Kedves Kornyeszek!
NAgyon orulok a hazai energiahelyzetrol kialakult vitanak, es Varadi Balazs
kicsit mikrookonomia-ora szeru (Balazs, nem akarlak megserteni!) hozzaszolasa
utan en is szeretnem hallatni a hangomat. Velemenyem szerint az egesz
alapjaiban van ellokve. Energiapolitikarol beszelve mindenki arakrol,
keresletrol, kapacitasokrol beszel. Kornyezeti hatasokrol, azok
internalizalasarol szo sincs. A masik, amit en meg jobban hianyolok, az az
energiatakarekossag elosegitese. Erre azt szoktak mondani, hogy aki kevesebbet
akar fogyasztani, az majd megteszi a lepeseket. Tudjatok, hogy mibe kerul ma
egy csaladi haz utolagos hoszigetelese es komplet nyilaszarocsereje? Egy uj
haz aranak cirka 25%-a! Azonkivul gyors kutatast hajtottam vegre az itt
fellelheto nyugat-europai diakok kozott, igy batran allithatom, hogy az
ilyen celu beruhazasokra mindenhol (arrafele) rendelkezesre allnak
kedvezmenyes hitelek meg tamogatasok. Azonkivul nem tudom, hogy mi a helyzet
otthon, de a kulonbozo haztartasi berendezesek fogyasztasara is szokott
lenni valami szabalyozas (arrafele). Azt hiszem, ez is eleg sokat jelent,
aranyosan es abszolut ertekben.
Minden ilyenkor szokasos kozhelyeket kivanok:
Zalka Peter
hoszigetelese es

Ugy gondolom, a Vilagbankot, IMF-et es tarsaikat a bretton woods-i
rendszerben a kelletenel kisse tobb kritika eri.  Nem arra gondolok, hogy a
kritika, melyet hajlamosak vagyunk e ket szervezet fele iranyitani nem jogos 
sok szempontbol, hanem arra, hogy a gond alapvetoen nem e ket szervezettel,
hanem a jatekszabalyokkal van, melyek alapjan a WB es IMF is jatszani
kenyszerul, vagy legalabbis kenyszerult a mai napig.

Attol fuggetlenul, hogy szamtalan esetben ramutattak mar a haborus
koltsegvetesekre keszult GNP / GDP rendszer alapveto fogyatekossagaira,
amikor "novekedest" mondunk, tobbnyire tovabbra is e mutatok novekedesere
gondolunk.  A GNP / GDP mutatok latszolagos egyszerusege mogott persze
szamtalan olyan felteves rejtozik, amely alaposabb vizsgalodas utan
teljesen esszerutlennek tunik.  A legtobbet emlegetett nepszeru pelda az
Exxon-Valdez baleset nemzeti ossztermeket novelo hatasa; amirol valojaban
szo van viszont az az, hogy a nemzeti koltsegvetesekben nem szerepelnek az
alapveto termeszeti eroforrasok - azaz sem a megujulo / nem megujulo
eroforrasok keszletei, sem a termeszeti okoszisztemak szennyezest
kozombosito kepessege ("sink capacity").  Gond tovabba, hogy mindezeket a
funkciokat a piac NEM tudja ertekelni (mivel nem maganosithato, hanem
koztulajdonu dolgokrol van szo), igy a hagyomanyos piacgazdasagban allami
beavatkozas nelkul ezek erteke a maganfelhasznalo es a nemzeti koltsegvetes
szamara nulla.  Mindennek a magaslatnak a tetejen ulunk tehat es teszunk
nyilatkozatokat a gazdasagi novekedes szuksegessegerol illetve annak
ellenkezojerol, csak epp az nem vilagos, hogy minek a novekedesere
gondolunk.

Sajnos e szabalyok megvaltoztatasa kivul esik a mai, tegnapi vagy akarmikori 
magyar kormany hataskoren, sot feltetelezem hogy a jelenlegi felallas
ertelmeben minden EGYES nemzeti kormany hataskoren.  Azt is latni kell
viszont, hogy ha valaki magyarorszagi szempontbol hibasnak vel donteseket
melyeket a fenti rendszer ertelmeben hoz akar egy nemzetkozi szervezet, akar 
egy nemzeti kormany, nem lehet arra hivatkozva elhallgattatni az illetot,
hogy hat itt nemzetkozi szabalyokrol van szo, es ne probaljunk az ar ellen
uszni.  Szamtalan probalkozas tortent mar a hagyomanyos GDP / GNP rendszer
reformjara, lasd Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, Net National
Product, Green and Gold Index, Appropriated Carrying Capacity, stb.

