensifying the global climate crisis (Smith et al., 2015; Lal, 2004).

Addressing soil structure degradation and carbon loss requires adopting sustainable farming practices, such as reduced tillage, cover cropping, and organic amendments, to restore soil health, increase soil water retention, improve crop quality, and enhance global food security (Lal, 2015).

3. Impact on Public Health – Malnutrition

The combination of poor soil health and the proliferation of ultra-processed foods creates a “double burden” on global health. Populations are not only consuming foods that are high in unhealthy components but also low in essential nutrients due to soil degradation (Smith et al., 2016). This scenario exacerbates micronutrient deficiencies, leading to increased susceptibility to chronic diseases. For example, the lack of zinc in soils, and consequently in crops, has been linked to higher rates of immune deficiency and infectious diseases, as detailed by Brown & Wuehler (2000) and discussed in The Lancet (Swaminathan, 2003).

Global Health Implications and Industry Response

The global health implications of the widespread consumption of ultra-processed foods, compounded by declining soil health, are severe. The rise in non-communicable diseases, driven by these factors, presents a major challenge to public health systems, particularly in developing countries where both undernutrition and overnutrition are prevalent (Barrett, 2010; Cordell et al., 2009).

The food industry’s response to these challenges has been largely superficial, focusing on the introduction of “healthier” product lines without addressing the underlying issues of soil degradation and nutrient depletion (Glanz & Yaroch, 2004). While some companies are beginning to explore more nutrient-dense food options, the scale of the problem requires a more fundamental shift in both agricultural practices (including innovative organic fertilizers) and food processing methods (van der Wiel et al., 2023).

Societal Response to Global Health Implications

The global health implications of widespread consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and the degradation of soil health present a multifaceted challenge that requires coordinated action from governments, the private sector, civil society, and individuals. The societal response must address both the immediate health impacts and the underlying environmental and economic drivers that exacerbate these issues.

1. Policy and Regulation

Governments play a crucial role in shaping the food environment and mitigating the negative health impacts associated with UPFs and soil degradation. Effective policy and regulatory measures can include:

• Nutritional Guidelines and Public Awareness: Governments can promote dietary guidelines that emphasize the consumption of whole foods and reduce reliance on ultra-processed products. Public health campaigns can raise awareness about the health risks of UPFs and the importance of nutrient-rich diets, particularly in vulnerable populations such as children and low-income groups (Monteiro et al., 2019; Fiolet et al., 2018).
• Taxation and Subsidies: Implementing taxes on unhealthy foods, such as sugary beverages and high-fat snacks, can discourage their consumption. Conversely, subsidies for fruits, vegetables, and other whole foods can make healthier options more accessible and affordable. For instance, Mexico’s sugar tax, introduced in 2014, has shown promising results in reducing the consumption of sugary drinks (Colchero et al., 2016).
• Food Labeling Requirements: Clear and informative food labeling can help consumers make healthier choices. Mandatory front-of-package labels that indicate high levels of sugar, fat, and sodium can deter the purchase of ultra-processed foods. Some countries, like Chile and Brazil, have already implemented such labeling systems with positive outcomes (Taillie et al., 2020).
• Regulation of Marketing Practices: To protect vulnerable groups, particularly children, stricter regulations on the marketing of ultra-processed foods are necessary. Limiting advertising during children’s programming and restricting the use of cartoon characters and celebrities in marketing unhealthy foods can reduce children’s exposure to these products (Sadeghirad et al., 2016).

2. Agricultural Practices and Soil Management

Improving agricultural practices is essential to address soil degradation and enhance the nutritional quality of food. This requires a shift towards sustainable farming practices that prioritize soil health and biodiversity:

• Sustainable Farming Techniques: Promoting techniques such as crop rotation, cover cropping, reduced tillage, and the use of organic fertilizers can help restore soil structure, increase soil organic carbon content, and improve water retention (Lal, 2004; Smith et al., 2015). These practices can enhance the resilience of agricultural systems to climate change and improve the nutritional content of crops (Bouis & Welch, 2010).
• Support for Small-Scale Farmers: Governments and NGOs can support small-scale farmers in adopting sustainable practices by providing access to resources, education, and financial incentives. These farmers often face barriers to implementing sustainable methods due to limited access to technology, knowledge, and capital (Altieri, 2009).
• Agroecology and Agroforestry: Integrating trees and other perennial plants into agricultural landscapes (agroforestry) can improve soil health, sequester carbon, and increase biodiversity. Agroecology, which emphasizes the ecological management of farming systems, can also play a critical role in creating more resilient and sustainable food systems (Gliessman, 2015).

3. Private Sector Initiatives

The private sector, particularly food manufacturers and retailers, has a significant influence on the food environment and consumer choices. Companies can contribute to the societal response by:

• Reformulating Products: Food companies can reduce the levels of sugar, fat, and salt in their products and remove harmful additives. Reformulating UPFs to make them healthier while maintaining taste and affordability can help reduce the public health burden associated with these products (Mozaffarian et al., 2018).
• Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Companies can engage in CSR initiatives that support sustainable agriculture, improve food security, and promote healthy eating. For example, investing in sustainable sourcing of ingredients or supporting educational programs about nutrition can enhance a company’s reputation while contributing to public health (Hartmann et al., 2015).
• Innovating Healthier Products: The development of new, healthier food products that cater to the growing consumer demand for nutritious and convenient options can drive industry change. This includes increasing the availability of minimally processed foods and creating alternatives to highly processed snacks and meals (Pereira-Kotze C, et al., 2022).

4. Community and Civil Society Engagement

Civil society organizations, community groups, and NGOs play a crucial role in advocating for healthier food environments and supporting grassroots initiatives that promote sustainable agriculture and healthy eating:

• Community-Led Initiatives: Local initiatives such as community gardens, farmers’ markets, and food cooperatives can improve access to fresh, local, and nutritious foods. These initiatives also strengthen community ties and empower individuals to take control of their food choices (Wakefield et al., 2007).
• Educational Programs: NGOs and community organizations can provide education on nutrition, sustainable agriculture, and cooking skills, particularly in underserved communities. These programs can help people understand the importance of healthy eating and how to prepare nutritious meals on a budget (Drewnowski et al., 2010).
• Advocacy for Policy Change: Civil society organizations can advocate for stronger government action on food policy and environmental protection. By mobilizing public support and engaging in policy dialogue, these organizations can influence decision-making and drive systemic change (Lang & Rayner, 2012).

