DOCSLIB.ORG

Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 Executive Summary mmmll Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 ISBN 978-92-79-60069-2 doi:10.2779/609002 © European Union, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................. 2 Abstract .......................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary.......................................................................................... 4 Background .................................................................................................. 4 Introduction to the project .............................................................................. 4 Method ........................................................................................................ 5 Detailed Country Analysis............................................................................. 5 Results......................................................................................................... 5 Key achievements....................................................................................... 6 Main findings of the problem analysis at national level...................................... 6 Main recommendations to improve national waste management systems ............ 7 June 2016 2 Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 Abstract This report presents the findings of the ‘Municipal Waste Compliance-Promotion Exercise 2014-2015’ project, which forms part of a broader strategy aiming to improve the compliance and implementation of EU waste legislation and supporting member states in achieving compliance. Following on from a previous study which involved a screening exercise of waste management practices in all member states and reviews of ten of the countries experiencing some difficulties complying with the EU acquis, this study undertakes detailed country reviews of a further eight EU member states (Ireland, Malta, Cyprus, Portugal, Spain, Slovenia, Hungary and Croatia). Country factsheets summarising each country’s performance with regards to legal compliance and their ability to meet targets, followed by a series of workshops with stakeholders, culminated in the production of eight roadmaps identifying the key challenges faced by each of the countries. The roadmaps further presented the member states with a list of actions required to improve their performance. The final stage of the project involved a high-level workshop with representatives from all the eight member states to discuss the findings from the project and to share best practice. June 2016 3 Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 Executive Summary Background Successful implementation and enforcement of EU waste legislation across all Member States is key to maximising the benefits from environmentally sound waste management. However, current implementation progress varies greatly from country to country - and there is a considerable gap in many Member States between national waste policy and actual waste management practices, and the results achieved. The Commission recently adopted a Circular Economy Package1 which proposes actions to stimulate Europe's transition towards a circular economy, whereby greater recycling and re-use are the main actions contributing to closing the loop. The proper implementation and enforcement of EU waste legislation is therefore a key priority of the European Commission; it is also vital for the growth of the waste and recycling industry. However, with increasing waste amounts, and large discrepancies in waste management practices across Member States, additional measures are required across the EU to improve implementation and related waste management systems.2 The need for close monitoring of national implementation and enforcement was highlighted in the Commission’s report on the Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste.3 The same report also stressed the importance of supporting Member States in designing strategies and policies that would help countries achieve compliance. Furthermore, the 7th Environment Action Programme also recognises the implementation gap by including as a priority objective 'to maximise the benefits of Union environment legislation by improving implementation' and foreseeing a number of actions. Introduction to the project The current project is part of a broader strategy aiming to improve the compliance and implementation of EU waste legislation, thereby supporting Member States in achieving compliance. It follows the ‘Support to Member States in improving waste management based on assessment of Member States’ performance’ project which was completed in 2013, which aimed at assisting the Commission in the practical implementation of the conclusions of the ‘Report on the Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste’. This three-phase project involved a screening of waste management practices in all Member States. The ten Member States identified to have the largest implementation gaps were then subjected to in-depth assessments of their situation, identifying challenges in complying with EU requirements. Based on these assessments, individual roadmaps with country-specific recommendations were developed. A high level seminar was subsequently organised to discuss actions already taken and to exchange best practice. The ‘Municipal Waste Compliance-Promotion Exercise 2014-2015’ follows on from the previous exercise, by undertaking similar 1COM(2015)/0614final available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0614 2 BiPRO (2013): Support to Member States in improving waste management based on assessment of Member States’ performance. Report prepared