Udvozlettel:  Pinter Laci

STATEMENT CONCERNING THE MoNPP ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT


I. THE MoNPP DOES NOT INCLUDE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
OF HIGH LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE LIQUIDATION

The MoNPP Environmental Impact Assessment lacks an analysis of
the crucial phase of the nuclear fuel cycle - liquidation of the
nuclear reactors and exhausted nuclear fuel from MoNPP. This is
a result of the project's lack of a complex liquidation process
for high level radioactive waste from MoNPP - as openly confirmed
by both the Slovak and French project sponsors during the
February 1, 1995 public hearing and by the MoNPP documentation
itself. Therefore, the submitted EIA report lacks its most
relevant part.

* The following quotations from the submitted EIA report prove
this argument:
"The waste management system in Slovakia has not been finalized
for all types of waste." (8.59)
"...there are currently no detailed plans for long-term disposal
of spent fuel or for decommissioning of nuclear plant" (3.131)
"Ultimately, the nuclear plant at Mochovce will need to be
decommissioned... there are currently no detailed plans for
decommissioning or for long-term disposal of spent fuel in
Slovakia" (0.25)
"Decommissioning of the Bohunice nuclear power plant will serve
as a reference for the development of a detailed decommissioning
and funding concept for Mochovce." (8.61)

* The EIA report mentions only project of 3-year storage of spent
fuel with the possibility to prolong the 3-year period up to 5
years.
"After this time, it will need to be removed and stored, under
a longer-term arrangement, in a dedicated facility with a larger
capacity." (3.122)
Despite the fact that the EIA report proves the need to arrange
longer-term spent fuel storage there are not any plans even for
the interim storage of high level radioactive waste from the
MoNPP.
"Plans are being developed for longer-term spent fuel storage,
at both Bohunice and Mochovce, following discussion between SEP
and the Slovak Nuclear Regulatory Authority. Several potential
foreign contractors have tendered for the work to construct the
required facilities. These responses are currently being
considered, but no final decision is expected for some time."
(3.126)
"Waste acceptance criteria and operational plans for the
repository are currently under review by the Nuclear Regulatory
Authority. Following due consideration of these plans and the
implementation of any appropriate modifications, it is currently
anticipated that the site will be authorized and all disposals
will commence by December 1995." (3.99)

* Solution to the liquidation of the nuclear reactors and
exhausted nuclear fuel from MoNPP is openly left to the future
without an explanation that would reflect the complexity of the
problem. Considerations that build a basis for the EIA report
emerge from speculations rather than being supported by relevant
arguments.
"Ultimately, the nuclear plant at Mochovce will need to be
decommissioned. This could result in the production of
significant volumes of additional radioactive waste, but this
will depend on the extent of decommissioning that is carried
out." (3.129)
"(SLOVRAO Corporation) will also manage the new fund, established
in August 1994, that has been created finance the development of
decommissioning plans and new waste treatment technologies, and
to research into plans for final disposal for high active wastes
and spent fuel." (3.130)



II. SAFETY ANALYSIS IS BASED ON SPECULATIONS AND UNVERIFIABLE
STATEMENTS

Safety analysis that is a part of Environmental Impact Assessment
can not be considered as comprehensive and complete. As it is
stated in several places in the study itself, relevant
information was missing for crucial parts and, therefore, it was
not possible to carry out important analyses of the MoNPP
project.

* The quality management that is generally requested for Western
nuclear power plants in different steps throughout the
construction and commissioning phases of the project has not been
carried out for MoNPP.
"As planned for Mochovce, different quality assurance procedures
are usually implemented to address issues such as "receiving"
controls, pre-service inspection and commissioning tests. As the
project is not yet at this phase, Electricit#002# de France organized
inspection and auditing of activities undertaken to date for its
own purposes, in order to determine the corresponding financial
risk." (8.62). Riskaudit, however, does not mention if the
additional audit is equivalent to regular quality management
(especially if we take into account the quality of work as well
as the level of technologies in CEE in the past).