5. Individual Actions and Consumer Choices

Ultimately, individual choices play a significant role in shaping the demand for ultra-processed foods and the sustainability of agricultural practices. Consumers can contribute to societal change by:

• Making Informed Choices: Educating oneself about the health impacts of ultra-processed foods and the importance of soil health can lead to more informed purchasing decisions. Choosing whole, minimally processed foods and supporting sustainable agricultural products can drive demand for healthier options (Lal, 2009; Monteiro et al., 2019).
• Reducing Food Waste: Reducing food waste is another important individual action that can contribute to global sustainability. By planning meals, using leftovers, and composting organic waste, consumers can reduce the environmental impact of their food consumption (FAO, 2011).
• Supporting Sustainable Brands: Consumers can choose to support brands that prioritize sustainability, ethical sourcing, and healthy products. By directing purchasing power towards companies that align with these values, individuals can encourage the broader food industry to adopt more sustainable practices (Hartmann et al., 2015).

In Summary: Addressing the global health implications of ultra-processed food consumption and soil degradation requires a comprehensive societal response that involves coordinated action from governments, the private sector, civil society, and individuals. By implementing policies that promote healthy eating, sustainable agriculture, and consumer education, society can mitigate the health and environmental impacts of these challenges and move towards a more sustainable and equitable food system.

Conclusions

The convergence of soil degradation and the proliferation of ultra-processed foods represents a significant threat to global health. The depletion of essential nutrients in soils, coupled with the rise of nutrient-poor processed foods, exacerbates the global burden of non-communicable diseases. Addressing this issue requires a multi-faceted approach, including:

• adoption of sustainable innovative agricultural practices (including organic fertilization),
• stricter regulation of food processing and innovative agricultural practicies,
• incentives for less processed food,
• greater public awareness of the nutritional quality of foods.

This publication has been inspired by the interesting article in The Economist (Aug 18, 2024), section business: Can big food adapt to healthier diets? https://www.economist.com/business/2024/08/18/can-big-food-adapt-to-healthier-diets#

References

1. Altieri, M. A. (2009). Agroecology, small farms, and food sovereignty. Monthly Review, 61(3), 102-113.
   https://doi.org/10.14452/MR-061-03-2009-07_8
2. Barrett, C. B. (2010). Measuring food insecurity. Science, 327(5967), 825-828.
   https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182768
3. Beach RH, et al. (2019). Combining the effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on protein, iron, and zinc availability and projected climate change on global diets: a modelling study. Lancet Planet Health. Jul;3(7):e307-e317.
   https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30094-4.
4. Bouis, H.E. and Welch, R.M. (2010), Biofortification—A Sustainable Agricultural Strategy for Reducing Micronutrient Malnutrition in the Global South. Crop Sci., 50: S-20-S-32.
   https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2009.09.0531
5. Brown, K. H., & Wuehler, S. E. (2000). Zinc and human health: results of recent trials and implications for program interventions and research. Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 21(4), 440-443.
   https://archive.unu.edu/unupress/food/fnb22-2.pdf  
6. Cakmak, I., & Marschner, H. (1988). Zinc-dependent changes in ESR signals, NADPH oxidase and plasma membrane permeability in cotton roots. Physiologia Plantarum, 73(1), 182-186.
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1988.tb09214.x  
7. Colchero, M. A., et al. (2016). Beverage purchases from stores in Mexico under the excise tax on sugar sweetened beverages: observational study. BMJ, 352, h6704.
   https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h6704
8. Cordell, D., Drangert, J. O., & White, S. (2009). The story of phosphorus: Global food security and food for thought. Global Environmental Change, 19(2), 292-305.
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.10.009
9. Davis, D. R., et al. (2004). Changes in USDA Food Composition Data for 43 Garden Crops, 1950 to 1999. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 23(6), 669-682.
   https://doi.org/10.1080/07315724.2004.10719409
10. Drewnowski, A., & Darmon, N. (2010). The economics of obesity: dietary energy density and energy cost. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 82(1), 265S-273S.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/82.1.265S
11. Fan, M. S., et al. (2008). Evidence of decreasing mineral density in wheat grain over the last 160 years. Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology, 22(4), 315-324.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtemb.2008.07.002
12. FAO (2011). Global food losses and food waste – Extent, causes and prevention. Rome.
    https://www.fao.org/4/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
13. Fiolet, T., et al. (2018). Consumption of ultra-processed foods and cancer risk: results from NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort. The BMJ, 360, k322.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k322
14. Gearhardt, A. N., et al. (2011). Can food be addictive? Public health and policy implications. Addiction, 106(7), 1208-1212.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03301.x
15. Glanz, K., & Yaroch, A. L. (2004). Strategies for increasing fruit and vegetable intake in grocery stores and communities: policy, pricing, and environmental change. Preventive Medicine, 39(Suppl 2), S75-S80.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.01.004
16. Gliessman, S. R. (2015). Agroecology: The Ecology of Sustainable Food Systems. CRC Press.
    https://doi.org/10.1201/b17881
17. Gupta, U. C., & Gupta, S. C. (2000). Selenium in soils and crops, its deficiencies in livestock and humans: Implications for management. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 31(11-14), 1791-1807.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620009370538
18. Hartmann, M., & Siegrist, M. (2015). Consumer perception and behavior regarding sustainable protein consumption: A systematic review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 44(1), 2-11.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.12.006
19. Lal, R. (2004). Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and food security. Science, 304(5677), 1623-1627.
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097396
20. Lal, R. (2009). Soil degradation as a reason for inadequate human nutrition. Food Security, 1(1), 45-57.
    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/S12571-009-0009-Z
21. Lal, R. (2015). Restoring soil quality to mitigate soil degradation. Sustainability, 7(5), 5875-5895.
    https://doi.org/10.3390/su7055875
22. Lang, T., & Rayner, G. (2012). Ecological public health: the 21st century’s big idea? An essay by Tim Lang and Geof Rayner. BMJ, 345, e5466.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e5466
23. Mayer, A. M. (1997). Historical changes in the mineral content of fruits and vegetables. British Food Journal, 99(6), 207-211.
    https://doi.org/10.1108/00070709710181540
24. Mendonça, R. D., et al. (2017). Ultra-processed food consumption and the incidence of hypertension in a Mediterranean cohort: The SUN Project. American Journal of Hypertension, 30(4), 358-366.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpw137
25. Monteiro, C. A., et al. (2019). Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them. Public Health Nutrition, 22(5), 936-941.
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980018003762
26. Mozaffarian, D., et al. (2018). Role of government policy in nutrition—barriers to and opportunities for healthier eating. BMJ, 361, k2426.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k2426
27. Pereira-Kotze C, et al. (2022). Conflicts of interest are harming maternal and child health: time for scientific journals to end relationships with manufacturers of breast-milk substitutes. BMJ Glob Health. 2022 Feb;7(2):e008002.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-008002.
28. Rengel, Z., & Graham, R. D. (1995). Wheat genotypes differ in zinc efficiency when grown in the chelate-buffered nutrient solution. I. Growth and zinc uptake. Plant and Soil, 176, 307-316.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00011795
29. Sadeghirad, B., et al. (2016). Influence of unhealthy food and beverage marketing on children’s dietary intake and preference: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Obesity Reviews, 17(10), 945-959.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12445
30. Schulte, E. M., et al. (2015). Which foods may be addictive? The roles of processing, fat content, and glycemic load. PLoS ONE, 10(2), e0117959.
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117959
31. Smith, P., et al. (2015). Agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU). In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press.
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415416.017
32. Srour, B., et al. (2019). Ultra-processed food intake and risk of cardiovascular disease: prospective cohort study (NutriNet-Santé). The BMJ, 365, l1451.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1451
33. Taillie, L. S., et al. (2020). An evaluation of Chile’s law of food labeling and advertising on sugarsweetened beverage purchases from 2015 to 2017: A before-and-after study. PLOS Medicine, 17(2), e1003015.
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003015
34. van der Wiel, B.Z., Neuberger, S., Darr, D. et al. (2023). Challenges and opportunities for nutrient circularity: an innovation platform approach. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-023-10285-x
35. Wakefield, S., et al. (2007). Growing urban health: Community gardening in South-East Toronto. Health Promotion International, 22(2), 92-101.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dam001
36. Welch, R. M., & Graham, R. D. (2004). Breeding for micronutrients in staple food crops from a human nutrition perspective. Journal of Experimental Botany, 55(396), 353-364.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh064
37. White, P. J., & Broadley, M. R. (2005). Historical variation in the mineral composition of edible horticultural products. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 80(6), 660-667.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2005.11511995
38. Ziauddeen, H., & Fletcher, P. C. (2013). Is food addiction a valid and useful concept? Obesity Reviews, 14(1), 19-28.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2012.01046.x