for the European Commission, DG ENV, May 2013, Accessed 27th June 2016, Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/framework/pdf/Final%20Report%20_130507. pdf 3 Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste (SEC(2011) 70 final, 19.1.2011) June 2016 4 Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 comprehensive assessments of municipal waste management policy in a further eight Member States identified as requiring support from the screening exercise. Method The method employed in this project closely follows that of the previous exercise. The screening phase undertaken in the first project was relied upon to identify the Member States most requiring support, and was not repeated. Detailed country analysis was undertaken for the following eight Member States in the current study: • Croatia; • Cyprus; • Hungary; • Ireland; • Malta; • Portugal; • Slovenia; and • Spain. Detailed Country Analysis A thorough review of municipal waste management policy was compiled into a factsheet for each of the eight Member States, summarising each country’s performance with regards to compliance with legislation and technical content as well as their ability to meet targets. Based on these factsheets, eight separate workshops bringing together key stakeholders in each Member State were carried out. Measures to improve the waste management situation were discussed during these workshops. A particular focus of both the workshops and the performance reviews was a consideration of the practical implementation and enforcement of the legislation contained within the Waste Framework Directive and Landfill Directive, and a critical analysis of whether policies and strategies developed by the Member States were sufficient to deliver the required changes on the ground. The output from the workshops - along with the factsheets and further reviews of national and regional waste management plans and other relevant documentation - was used to develop the roadmap for each country, taking into account the comments provided by the authorities of each Member State. The roadmaps identified the actions required in each Member State to improve their performance. The last stage of the project included a final workshop with representatives from all of the eight Member States studied. The final workshop presented the key points that the Member States should take away from the process, and provided a forum in which to exchange best practice. Results A key feature of this exercise compared with the previous one is the greater difference between Member States with regards to performance against the targets. While the previous study focussed on the ten poorest performing Member States, this exercise includes some Member States that are performing well together with some that still have some way to go. However, with regards to the potential problems
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Waste Technologies: Waste to Energy Facilities
    WASTE TECHNOLOGIES: WASTE TO ENERGY FACILITIES A Report for the Strategic Waste Infrastructure Planning (SWIP) Working Group Complied by WSP Environmental Ltd for the Government of Western Australia, Department of Environment and Conservation May 2013 Quality Management Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Remarks Date May 2013 Prepared by Kevin Whiting, Steven Wood and Mick Fanning Signature Checked by Matthew Venn Signature Authorised by Kevin Whiting Signature Project number 00038022 Report number File reference Project number: 00038022 Dated: May 2013 2 Revised: Waste Technologies: Waste to Energy Facilities A Report for the Strategic Waste Infrastructure Planning (SWIP) Working Group, commissioned by the Government of Western Australia, Department of Environment and Conservation. May 2013 Client Waste Management Branch Department of Environment and Conservation Level 4 The Atrium, 168 St George’s Terrace, PERTH, WA 6000 Locked Bag 104 Bentley DC WA 6983 Consultants Kevin Whiting Head of Energy-from-Waste & Biomass Tel: +44 207 7314 4647 [email protected] Mick Fanning Associate Consultant Tel: +44 207 7314 5883 [email protected] Steven Wood Principal Consultant Tel: +44 121 3524768 [email protected] Registered Address WSP Environmental Limited 01152332 WSP House, 70 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1AF 3 Table of Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................. 6 1.1 Objectives ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Landfill Disposal Summary Energy Recovery/Incineration
    Landfill Disposal Summary Energy Recovery/Incineration Municipal/Commercial Solid pharmaceuticals Sewage Sludge Wood Waste Grand Total Waste Inland Empire Paper Co Spokane 17911 17911 Grand Total 17911 17911 Ponderay Newsprint Co _N/A 5413 5413 Pend Oreille 27200 3787 30987 Grand Total 27200 9200 36400 Spokane Regional Waste to _N/A 1162.42 1162.42 Energy Facility Lincoln 40.75 40.75 Pend Oreille 3.8 3.8 Spokane 242101.56 11.45 242113.01 Stevens 178.61 178.61 Whitman 22.16 22.16 Grand Total 243509.3 11.45 243520.75 Grand Total 243509.3 11.45 27200 27111 297831.75 Landfill Disposal Summary Inert Waste Landfill Ash (other than special Asphaltic Materials Vactor/Street Sweeping Waste mtg inert criteria per Aluminum Brick and Masonry Ceramic Materials Concrete Cured Concrete Glass Industrial Waste Soil, rock, gravel Soils (uncontaminated) Grand Total incinerator ash) (excluding roofing) Wastes WAC 173-350-990 (3) AAA MONROE ROCK CORP King 400000 400000 Snohomish 12000 22860 123795 158655 Grand Total 12000 22860 523795 558655 BP Cherry Point Refinery Whatcom 55 263 16260 16578 Inert Landfill Grand Total 55 263 16260 16578 Busy Bee Landfill Spokane 1 200 25 1 800 1 200 1228 Grand Total 1 200 25 1 800 1 200 1228 Cemex Inert Waste Landfill, King 75540.52 75540.52 Everett Snohomish 14616.07 5385.25 16153.86 72817.55 108972.73 Grand Total 14616.07 5385.25 16153.86 148358.07 184513.25 Central Pre-Mix Crestline Spokane 67700 67700 Grand Total 67700 67700 Central Pre-Mix Recycling Spokane 5000 5000 8th & Carnahan Grand Total 5000 5000 City of Kennewick