* The PSA was not used for MoNPP.
"The detailed design of prospective improvement measures and
plant-specific reliability data are not available. Furthermore,
no best-estimate calculations exists for the plant. The PSA
(Probabilistic Safety Assessment) approach was not used by
Riskaudit in the safety evaluation of Mochovce since it was
judged that such an evaluation would necessarily be
unrepresentative of the specific situation of the plant and,
thereby, capable of producing an unrealistic perspective of the
risk, with the potential for influencing design decisions in the
wrong direction." (8.24)
However, "...the realization of such a PSA by the utility is
recommened, once all the relevant design information is
available." (8.25)!

* The safety analysis shows that an analysis of the seismic
response of the building constructions and technologies has not
been carried out and, therefore, it has not been proven that the
constructions and technologies have been designed to resist
potential earthquakes.

* "The full management systems for site environmental management
during normal operation are not yet defined..." (3.139)


Moreover, the Safety Analysis in fact represents a set of a large
number of recommendations concerning technical improvements as
well as supplementary analyses and tests. It is not clear,
however, whether these recommendations are obligatory for project
sponsors (Slovenske elektrarne and EdF), i.e. whether they must
be respected or not. If so, it is not clear whether a new Safety
Analysis is required since the realized recommendation may change
relevant assumptions the Safety Analysis is based on now. It is
also not clear whether the fulfillment of these recommendations
is included in the submitted Least Cost Study.
The recommendations are included in the following parts of the
Safety Analysis:
Role of Probabilistic Safety Assessment, Nuclear Design,
Pressurized Components and Piping, Fire Protection, Other
Hazards, System Analysis, Electrical Systems, Instrumentation and
Control, Thermohydraulic Aspects of the Bubble Condenser, Seismic
Resistance and Civil Works, Operating Conditions, Radiation
Protection, Waste Management, Fuel Management and Transport,
Quality.
Following are selected recommendations quoted from the Safety
Analysis:
"Recommendations made by Riskaudit concern: ...the need to
perform recalcualtions or complete existing analyses." (8.27)
"A specific recommendation for upgrading is the implementation
of a continuous operational control system for monitoring the
content of impurities in the primary coolant capable of causing
corrosion attack. (8.31)
"A further important recommendation proposes implementing as soon
as possible, and perhaps for the first cycle, a low leakage core
strategy to minimize the neutron flux on the reactor pressure
vessel." (8.32)

Idezet a Magyar Narancs 1. elektronikus valtozatanak bekoszontojebol:

> Kedves Olvaso, ki Magyarorszagon, vagy Amerikaban, vagy Nyugat-
> Europaban most talalkozol eloszor a Magyar Naranccsal! Lapunk
> 1989 oszen indult es most jo ot evvel kesobb, a sajtoszabadsag
> magyarorszagi unnepenek 148. evfordulojara jutottunk oda, hogy
> az Interneten is elhelyezzuk - a magyar nyelvu lapok kozul
> elsokent -, es igy terben es idoben egy szelesebb
> olvasokozonseghez juttassuk el...

Nana! Az "elsoseg" kerdese mindig is kenyes ugy. Ha mar szerepelt a
bevezetoben ez a szo, hadd emlekeztessem a tisztelt olvasokat, hogy
letezik egy Gaia Sajtoszemle, amely szinten elerheto elektronikus
ujsagkent az Internet tobb helye'n is - tobb mint fe'l esztendeje!

A "Sajtszem" nyomtatott valtozata a #276-dik szamot erte meg, amely
idoben kozel tiz esztendot jelent. Hogy mirol is szol a Gaia, az alabbi
kedvcsinalobol kiderult. Csakugy, mint megrendelesenek, jaratasanak modja.
Amely ugyan - me'g? - nem ilyen latvanyosan, Hollosi Jozsi segitsegevel
tortenik, de ki tudja, mit hoz a jovo!... :-)


                        *********************


 ----====****     G A I A   S A J T O S Z E M L E     ****====----


Gaia a gorogok osi Foldistennoje. Jim Lovelock angol kutato szerint
bolygonk mikroszervezetei, novenyei, allatai egyuttesen onszabalyozo,
elo rendszert alkotnak. Ezen rendszernek adta William Goldoing a GAIA
nevet.