#Sustainability #PublicHealth #FoodSecurity #UltraprocessedFoods #UPF #Agriculture #SoilDeterioration #HealthyLiving #CorporateResponsibility #SCR

1. Introduction to REACH: REACH is a key tool for chemical management in companies operating within the European Union. The introduction of this regulation aims to protect human health and the environment through better management of risks associated with chemicals (ECHA, 2020, Barlow et al., 2015; Fisk, 2013).
2. Benefits of Implementing REACH: REACH is a mechanism that not only helps companies comply with legal requirements but also offers long-term benefits such as improved workplace safety, health protection, and enhanced company reputation (Ciatti et al., 2021, Hammerschmidt & Marx, 2014, ECHA, 2016 ).
   • Improved Workplace Safety and Health Protection: There is broad consensus in the scientific literature that implementing REACH positively impacts workplace safety. Research shows that reducing exposure to harmful chemicals leads to fewer accidents and occupational diseases (Bodar et al., 2018; Frick, 2011, Wachter & Yorio, 2014, Godderis et al., 2024).
   • Compliance as a Risk Management Strategy: Compliance with REACH regulations is crucial to avoiding legal sanctions, as emphasized in scientific studies. This compliance is also seen as a strategic element of risk management in companies, which can lead to an increase in their market value (Ramos et al., 2020; Black & Baldwin, 2012, Vogel, 2010).
   • Increased Competitiveness and Sustainable Development: Implementing REACH can contribute to increased competitiveness by improving the company’s reputation for sustainable development. Studies suggest that companies adhering to REACH are perceived as more socially and environmentally responsible, which can attract new customers and partners (Hale et al., 2015; Kontogiannis et al., 2017, Worthington, 2013).
3. Challenges of Implementing REACH: While the benefits are usually highlighted, it’s also important to address the challenges associated with implementing REACH, which are discussed in the literature.
   • Implementation Costs: One of the main challenges is the high costs associated with implementing REACH, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Research indicates that these costs may include not only the registration of substances but also risk assessments and compliance monitoring (Salguero-Caparrós et al., 2020; Sutton, 2014).
   • Complexity and Bureaucracy: REACH is often criticized for its complexity and administrative demands. The process of registering and evaluating substances is time-consuming and requires significant resources, which can be challenging for SMEs (Li & Guldenmund, 2018; Robinson et al., 2020).
4. Recommendations: Given the challenges posed by implementing REACH, it is recommended to take steps such as identifying the chemicals used, conducting risk assessments, training employees, and regular monitoring (Pidgeon, 1991).
   • Importance of Training: Studies show that regular employee training in the safe handling of chemicals is crucial for the effective implementation of REACH. These training sessions should cover both theoretical and practical aspects to increase awareness and preparedness among employees (Gander et al., 2011; Walters et al., 2011).
   • Monitoring and Auditing: Regular monitoring of REACH compliance and conducting internal audits are essential to maintaining compliance and minimizing risk (Bahr, 2014; Reese, 2018).