    [Show full text]
  • REBIS) Update
    Report No. 100619-ECA Public Disclosure Authorized The Regional Balkans Infrastructure Study (REBIS) Update ENHANCING REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY Identifying Impediments and Priority Remedies Public Disclosure Authorized Main Report Public Disclosure Authorized September 2015 Public Disclosure Authorized © 2015 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org E-mail: [email protected] All rights reserved This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Western Balkans Joint Fund under the Western Balkans Investment Framework. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and can therefore in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the Contributors to the European Western Balkans Joint Fund or the EBRD and the EIB, as co-managers of the European Western Balkans Joint Fund. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission promptly.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Waste to Energy and Liquid Fuel Plants: Key to Sustainable Solid Waste Management
    Integrated Waste to Energy and Liquid Fuel Plants: Key to Sustainable Solid Waste Management Bary Wilson, Ph.D. Barry Liss, Ph.D., P.E Brandon Wilson, Ph.D., P.E May 2019 EnviroPower Renewable, Inc. 7301A Palmetto Parkway Rd. Suite 206B Boca Raton, FL 33433 www.eprenewable.com EPR Doc. 05212019 © 2019 EPR All Rights Reserved 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Plastics................................................................................................................................................... 5 Plastics Recycling................................................................................................................................... 6 Diesel Fuels ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Premium Diesel ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Biodiesel and Renewable Diesel ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Composting.Pdf
    CCET guideline series on intermediate municipal solid waste treatment technologies Composting Prevention Product (Non-Waste) Preparing for re-use Recycling Recovery Disposal Technological Waste aspects Financial aspects Governance capability Institutional aspects Public awareness & cooperation of residents Social conditions United Nations Avenue, Gigiri National Institute for Environmental Studies IGES Centre Collaborating with UNEP PO Box 30552, 00100 16-2 Onogawa, Tsukuba, on Environmental Technologies (CCET) Nairobi, Kenya Ibaraki 305-8506, 2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Tel: +254 (0)20 762 1234 Japan Kanagawa 240-0115, Email: [email protected] www.nies.go.jp/index-e.html Japan www.unep.org Tel: +81-46-855-3840 www.ccet.jp Economy Division International Environmental Technology Centre 2-110 Ryokuchi koen, Tsurumi-ku, Osaka 538-0036, Japan Tel: +81 6 6915 4581 Email: [email protected] www.unep.org/ietc August 2020 CCET guideline series on intermediate municipal solid waste treatment technologies: Composting Authors Copyright Kosuke Kawai (National Institute for Environmental © United Nations Environment Programme, 2020 Studies, NIES), Chen Liu (Institute for Global This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part Environmental Strategies, IGES), and Premakumara and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes Jagath Dickella Gamaralalage (IGES) without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. Project Coordination of CCET Guideline series The United Nations Environment Programme would Kazunobu Onogawa (IGES), Yasuhiko Hotta (IGES), appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses Keith Alverson (UNEP IETC), Shunichi Honda (UNEP this publication as a source. IETC), Misato Dilley (UNEP IETC) No use of this publication may be made for resale or for Peer Reviewers any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior Members of the Japan Society of Material Cycles and permission in writing the United Nations Environment Waste Management (JSMCWM): Kiyohiko Nakasaki Programme.
    [Show full text]
  • Inert Landfill Operations Inert Waste Definition
    Inert Landfill Operations Inert Waste Definition North Dakota Administrative Code 33-20-01.1-03 (26) defines inert waste as: “Inert waste” means nonputrescible solid waste which will not generally contaminate water or form a contaminated leachate. Inert waste does not serve as food for vectors. Inert waste includes, but is not limited to: construction and demolition material such as metal, wood, bricks, masonry and cement concrete; asphalt concrete; metal; tree branches; bottom ash from coal fired boilers; and waste coal fines from air pollution control equipment. Acceptable Wastes for Disposal? Yes (although concrete could No (aerosol cans, chemical be recycled) containers and electronics are not inert) Acceptable Wastes for Disposal? No (household waste could attract No (could attract vectors, vectors, create leachate putrescible) and/or be putrescible) Waste Collected for Non-Disposal Management • Major Appliances: – Freezers, Refrigerators, Ovens, Water Heaters, etc. – May require Freon removal with licensed equipment or removal of residual liquids – Aka “White Goods” • Scrap Metal Waste Collected for Non-Disposal Management • Grass and Leaves: – Manage by Composting – Separate from Burn Pile and Disposal Area – Soil Amendment for Cover or for Contractor/Resident Landscaping Projects – Run-off Management Waste Collected for Non-Disposal Management • Electronics*: No! – Challenging waste to recycle: • Storage • Outlet • May Contain Heavy Metals and Other Toxic Substances – Aka “E-Waste” or “Brown Goods” – Recycling Facilities and MSW