A Gaia Sajtoszemle, az ELTE Termeszetvedelmi Klub hirlevele 1983 ota
tekinti feladatanak, hogy hirt adjon ennek az ELOLENYNEK eleterol, az
ember altal kivaltott betegsegenek tuneteirol, gyogyitasanak lehetosegerol
es modjarol. Foglalkozuk a (C.P. Snow fogalma szerinti) "ket kultura",
a termeszet- es szellemtudomanyok teruleteivel. Me'rt es hiteles adatokat
gyujtunk es kozlunk - elsosorban a szaklapokbol - az elovilagrol,
kornyezetunkrol, az ember tevekenysegeirol es annak hatasairol. A "masik
kultura" teruleten erdeklodesunk kozeppontjaban a tarsadalmi esemenyek
(pl. mozgalmi hirek), az emberi tudat, a gondolkodas allnak, valamint a
bolcselet, vallas szerepe es hatasai, ill. tennivaloink a neveles tere'n.

A Gaia Sajtoszemle follep a "szellemi kornyezetszennyezes" ellen is.
Nemcsak utankozleseket, forditasokat kozlunk, hanem eredeti irasokat,
leveleket, alkotasokat is.

                                               Gyorgy Lajos (Piros)
                                                 



                ********    GAIA-megrendelolap     ********


A valaszlevel lenyegi tartalma:
"Felulirott (cimben irott), megrendelem a GAIA SAJTOSZEMLET!"

1.) Ha a Zoldpok Halozat felhasznaloja vagy, leveledet a 
    cimre kuldd, kerve, hogy vegyen fel a BIT.GAIA kuldesi listajara.

2.) Egyeb, ezen kivuli levelcimre a GAIA Sajtoszemlet zip-elt es uukodolt
    levelben kuldjuk (az ekezetek megtartasa vegett). Teendo ezzel a
    kovetkezo: a fajlkent lementett levelet az "uudecode fajlnev" parancs
    segitsegevel kikodoljuk, majd a "pkunzip zip-fajlnev" paranccsal
    kicsomagoljuk. A tomoritesi eljarassal mintegy felere csokken az
    atviteli ido. (A megadott segedprogramok - uudecode ill. pkunzip -
    altalaban minden normalis rendszerben elerhetok. Negativ esetben
    keresd a rendszergazdat, nagyon-nagyon negativ esetben irj nekem!)
    Az erdeklodok a    cimen jelentkezzenek!


Akcionk egy kiserlet a GAIA Sajtoszemle elektronikus ujsagga tetelere.
(Csokkentsuk Piros kiadvany- es lemezpostazasi faradalmait, ha mar letezik
a halozat!) A kiadvany kulonben mar harom helyen is hozzaferheto az
internet-en:

a.) a Ludens NEWS szolgaltatasanak ELTE.GAIA newsgroup-jaban
    (Bejelentkezes a Ludensre - pl. "TELNET LUDENS.ELTE.HU" -, Username:
    "GUEST", jelszo nincs, majd a "$" jel utan: "NEWS ELTE.GAIA");

b.) az Ursus GOPHER-en ("GOPHER GOPHER.BKE.HU") a "Magyar nyelvu
    informaciok (ekezet nelkul)" alatt talalhato "Termeszet- es
    kornyezetvedelem" alatt "GAIA Sajtoszemle"-kent, ertelemszeruen,
    evenkenti bontasban. Az utobbi szamok elerhetok tovabba a JATE
    gopheren is.

++.) Nem igazi internet, de megtalalhato az AstroBase BBS "Kornyezetvedelem"
    fajlteruleten is: Baja, +36-79-324-600.

                                   Jo olvasast!
                                                    Tepliczky Istvan (Tepi)
                                                       

Mechanisms of Resolving Dispute under the Treaty:

All the designs (or proposals for their change) were dicussed in the 
Common Professinal Group, on the basis of the technical and 
economical documentation. Disputes were to be resolved by the 
plenipotentiaries, who had the power to call for additional surveys 
or research, impartial expert opinions or to create ad hoc comittees. 
Any changes of treaty conditions had to be approved by the 
plenipotentiaries or -if necessary- by the governments of both sides. 
Two amendments of the Treaty (both by Hungarian request) have been 
accepted. The first in 1983, postponed the operation schedule of the 
first unit by 4 years from July 1986 to July 1990, while the second, 
while the second, signed in February, 1989 shortened the construction 
time of Nagymaros by 15 months.