Conclusion: The article rightly emphasizes that REACH is not just a legal obligation but also a tool for improving workplace safety and health protection within an enterprise. While implementing REACH comes with certain challenges, the long-term benefits, such as better employee health protection, compliance with regulations, and increased competitiveness, outweigh these difficulties. Therefore, it is worth investing in the REACH implementation process to ensure the safety and sustainable development of the company (Black, 2010; Majone, 2010).

Would You like to find out how our project can help You with REACH – fill in the form and we will contact You shortly: https://forms.gle/6YJgSAJiPpmSQbJW6

Bibliography (with links to original publications)

1. Bahr, N. J. (2014). System safety engineering and risk assessment: A practical approach. Available here.
2. Barlow, S. M., Boobis, A. R., Bridges, J., Cockburn, A., & others. (2015). The role of hazard-and risk-based approaches in ensuring food safety. Trends in Food Science & Technology, Volume 46, Issue 2, Part A, Pages 176-188 Available here.
3. Black, J. (2010). Risk-based regulation: Choices, practices, and lessons being learnt. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264082939-en .
4. Black, J., & Baldwin, R. (2012). When risk-based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges. Regulation & Governance. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748- 5991.2011.01124.x.
5. Bodar, C., Spijker, J., Lijzen, J., & others. (2018). Risk management of hazardous substances in a circular economy. Journal of Environmental Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.02.014 .
6. ECHA, 2016, Cost and benefit assessments in the REACH restriction dossiers https://doi.org/10.2823/57600
7. ECHA, (2020). REACH Regulation Overview. Helsinki: ECHA, https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/understanding-reach
8. Fabrizzio Ciatti, Daniel Vencovsky, et al., 2021, Development of REACH – Review of evidence on the benefits & costs of REACH, German Environment Agency, https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/5750/publikationen/2021_01_28_texte_06-2021_reach_weiterentwicklung_ap_2.pdf
9. Fisk, P. (2013). Chemical risk assessment: A manual for REACH. Available here.
10. Frick, K. (2011). Worker influence on voluntary OHS management systems–A review of its ends and means. Safety Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.04.007
11. Gander, P., Hartley, L., Powell, D., Cabon, P., & others. (2011). Fatigue risk management: Organizational factors at the regulatory and industry/company level. Accident Analysis & Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.11.007
12. Godderis L, et al., 2024, Towards a more effective REACH legislation in protecting human health. Toxicol Sci. 2024 May 28;199(2):194-202. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfae025.
13. Hale, A., Borys, D., & Adams, M. (2015). Safety regulation: The lessons of workplace safety rule management for managing the regulatory burden. Safety Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.11.012.
14. Hammerschmidt, T., Marx, R., 2014,  REACH and occupational health and safety. Environ Sci Eur 26, 6 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/2190-4715-26-6
15. Kontogiannis, T., Leva, M. C., & Balfe, N. (2017). Total safety management: principles, processes, and methods. Safety Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.09.015.
16. Li, Y., & Guldenmund, F. W. (2018). Safety management systems: A broad overview of the literature. Safety Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.11.016.
17. Majone, G. (2010). Strategic issues in risk regulation and risk management. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264082939-en.
18. Pidgeon, N. F. (1991). Safety Culture and Risk Management in Organizations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 22(1), 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022191221009
19. Ramos, D., Afonso, P., & Rodrigues, M. A. (2020). Integrated management systems as a key facilitator of occupational health and safety risk management: A case study in a medium-sized waste management firm. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121346
20. Reese, C. D. (2018). Occupational health and safety management: A practical approach. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781351228848 .
21. Robinson, C., Portier, C. J., & Čavoški, A., et al. (2020). Achieving a high level of protection from pesticides in Europe: Problems with the current risk assessment procedure and solutions. European Journal of Risk Regulation. 11(3):450-480. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2020.18.
22. Salguero-Caparrós, F., Pardo-Ferreira, M. C., & others. (2020). Management of legal compliance in occupational health and safety: A literature review. Safety Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.08.033.
23. Sutton, I. (2014). Process risk and reliability management. Available here.
24. Vogel, D. (2010). The Private Regulation of Global Corporate Conduct. Business and Society, 49(1), 68-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650309343407
25. Wachter, J. K., & Yorio, P. L. (2014). A system of safety management practices and worker engagement for reducing and preventing accidents: An empirical and theoretical investigation. Accident Analysis & Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.07.029 .
26. Walters, D., Johnstone, R., Frick, K., Quinlan, M., & others. (2011). Regulating workplace risks: A comparative study of inspection regimes in times of change. Available here.
27. Worthington, I. (2013). Greening Business: Research, Theory, and Practice. Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780199535224, Available here.

#Safety #Management #REACH #fit4REACH2PL

In the ever-evolving landscape of sustainability, the circular economy stands out as a promising solution to many of our environmental challenges. By focusing on reducing waste and making the most of resources, the circular economy can significantly mitigate environmental degradation. However, implementing circular principles in food delivery presents unique challenges that require innovative solutions.

The Complexity of Food Delivery Systems

Food delivery systems are intricate networks involving multiple stakeholders, including suppliers, restaurants, delivery services, and consumers. Transitioning from a linear to a circular model in this sector is complex due to the diverse and interconnected nature of these systems. Each stakeholder has different priorities and capabilities, making it difficult to implement uniform circular practices.
For instance, while some restaurants might easily adopt reusable packaging, delivery services need to manage the logistics of returning these packages. This complexity necessitates a coordinated approach, where each stakeholder’s role and responsibilities are clearly defined and supported by robust infrastructure and policy frameworks.

Consumer Behavior and Mindset

One of the most significant challenges in promoting circularity in food delivery is changing consumer behavior and mindset. Many consumers are accustomed to the convenience of single-use packaging, which offers quick disposal without the need for cleaning or returning items. Shifting this mindset towards a more sustainable approach requires a cultural change, driven by awareness and incentives.
Educational campaigns highlighting the environmental impacts of single-use plastics and the benefits of reusable alternatives are essential. Moreover, providing incentives such as discounts for using reusable containers or penalties for opting for single-use items can nudge consumers towards more sustainable choices. However, these measures need to be carefully designed to avoid inconvenience that might discourage adoption.