    [Show full text]
  • The Orange World 2014 at the Company’S Head Office in Lauterach, Gebrüder Weiss in Its Decision
    the orange world 2014 At the company’s head office in Lauterach, Gebrüder Weiss in its decision. The two-storey building, which has been built an imposing, state-of-the-art office building cover- in operation since July 2014, was built according to er- ing 4,000 square metres. The concept submitted by the gonomic and ecological guidelines, and reflects the flat Cukrowicz Nachbaur firm of architects from Bregenz hierarchies of Gebrüder Weiss, facilitating quick, infor- impressed the architectural competition’s jury, which, in mal exchanges. There is a pleasant atmosphere thanks addition to appropriate design, also considered the to the green inner courtyards that are flooded with light. principles of communication and absence of hierarchy 5 Contents Management Board 6 Annual Report 8 gw-world 12 Highlights 14 25 Years of Success in Eastern Europe 30 Divisions 38 Brands 48 Sustainability 56 Locations 68 Imprint 80 5 Management Board Annual Report gw-world Highlights 25 Years of Success in Eastern Europe 7 Divisions Brands Sustainability Locations Imprint Gebrüder Weiss Management Board Peter Kloiber Heinz Senger-Weiss Wolfram Senger-Weiss Wolfgang Niessner, CEO 7 Management Board Annual Report gw-world Highlights 25 Years of Success in Eastern Europe Wolfgang Niessner CEO Gebrüder Weiss 9 Divisions Brands Sustainability Locations Imprint Dear Reader, In 2014, we succeeded for the first time ever in achiev- In terms of logistics solutions, the year under review ing a turnover in excess of 1.2 billion euros. Since the was a very successful one. We were able to develop value added and cash flow went hand in hand with a and implement several demanding and innovative con- high level of investment and an increase in equity ra- cepts in the orange network for highly prestigious tio, we can be satisfied with this result.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix H Acronyms and Definitions
    Solid Waste Management Plan Appendix H Acronyms and Definitions APPENDIX H Solid Waste Management Plan Acronyms ACM Asbestos Containing Materials C&D Construction and Demolition CDL Construction, Demolition, Landclearing and Inert Waste CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations CY Cubic Yard Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EDC (Spokane) Economic Development Council EPA (U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency EPP Environmentally Preferable Purchasing EPR Extended Producer Responsibility HDPE High-Density Polyethylene HHW Household Hazardous Waste HWMA (Washington) Hazardous Waste Management Act LDPE Low-Density Polyethylene LQG Large Quantity Generators MFS Minimum Functional Standards for Solid Waste Handling MQG Medium Quantity Generators MRF Material Recovery Facility MRW Moderate Risk Waste MRW Plan Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan MSW Municipal Solid Waste MTCA Model Toxics Control Act NESHAP National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NOC Notice of Construction NPL National Priorities List NSLF Northside Landfill NWPSC Northwest Product Stewardship Council OFM Office of Financial Management (State of Washington) ONP Old Newsprint PAYT Pay As You Throw PETE Polyethylene Terephthalate PS Polystyrene PSI Product Stewardship Institute PVC Polyvinyl Chloride H - 1 Solid Waste Management Plan RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCW Revised Code of Washington RDC Regional Disposal Company RPWRF Riverside Park Water Reclamation Facility
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Recovery/Incineration 2009
    Energy Recovery/Incineration Municipal/Commercial Solid 2009 pharmaceuticals Wood Waste Grand Total Waste Inland Empire Paper Co Spokane 17,435.00 17,435.00 Grand Total 17,435.00 17,435.00 Spokane Regional Waste to _N/A 1,225.98 1,225.98 Energy Facility Lincoln 65.01 65.01 Pend Oreille 7.77 7.77 Spokane 258,150.77 17.76 258,168.53 Stevens 181.08 181.08 Whitman 17.65 17.65 Grand Total 259,648.26 17.76 259,666.02 Grand Total 259,648.26 17.76 17,435.00 277,101.02 Municipal/Commercial Solid pharmaceuticals Wood Waste Grand Total Waste Inert Waste Landfill Ash (other Asphaltic Vactor/Str 2009 Contamina Soils than special Materials Brick and Ceramic Cured Industrial Inert Soil, rock, eet Grand Aluminum ted Soils Glass Other (uncontami incinerator (excluding Masonry Materials Concrete Waste Waste gravel Sweeping Total (other) nated) ash) roofing) Wastes AAA MONROE ROCK CORP Snohomish 14,000.00 400.00 11,195.00 130,044.00 155,639.00 Grand Total 14,000.00 400.00 11,195.00 130,044.00 155,639.00 Atlas Sand & Gravel - _N/A 90,000.00 90,000.00 Chipman Landfill Whitman 10,100.00 18,200.00 161.00 28,461.00 Grand Total 10,100.00 18,200.00 90,161.00 118,461.00 BP Cherry Point Refinery Whatcom 60.00 194.00 6,473.00 6,727.00 Inert Landfill Grand Total 60.00 194.00 6,473.00 6,727.00 Busy Bee Landfill Spokane 1.00 50.00 15.00 1.00 300.00 0.50 100.00 467.50 Grand Total 1.00 50.00 15.00 1.00 300.00 0.50 100.00 467.50 Cemex Inert Waste Landfill, King 67,426.00 67,426.00 Everett Skagit 4.00 4.00 Snohomish 16,302.00 13,644.00 13,235.00 90,783.00 133,964.00 Grand Total 16,302.00 81,074.00 13,235.00 90,783.00 201,394.00 Central Pre-Mix Concrete Co.