The Beginning of Disputes Between Treaty Partners:

in May 1989, the Hungarian side suspended construction of Nagymaros, 
without advance notice and with no discussion of reasons for doing 
so. Despite the assurance that works would continue on Gabcikovo, 
which was nearly finished, all construction was stopped in October, 
1989. In December 1989, an official proposal was put forward to 
finish the Gabcikovo Project, operating it as a run-of-the-river 
plant without Nagymaros. However, Hungary withdrew the proposal in 
January 1990. The proposal of the Czecho-Slovak plenipotentiary, for 
both parties to ask for the impartial assistance of the Comission of 
European Communities (CEC, now the Comission of the European Union, 
CEU) in resolvin the crucial ground-water question, was rejected in 
October 1990. During 1991, three governmental level negotiations (in 
April, July and December 1991) were unsuccessful, because in April 
1991 the Hungarian parliement limted the mandate of the government 
over the HES G-N, giving it only one alternative: to abrogate the 
Treaty and restore the original state of the terrain. Bilateral talks 
on a professional level were prevented by the imposition of 
unacceptable condition to stop all works also on the Slovak side.

The Reasons for, and the Consequences of, Sopping Construction:

Although the reason given for stopping construction was the 'threat 
of an environmental catastrophe', the specific character of this 
catastrophe was not clearly stated and no scientifically sound 
arguments were given by Hungary to prove their point. Impartial 
experts (Bechtel Environmental inc., Hydro Quebec International and 
lately also reports of an independent working group appointed by the 
CEU) confirmed that all advers environmental consequences can be 
mitigated to an acceptable level and that there was no reason for 
contruction delays. For every year of delay Czecho-Slovakia has lost 
6 billion Crowns worth in unproduced energy alone. Total losses are 
much higher. If the Hungarian decision to terminate the Project had 
been accepted, the present value of total losses would approximate 10 
billion US Dollars, not including the cost of related environmental 
damage.

The Temporary Solution on Slovak Territory:

The solution of the problem, preventing significant economic and 
environmental damages, was implemented in the course of 1992, 
starting the operation in October 1992. It consists of a lateral dam 
11 km long, reducing the size of the reservoir by one third, 
limitingit only to Slovak Territory and of a system of structues at 
Cunovo (rkm 1852.75), replacing the function of the Dunakiliti weir 
(bypass weir 4 x 18.1 x 5.1 m, closure of the Danube-bed, floodplain 
weir 20 x 24.0x 3.6 m, intake structure into the Mosony (sic!) Danube 
also with a small HPS and connecting dams). Phase two, increasing the 
discharge capacity to a 10000-year flood includes a third central 
weir (3x 24 x 10.6 m) with an auxiliary ship-lock (24 x 125 m) and a 
small hydro-power station, scheduled for completion in 1995 and 1996 
(HPS).

Trilateral Talks:

In May 1992 Hungary responded to a 'good service' proposal by the CEC 
by unilaterally declaring the 1977 Treaty terminated. Trilateral  
talks were resumed only after the damming of the Danube. Two CEC 
expert groups assessed the situaion and proposed a solution which 
would combine a certain sanitary flow with measures in the old Danube 
channel, to safely create the necessary water level regime securing 
the feeding of branches on the Hungarian side and stopping the 
continued erosion of the Danube bed.
In July 1993, a special agreement was reached about the presentation 
of the dispute to the International Court of Justice in the Hague. 
However, an agreement about the Danube's Temporary Water Management 
Regime has not yet been reached. The Slovak side proposes a temporary 
increase in the sanitary flow from the 50 to 200 cumecs agreed in the 
1977 Treaty to 100 to 500 cumecs. Simultaneously, the construction of 
several low underwater dams was envisaged which would not only supply 
a sufficient amount of water into the Hungarian part of the 'inland 
delta' of the Danube, but also increase the lowered ground water 
level and interconnect the ecosystems of the old river-bed and its 
side-arms, representing a significant improvement of the pre-dam 
state. In contrast, Hungary wants to contain two thirds of the Danube 
flows in the old river-bed, without the construction of underwater 
dams. This solution would allow the erosion to continue, create 
conditions for the eutrophication of the water in the reservoir and 
the canal (where the velocity of the current would fall below an 
acceptable limit)<mert a masik esetben nem ugyanez lenne az Oreg-
Dunaban, mi? megjegyzes tolem, Kerey Peter> anddecrease drastically 
the economic value of the Gabcikovo hydro-power station, lowering the 
production agreed in the Treaty to one third. And all this with no 
environmental improvement, in comparision with the pre-dam state.