Infrastructure and Logistics

The infrastructure required to support circular food delivery systems is another significant hurdle. Establishing a system where reusable packaging is collected, cleaned, and redistributed involves considerable logistical challenges. This requires investment in cleaning facilities, efficient collection routes, and partnerships with delivery companies.
Moreover, urban environments vary greatly in their capacity to support such systems. Cities with dense populations might find it easier to implement centralized cleaning facilities and efficient collection systems, while smaller or more spread-out areas may struggle with the logistics and cost-effectiveness of such solutions.

Regulatory and Policy Frameworks

Effective implementation of circular economy principles in food delivery also depends on supportive regulatory and policy frameworks. Governments play a crucial role in setting standards, providing incentives, and enforcing regulations that promote circular practices. However, developing and enforcing these policies can be challenging.
Regulations need to balance the interests of businesses and consumers while ensuring environmental benefits. Policies might include bans on single-use plastics, mandates for reusable packaging, and incentives for businesses that adopt circular practices. However, without proper enforcement and support, such policies might not achieve their intended impact.

Technological Innovation

Technological innovation is key to overcoming many of the challenges associated with circular food delivery systems. Advances in materials science can lead to the development of more durable and sustainable packaging options. Digital platforms can streamline the logistics of collecting and redistributing reusable containers, making the process more efficient and user-friendly.
However, adopting new technologies requires investment and willingness to experiment. Small businesses, in particular, may find it difficult to allocate resources towards such innovations without support from larger companies or government initiatives.

Economic Viability

The economic viability of circular food delivery systems is a critical consideration. While the long-term benefits of circularity include reduced waste management costs and environmental impact, the initial investment can be high. Businesses need to see a clear economic benefit to invest in reusable packaging systems, infrastructure, and technology.
Creating a business model that balances environmental sustainability with economic viability is essential. This might involve collaborative approaches where costs and benefits are shared among stakeholders, government subsidies or incentives, and innovative pricing strategies that reflect the true cost of single-use versus reusable packaging.

Conclusion

The transition to a circular economy in food delivery presents numerous challenges, from changing consumer behavior and developing infrastructure to creating supportive regulatory frameworks and ensuring economic viability. However, these challenges are not insurmountable. With coordinated efforts from all stakeholders, technological innovation, and supportive policies, the food delivery sector can move towards a more sustainable and circular model.
By addressing these challenges head-on, we can create a food delivery system that not only meets our convenience needs but also aligns with our environmental and sustainability goals. This transition requires a collective effort, but the benefits for our planet and future generations make it a journey worth undertaking.

Contact:

Would You like to find out more about our activities, please follow us on Internet and Social Media (Facebook, LInkedIn, X (formerly Twitter)).
Would You like to find out whether there is a possibility to join the project as an associated partner: please fill in the short questionnaire (5 questions) here or contact coordinator for Poland (Dr inż. Andrzej Tonderski) here.

#ChangeKnow #Sustainability #CircularEconomy #GreenGovernance #EcoFriendly #FoodDelivery #MultipleUsePackages

In the quest for sustainability, the public sector plays a crucial role. Through Green Public Procurement (GPP), municipalities and governments can set a powerful example by choosing goods and services that have a reduced environmental impact. However, achieving true sustainability requires more than just a focus on green products; it requires a holistic approach that integrates chemicals, climate, and circularity. This is where the ChemClimCircle project steps in.

What is ChemClimCircle?

ChemClimCircle is an innovative project designed to address the complex interplay between chemicals, climate, and circularity in public procurement processes. The project’s primary aim is to ensure that materials procured by municipalities are not only circular and climate-neutral but also free from harmful toxins. This integrated approach is crucial for creating a truly sustainable and safe circular economy.

The Need for Integration

Public procurement is a powerful tool for driving environmental change. However, traditional procurement practices often overlook the interconnectedness of chemical safety, climate impact, and material circularity. For instance, a product might be climate-neutral but contain harmful chemicals, or it might be free of toxins but contribute to greenhouse gas emissions during its lifecycle.
To address these gaps, ChemClimCircle focuses on developing a comprehensive procurement concept that assesses the interlinks, conflicts, and dependencies between these three critical aspects. By doing so, it aims to provide municipalities with the guidance and tools needed to make informed, sustainable procurement decisions.

Key Components of ChemClimCircle

Concept Development:
• Assessing the interconnections between circularity, chemical risks, and climate neutrality.
• Identifying potential conflicts and dependencies in procurement processes.
Guidance and Training:
• Creating detailed guidance documents and training modules for procurement specialists and decision-makers in municipalities.
• Ensuring these materials are practical and applicable to real-world scenarios.
Internal and External Management Strategies:
• Developing internal strategies for municipalities to coordinate ChemClimCircle aspects.
• Providing external support for municipalities, particularly in the Eastern Baltic Sea Region, through round tables and collaborative efforts.
Stakeholder Engagement:
• Mapping target groups and initiating dialogues with stakeholders.
• Creating platforms for larger collaborative actions and networking opportunities.
International Collaboration:
• Organizing international think tank workshops to discuss findings, share best practices, and receive feedback from a diverse group of experts.

Transforming Public Procurement

ChemClimCircle aims to transform public procurement by embedding the principles of chemicals safety, climate neutrality, and circularity into the procurement processes. This involves:

• Assessing Procurement Processes: Municipalities need to evaluate their current procurement practices to identify areas where improvements can be made in terms of sustainability.
• Developing Comprehensive Criteria: Establishing procurement criteria that ensure products and services are circular, climate-neutral, and free from harmful chemicals.
• Training and Capacity Building: Providing ongoing training for procurement officials to keep them informed about the latest sustainable procurement practices and standards.
• Monitoring and Evaluation: Continuously monitoring procurement outcomes to ensure they align with the ChemClimCircle principles and making adjustments as necessary.