    [Show full text]
  • 01-74-19 Construction Waste Management
    California Polytechnic State University April 15, 2020 [Project Name – MJ00##] SECTION 01 74 19 - CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS A. Drawings and general provisions of the Contract, including General and Supplementary Conditions and Division 1 Specification Sections, apply to this Section. 1.2 SUMMARY A. Section includes requirements and procedures for ensuring optimal diversion of construction and demolition (C&D) waste materials generated by the Work from landfill disposal within the limits of the Construction Schedule and Contract Sum. 1. California State law (Public Resources Code sections 40000 et seq.) requires the California State University to develop source reduction, re-use, recycling, and composting programs to divert 75% of all solid waste from landfill disposal by 2020. Construction waste materials generated by the Work are targeted to achieve and maintain these diversion rates. 2. The Work of this Contract requires that a minimum of 75% by weight of the construction and demolition materials generated in the Work is diverted from landfill disposal through a combination of re-use and recycling activities. 3. For LEED® projects, requirements for submittal of LEED documentation in compliance with the Materials and Resources category, Construction and Demolition Waste Management credit. 4. Requirements for submittal of Contractor’s Construction Waste and Recycling Plan prior to the commencement of the Work. 5. Contractor’s quantitative reports for construction waste materials as a condition of approval of the third progress payment. 1.3 DEFINITIONS A. Class III Landfill: A landfill that accepts non-hazardous resources such as household, commercial, and industrial waste, resulting from construction, remodeling, repair, and demolition operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Waste to Energy in the Age of the Circular Economy Best Practice Handbook
    WASTE TO ENERGY IN THE AGE OF THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY BEST PRACTICE HANDBOOK NOVEMBER 2020 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK WASTE TO ENERGY IN THE AGE OF THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY BEST PRACTICE HANDBOOK NOVEMBER 2020 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) © 2020 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 8632 4444; Fax +63 2 8636 2444 www.adb.org Some rights reserved. Published in 2020. ISBN: 978-92-9262-480-4 (print); 978-92-9262-481-1 (electronic); 978-92-9262-482-8 (ebook) Publication Stock No. TIM200330-2 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22617/TIM200330-2 The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by ADB in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/.
    [Show full text]
  • Touch & Go and Touch 2 with Go
    Touch & Go and Touch 2 with Go Autumn 2018 map update release notes 4 more pages required in Autumn edition to fit information Keeping up to date with The Toyota Map Update Release Notes Map update information these and many more features: Touch & Go (CY11) helps you stay on track with the map Full map navigation Release date: Autumn 2018 Driver-friendly full map pan-European navigation updates of the Touch & Go and Touch 2 Version: 2018 with clear visual displays for signposts, junctions and lane with Go navigation systems. Database: 2018.Q1 guidance. Media: USB stick or download by user Speed limit and safety Toyota map updates are released at least once a year System vendor: Harman camera alerts Drive safely with the help of a and at a maximum twice. Coverage: Albania, Andorra, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia Herzegovina, speed limit display and warning, including an optional Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Gibraltar, France, speed warning setting. Alerts Keep up with the product information, map changes, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Latvia, notify you of fixed safety Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia (F.Y.R.O.M), Malta, Moldova, camera locations (in countries premium content and sales arguments. where it is legal). Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Vatican. Intuitive detour suggestions Real-time traffic information Contents updates* alert you to Touch 2 with Go (CY13/16) congestion ahead on your planned route. The system Map update information 3 Release date: Autumn, 2018 calculates potential delay times and suggests a detour Navigation features 4 Version: 2018 to avoid the problem.
    [Show full text]