The Environmental Impact of Gabcikovo in the Third Year of Operation:

Gabcikovo has improved the conditions for navigation on a 70 km long 
section of the Danube. It has provided flood protectionfor both banks 
of the Danube and in the course of years 1992 to 1994 it has produced 
0.2 + 2.0 + 2.2 billion kWh of electric energy. Additionally, it can 
be credited with a number of environmental improvements, some of 
which are outlined below:

- The ground-water level downstream from Bratislava, has risen 
benefically up to 3 metres, since Gabcikovo began operating.
- Decreases in the ground-water level, which have been recorded in 
only 6 per cent of the affected territory after the damming of the 
Danube, were offset in May, 1993, when the left side of the Danube's 
river arm system filled up.
- The permanent injection of water into the Little Danube (Slovakia) 
and Mosoni and Zatonyi Danubes (Hungary) has revitalised more than 
250 km of these rivers which, before, received water from the Danube 
only about 2 months in a year being in a sewer-like state for the 
rest of the year. <nem nagy fullentes ez egy kicsit? hogy most 
elettel teltebb a Mosoni Duna, az szerintem tulzas. megjegyzes 
tolem:Kerey Peter>
- The Hungarian side has no possibility of direct supply of 
sufficient amount of water into the inner system of arms (Szigeti 
Danube), which was foreseen from the Dunakiliti weir. Slovakia's 
proposal to construct the necessary underwater dam upstream of 
Dunakiliti was not accepted and the decision of the Hungarian 
Government on construction of this low underwater dam was suspended 
by the Hungarian Parliament. The recommended (and for 2 months also 
carried out) pumping of Danube water was stopped, being inefficient 
and polluting the environment. In spite of this, the ground water 
level was raised in a significant part of the affected territory also 
on the Hungarian side - along Mosoni and Zatonyi branches of the 
Danube.
- The capacity of wells supplying fresh water from deeper aquifers 
(80 to 120 metres) has been increased by 30 to 40 per cent without 
influencing the quality of pumped water <ma meg. megj.: Kerey>
- In wells on the right side of the Danube (Rusovce - Ostrovske 
Lucky) the quality of the underground water has been improved by an 
increase in oxygen content.
- More intensive seepage of water from the reservoir has also 
increased the dynamics of the ground-water flow and, as a result, the 
very polluted upper layer of ground-water (up to a depth of 40 
metres) is being diluted and gradually washed away.
- Some of the seepage water which is caught by the seepage canals can 
be used for irrigation and technological purposes.
- The sedimentation of floating matter in the reservoir is directed 
by underwater dams. The sediments do not contain toxic organic 
matter. The content of free oxygen has remained high (around 10mg/l) 
and eutrophication processes are within acceptable limits.
- After the restoration of water into the side arms of the Danube, 
optimal conditions for the devel;opment of flora and fauna were 
created. The control of the amount of water supplied, permits permits 
artificial flooding of 75 per cent of the surface and when desired, 
also the temporary emptying of arms and lowering of the ground-water 
level -to simulate the natural dynamics of the water-level function. 
<ez ilyen egyszeru lenne? K.P.>
- Islands created in the reservoir and flat-water zones, together 
with the water-filled system of arms has increased the number and 
variety of aquatic population.
- The Gabcikovo project together with beautiful natural scenery 
attracts a large number of visitors. Several designated recreation 
areas have come into existence. The revitalised 'inland delta' of the 
Danube, enriched by the Gabcikovo Project is developing into a 
paradise for people, meadow forests and aquatic fauna.

Contact address:
Miroslav B. Liska, Public Relations Manager
Karloveska2, P.O. Box 45, 840 00 Bratislava,
Slovakia
 Phone: + 42 7 721 346 or 792 508
fax: +42 7 727 667

**********************************************************************

Kedevs Kornyeszek!

Tudna nekem valaki a fent emlitett temaban olyan cikke(ke)t ajanlani,
amely(ek) a legujabb elmeleti eredmenyeket tartalmazzak? Itt leginkabb
review-(k)ra gondolok, es persze olyan elmeleti eredmenyekre, amelyeket
bizonyitani is lehet kiserleti adatokbol. Mivel nem vagyok a KORNYESZ
allando olvasoja, valaszokat az , vagy
 cimekre varom. 

Koszonettel:

Juhos Szilveszter



Balaton Limnologiai Kutatointezet
Tihany