Benefits of Integrated Green Public Procurement

By integrating chemicals, climate, and circularity into public procurement, municipalities can:

• Reduce Environmental Impact: Lower greenhouse gas emissions, decrease waste, and minimize the use of toxic substances.
• Enhance Public Health: Promote the use of non-toxic materials, leading to healthier environments for residents.
• Promote Innovation: Encourage the development and adoption of sustainable products and services.
• Lead by Example: Set a standard for sustainable practices that can inspire other sectors and regions to follow suit.

The Road Ahead

As ChemClimCircle progresses, it aims to create a ripple effect, influencing more municipalities and regions to adopt integrated procurement practices. By addressing the critical links between chemicals, climate, and circularity, the project sets a new standard for sustainable public procurement.
For those involved in public procurement, the ChemClimCircle project offers invaluable insights and practical tools to navigate the complexities of sustainable procurement. By adopting these practices, municipalities can not only reduce their environmental footprint but also lead the way towards a safer, healthier, and more sustainable future.
Stay tuned for more updates on our journey towards integrating chemicals, climate, and circularity in Green Public Procurement. Together, we can make a difference!

For more information about the ChemClimCircle project and how you can get involved (fill in the formular here), visit our website and follow us on social media. Let’s work together for a sustainable future! 🌍🌿🔄

Audyt energetyczny stanowi kompleksową ocenę mającą na celu analizę efektywności energetycznej budynków, systemów i procesów operacyjnych. Proces ten ma na celu wykrycie nieefektywności w użyciu energii i zidentyfikowanie możliwości jej oszczędzania i optymalizacji. Realizowany przez dokładne badanie, ma za zadanie zapewnienie dogłębnego zrozumienia wzorców konsumpcji energii w określonej strukturze lub procesie i opracowanie strategii optymalizacji.

Główne cele przeprowadzenia audytu energetycznego obejmują:

• Identyfikację Potencjalnych Oszczędności Energetycznych: Audyt ma na celu wskazanie konkretnych obszarów, gdzie zużycie energii jest nadmierne lub nieefektywne. Do typowych ustaleń mogą należeć wycieki ciepła, nieprawidłowe ustawienia systemów grzewczych i chłodniczych, używanie przestarzałych urządzeń elektrycznych czy niewydajne rozwiązania oświetleniowe.
• Podniesienie Efektywności Energetycznej: Wnioski wynikające z audytu umożliwiają sformułowanie strategii optymalizacji zużycia energii. Może to obejmować przyjęcie bardziej energooszczędnych urządzeń, poprawę izolacji budynków, dostosowanie działania systemów HVAC lub integrację źródeł energii odnawialnej.
• Zmniejszenie Kosztów Operacyjnych: Poprzez usprawnienie zarządzania energią, możliwe jest osiągnięcie znaczących oszczędności kosztowych. Audyt identyfikuje możliwości redukcji zużycia energii, co bezpośrednio przekłada się na obniżenie rachunków za energię.
• Promowanie Zrównoważonego Użytkowania Energii: Audyt energetyczny jest kluczowym narzędziem w dążeniu do realizacji celów zrównoważonego rozwoju i ograniczenia emisji gazów cieplarnianych. Ulepszenia w efektywności energetycznej przyczyniają się do redukcji negatywnego wpływu na środowisko.

Audyt energetyczny jest przeprowadzany przez zewnętrznych specjalistów lub ekspertów w dziedzinie efektywności energetycznej, którzy są w pełni certyfikowani i uprawnieni do przeprowadzania takich ocen.

Wyniki audytu energetycznego oferują szczegółowy przegląd obecnych poziomów konsumpcji energii i dostarczają ukierunkowanych rekomendacji dotyczących wdrażania ulepszeń efektywności energetycznej. W Grantera, utrzymujemy listę wykwalifikowanych audytorów zdolnych do dostarczenia tych kluczowych wglądów.

W przypadku dalszych zapytań lub dyskusji na temat potencjalnych korzyści płynących z audytu energetycznego dla Państwa organizacji, zachęcamy do umówienia się na bezpłatną konsultację z jednym z naszych Ekspertów ds. Efektywności Energetycznej za pomocą formularza.

Często trafiały do nas pytania o możliwości uzyskania dotacji pomimo braku pomysłu na innowację lub nowatorskich produktów czy technologii . Do niedawna nie mieliśmy pozytywnej odpowiedzi na to pytanie, jednak teraz sytuacja uległa zmianie. Przedstawiamy Ci rozwiązanie, które doskonale spełnia te potrzeby – “Kredyt Ekologiczny”. POMInnO jest firmą, która pomaga przedsiębiorcom w pozyskiwaniu grantów i datacji.  Sprawdź nasze usługi.

Program ten zapewnia doskonałe źródło finansowania dla wymiany przestarzałych maszyn na nowoczesne, modernizację parku maszynowego oraz inne inwestycje związane z efektywnością energetyczną. Co ważne, nie wymaga on wdrażania innowacyjnych produktów ani zaawansowanych technologii wynikających z prac badawczo-rozwojowych. Wystarczy, że zdecydujesz się na zastąpienie energochłonnych maszyn nowymi, które charakteryzują się zmniejszonym zużyciem energii. Jest to program skierowany do przedsiębiorstw, które pragną nie tylko zmodernizować swój park maszynowy, ale także chcą zainwestować w energię odnawialną, taką jak fotowoltaika, czy też wprowadzić inne usprawnienia, które przyczynią się do zmniejszenia całkowitego zużycia energii w firmie.

Warto podkreślić, że pomimo swojej nazwy “Kredyt Ekologiczny” to nie preferencyjny kredyt, ale bezzwrotna dotacja, która stanowi dodatkowe wsparcie finansowe dla Twojego przedsiębiorstwa.

Jeśli zatem jesteś przedsiębiorcą i wydaje Ci się, że są sposoby na poprawę efektywności energetycznej w Twoim przedsiębiorstwie – zapraszam do indywidualnych konsultacji, które pozwolą nam określić szanse i prawdopodobieństwo uzyskania dotacji w Twojej firmie. Zanim jednak podejmiesz decyzję, że ten program jest dla Ciebie lub nie – serdecznie zapraszam na obejrzenie nagrania ze szkolenia internetowego z 25 maja 2023 r. czyli sprzed poprzedniej edycji tego programu. Prowadzącym szkolenie był Karol Bober, Prezes Zarządu Grantery, który jest ekspertem w dziedzinie dotacji unijnych i posiada ponad 20 letnie doświadczenie w pozyskiwaniu i rozliczaniu grantów. Wiem, że teraz wszystkie firmy wspomagające pozyskiwanie dotacji są bardzo mocno zajęte i musimy się wspomagać. Bez problemu dzielę się tą informacją, bo wiadomości przekazywane przez Karola są zawsze bardzo praktyczne a ja sam czasami współpracuję z Granterą w przygotowaniu wniosków dotacyjnych i wiem, że to wiedza z najwyższej półki.

W ramach konkursu Kredyt Ekologiczny zostały zaplanowane w 2024 r. dwa nabory wniosków. Pierwszy nabór potrwa od 25 kwietnia 2024 do 25 lipca 2024 roku. Kolejny nabór planowany jest na 17 października 2024 do 30 grudnia 2024 roku.

Jeśli jesteś zainteresowany programem – wypełnij proszę formularz kontaktowy, który pozwoli nam odezwać się bezpośrednio i ustalić szczegóły współpracy przy przygotowaniu  wniosku o Kredyt Ekologiczny dla Twojej firmy.

#kredytekologiczny #pominno #serwisgrantowy

Wyzwanie: Czeka nas Zielona Rewolucja

Zamówienia publiczne są potężnym narzędziem promowania zrównoważonego rozwoju środowiskowego, jednak ich potencjał pozostaje w dużej mierze niewykorzystany. Pomimo istniejących wytycznych i kryteriów, wdrażanie praktyk Zielonych Zamówień Publicznych (GPP) jest sporadyczne i dobrowolne, dalekie od powszechnego stosowania, co jest potrzebne do osiągnięcia znaczącego wpływu środowiskowego. Projekt ChemClimCircle II ma na celu zmierzenie się z tym wyzwaniem poprzez integrację bezpieczeństwa chemicznego, zasad gospodarki o obiegu zamkniętym i rozważań klimatycznych w procesach zamówień publicznych, czyniąc zielone zamówienia nie wyjątkiem, lecz normą.

Rodzaj Współpracy: Interakcja Transnarodowa ma Znaczenie

Przeszkody w „zazielenianiu” zamówień publicznych nie znają granic. Wspólne wyzwania na obszarze Regionu Morza Bałtyckiego (BSR), w tym różne poziomy wiedzy, brak umiejętności i presje ekonomiczne, podkreślają konieczność zjednoczonego podejścia. Inicjatywa ChemClimCircle wykorzystuje współpracę transnarodową, aby wspierać wymianę wiedzy, harmonizować standardy i tworzyć zjednoczony rynek, który korzysta z praktyk zrównoważonych zamówień publicznych.

Nasze Cele: Angażowanie Kluczowych Graczy

Skupiamy się na umocnieniu podmiotów publicznych w całym BSR, od małych gmin po władze narodowe, w przyjmowaniu kompleksowych strategii zielonych zamówień. Obejmuje to departamenty zamówień i środowiska, agencje rozwoju regionalnego, MŚP oraz interesariusze mający kluczowe znaczenie w kształtowaniu zrównoważonej przyszłości.

Partnerstwo: Wspólna Podróż w kierunku Rozwoju Zrównoważonego

Na czele naszego konsorcjum stoi Litewski Urząd Zamówień Publicznych, a w jego skład wchodzi szerokie spektrum interesariuszy, w tym gminy, sieci regionalne, think-tanki i Unia Miast Bałtyckich. To zróżnicowane partnerstwo zapewnia rozwój i dystrybucję innowacyjnych rozwiązań dostosowanych do różnych kontekstów w całym BSR.

Mapa Drogowa: Od Koncepcji do Rzeczywistości

Nasz projekt rozwija się w trzech strategicznych Pakietach Prac (WP): przygotowanie rozwiązań, pilotaż i ocena rozwiązań oraz transfer rozwiązań. Wspólnymi wysiłkami mamy na celu opracowanie modeli operacyjnych, koncepcji monitorowania i narzędzi oceny wpływu, które upraszczają integrację kryteriów GPP w praktyki zamówień publicznych. To kompleksowe podejście zapewnia, że nasze grupy docelowe nie tylko są zaangażowane, ale są aktywnymi uczestnikami procesu transformacji.

Rezultat: Zrównoważony System Zamówień Publicznych

Inicjatywa ChemClimCircle ma na celu zrewolucjonizowanie zamówień publicznych, czyniąc zrównoważony rozwój kryterium domyślnym. Naszą wizją jest stworzenie BSR, gdzie każda decyzja dotycząca zamówień jest okazją do promowania celów środowiskowych, wspierając zrównoważony rynek, który wykracza poza regionalne granice.

Dołącz do Nas: Wezwanie do Działania

Zapraszamy potencjalnych partnerów do dołączenia do tej ambitnej podróży w celu „zazielenienia” zamówień publicznych w całym BSR. Razem możemy stworzyć zrównoważoną przyszłość, podejmując jedną decyzję o zielonym zamówieniu publicznym po drugim. Chcesz do nas dołączyć – zarejestruj się na formularzu tutaj.

 

W obliczu wyzwań związanych ze zmianami klimatycznymi, Unia Europejska podejmuje kolejne kroki w kierunku zrównoważonego rozwoju. Wtorek, 11 marca 2024 roku, stał się kamieniem milowym w tym procesie, gdy Parlament Europejski przegłosował istotne zmiany w dyrektywie o sprawności energetycznej budynków, znanej szerzej jako dyrektywa budynkowa. Celem tych zmian jest nie tylko znaczące ograniczenie emisji dwutlenku węgla, ale i uniezależnienie energetyczne UE od importowanych paliw kopalnych. Jakie konkretnie zmiany nas czekają i jak mogą one wpłynąć na nasze codzienne życie oraz branżę budowlaną?

Zakaz montowania pieców na gaz ziemny

Pierwszym i może najbardziej bezpośrednim efektem nowych przepisów jest wprowadzenie zakazu montowania w nowych budynkach pieców opalanych paliwami kopalnymi, w tym gazem ziemnym, w latach 2028-2030. W istniejących budynkach zakaz ten będzie obowiązywał od 2040 roku. Jednak już wcześniej, piece na paliwa kopalne będą mogły być instalowane wyłącznie jako źródła uzupełniające, co wymusi na właścicielach budynków poszukiwanie alternatywnych, ekologicznych rozwiązań, takich jak pompy ciepła.

Obowiązek montowania paneli fotowoltaicznych

W ramach dążenia do maksymalnego wykorzystania odnawialnych źródeł energii, od 2029 roku każdy nowy budynek mieszkalny będzie musiał być wyposażony w panele fotowoltaiczne. To nie tylko krok ku redukcji emisji CO2, ale także szansa na obniżenie rachunków za energię dla mieszkańców. Zmiany te wprowadzane będą stopniowo, zaczynając już od 2025 roku dla budynków publicznych i innych typów konstrukcji.

Standaryzacja świadectw charakterystyki energetycznej

Nowe regulacje wprowadzają również zmiany w zakresie świadectw charakterystyki energetycznej. Od teraz, wszystkie świadectwa w UE będą musiały posługiwać się jednolitą skalą ocen, co ułatwi porównywanie efektywności energetycznej różnych budynków. Zmiany te będą wymagały jednak dostosowań administracyjnych i mogą wiązać się z wydłużeniem terminów wydawania świadectw oraz potencjalnym wzrostem ich cen.

Co to oznacza dla nas?

Te zmiany są traktowane jako znaczący krok w kierunku zrównoważonej przyszłości i mają szansę przynieść długoterminowe korzyści zarówno dla środowiska, jak i ekonomii. Jednakże, dla właścicieli domów i deweloperów oznaczają one jednak konieczność przemyślenia planów budowlanych i inwestycji w nowe technologie.
Branża budowlana stoi przed wyzwaniem adaptacji do nowych wymagań, co może być szansą dla firm inwestujących w zielone technologie i oferujących ekologiczne rozwiązania budowlane.
Dla mieszkańców Unii Europejskiej, te przepisy oznaczają perspektywę adaptacji i możliwe wyzwania związane z dostosowaniem istniejących budynków do nowych standardów. Z jednej strony jest to inwestycja w przyszłość, która ma na celu zapewnienie lepszej jakości życia oraz ochronę naszej planety dla przyszłych pokoleń, ale z drugiej strony stanowi poważne wyzwanie finansowe dla właścicieli domów i mieszkań. Zdecydowanie łatwiej będą mogli się dostosować do tych warunków mieszkańcy Europy Zachodniej (bogatszej) i Południowej (cieplejszej), ale dla mieszkańców Europy Wschodniej (uboższej)i Północnej (chłodniejszej). Z tego punktu widzenia takie programy jak „Mój Prąd” czy „Czyste Powietrze” w Polsce są istotnymi narzędziami finansowymi, które wspierają kierunek tych zmian.

Podsumowując

Decyzje te, choć są kluczowym elementem w strategii UE dotyczącej zrównoważonego rozwoju i walki ze zmianami klimatycznymi, stawiają przed nami, mieszkańcami Europy, jak i przed sektorem budowlanym, nowe wyzwania, ale także otwierają nowe możliwości. Adaptacja do tych zmian wymagać będzie współpracy, innowacji i gotowości do zmian, świadomości, gotowości do wyrzeczeń i zaangażowania każdego z nas, ale przede wszystkim odpowiednich instrumentów wspomagających. To może być wspaniała okazja do europejskiego projektu, który miałby na celu stworzenie rozwiązań wspierających efektywne wdrożenie dyrektywy budynkowej w różnych krajach.

 

17 maja odbyło się świetne szkolenie internetowe na temat poszukiwania partnerów do konsorcjów projektowych w programach UE (Horyzont Europe) i innych. Szkolenie przeprowadziły panie Agnieszka Murzec Wojnar oraz Monika Gadzińska z Horyzontalnego Punktu Kontaktowego Polska Północna przy Uniwersytecie Warmińsko-Mazurskim w Olsztynie. Skondensowana zawartość tego szkolenia dotyczy praktycznych porad w poszukiwaniu partnerów – czyli co, jak i gdzie?

• Wykorzystaj swoje dotychczasowe kontakty – to najlepsza i najbezpieczniejsza formuła pozyskiwaniu partnerów;
• Nawiązuj nowe kontakty podczas wydarzeń takich jak międzynarodowe konferencje, warsztaty, spotkania brokerskie, dni informacyjne KE. Bądź uczestnikiem a najlepiej prelegentem!
• Wykorzystaj media społecznościowe;
• Zostań ekspertem oceniającym wnioski;
• Dołącz jako partner do projektów w fazie realizacji przy pomocy nowych mechanizmów finasowania kaskadowego (HOP-ON dla Filaru II HE lub EIC Pathfinder);
• Dołącz do projektu jednego z siedmiu Wspólnotowych Centrów Badawczych (Joint Research Center);
• Dołącz jako partner stowarzyszony (Associated Partner);
• Przystąp do któregoś z istniejących europejskich partnerstw w twojej dziedzinie (np. EIT Partnership);
• Skorzystaj z bazy wyszukiwania partnerów (np. Funding & Tendering Opportunities albo Euroaxess).

Chciałbyś dowiedzieć się czegoś więcej na temat któregoś z wymienionych sposobów – zapraszam do kontaktu i konsultacji indywidualnej. 

#horyzonteuropa #serwisgrantowy #partnerstwo #konsorcjumprojektowe