Make or break for green economy

SDG indicators

Target 9.4: By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities
Indicator 9.4.1: CO2 emission per unit of value added (Tier I)


Target 7.3: By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency
Indicator 7.3.1: Energy intensity measured in terms of primary energy and GDP


Target SDG 12.6: Encourage companies, especially large and transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle
Indicator SDG 12.6.1: Number of companies publishing sustainability reports (Tier III)

Research shows clearly that choices in climate policy taken now will be critical for our future and for the future of the ocean and cryosphere -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. Climate change has already “caused impacts on natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans” -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. We are experiencing more frequent natural disasters and extreme weather events, rising sea levels and diminishing Arctic Sea ice, among other changes -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. Although 2021 was slightly cooler than some of the previous years, partly due to the influence of La Niña conditions, it saw exceptional heatwaves that broke temperature records in several regions. For example, 54.4 °C was measured in California and 48.8 °C in Sicily. The year 2021 also witnessed natural disasters of unprecedented severity, such as the Hurricane Ida in the North Atlantic and extreme floodings in the Henan province of China and in Western Europe. Rain fell at the highest point on the Greenland ice sheet, 3 216 meters above sea level, for the first time in history -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

Back on the sinister track into global warming

A growing concentration of the 'critical' GHGs, mainly CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, and F-gases, in the atmosphere has been identified as the main cause of increased temperatures on the planet -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. In 2019, GHG emissions reached a record high of 51.4 Gt of CO2e. This level was 57 per cent higher than in 1990 and 41 per cent higher than in 2000 (see Figure 1). Looking back to the times of industrialization, nearly half (42 per cent) of GHG emissions since 1850 have been caused in the last three decades alone -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. While emissions continuously grew over the past decades, this growth has recently slowed down. From 2000 to 2019, emissions increased on average 1.8 per cent each year; in the period from 2014 to 2019, the average annual increase was 0.8 per cent (see Figure 1).

The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on global emissions. In tandem with the development of industrial output, emissions fell sharply in the first two quarters of 2020 and rebounded in quarter three -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. Total GHG emissions dropped by 3.7 per cent in 2020 to 49.8 Gt of CO2e, CO2 emissions by 5.1 per cent (see figure 1). Figures for 2021 are already available for CO2 emissions from energy combustion and industrial processes, accounting for almost three quarters of GHG emissions. These figures suggest a rapid rebound, an annual increase of 6 per cent, pushing CO2 emissions from energy to a record high, above their 2019 level -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. In October 2021, the Emissions Gap Report -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
expected global total emissions to be in 2021 only slightly lower than the record level of 2019. At that time, energy-related CO2 emissions were estimated to grow by 4.8 per cent, while the latest figures show a 6 per cent growth -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. There is, therefore, evidence that the preliminary estimates for 2021 in Figure 1 underestimate the actual amount of CO2 and other GHG emissions. It is possible that in 2021, more GHG was emitted than ever before.

Figure 1. GHG emissions and target reductions (SDG 9.4.1)
(Gt of CO2e)

Source: UNCTAD calculations based on -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
and -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

Notes: Emissions from land-use change are not included. The 2021 estimates are based on IEA as reflected in -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. The baseline year for the target path is 2016.

According to the -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
, the high growth of fossil CO2 emissions was not only due to the recovery in industrial output, but also fueled by weather conditions and the situation on world energy markets. High prices for natural gas relative to coal led to substitution of gas by coal, the more carbon-intensive fuel, in energy production. Yet, the overall rise of fuel prices during the economic recovery from the pandemic is likely to have had a positive effect on the use of renewable energies. The IEA estimates that without the increasing use of renewable energies and nuclear power for electricity generation, the rise in global CO2 emissions from energy production in 2021 would have been 220 Mt higher than it was. In 2022, fuel prices have increased further, partly triggered by the war in Ukraine and the related bans on gas and oil imports from the Russian Federation. In March 2022, the UNCTAD fuel price index was 1.2 times higher than in December 2019 with natural gas prices even 3.8 times higher (see Figure 2). The stronger the expectations that high fuel price levels persist, the stronger the incentives to invest in renewable energy.

Figure 2. Development of fuel and natural gas prices
(2015=100)

Source: UNCTADstat -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

What do the developments above imply for global warming? The years from 2015 to 2021 were the warmest seven years on record. In 2021, the global mean temperature was around 1.11 °C above the 1850–1900 pre‑industrial average -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. The 2015 Paris Climate agreement aims “to limit the temperature increase from pre-industrial levels to 2 °C and pursue efforts to remain below 1.5 °C” by 2100 -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. Remaining below the 2 °C target requires a reduction of nearly 25 per cent from the 2018 levels of global emissions and remaining below the 1.5 °C target would require a reduction of nearly 55 per cent, by 2030 -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. If there was some hope that the COVID-19 pandemic would put the world on the right track to achieve at least the 2 °C target, this hope was dashed by the strong rebound of emissions in 2021.

Most carbon dioxide emitted in Asia – per unit of GDP and in total

Among the different GHG, the most prevalent in the atmosphere is CO2, as mentioned above. This gas is released through human activities, such as deforestation and burning of fossil fuels, and through natural processes, such as respiration and volcanic eruptions. Around 90 per cent of CO2 emissions are generated by burning of fossil fuels in the form of coal, oil and natural gas. However, CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are also influenced by deforestation and other types of land-cover or land-use change, due to their impact on the land's potential to absorb or generate CO2. As CO2 accounts for three quarters of GHG emissions, by focusing on CO2, SDG indicator 9.4.1 helps monitor the largest part, although not the full amount of global GHG emissions.

The concentration of CO2 emissions varies considerably across the globe. In 2020, many countries in Africa recorded emissions of less than 20 kg/km2. In Latin American countries and in Australia, emissions were mainly between 20-100 kg/km2. Much higher CO2 emissions, typically more than 200 kg/km2 and sometimes even higher than 2 000 kg/km2, were common for countries located in a band that ranges from the United States of America and Central America over to Western, Southern and Eastern Europe and the Near East to Southern, Eastern and South-Eastern Asia. Within that band, particularly high emission levels were recorded in the Benelux and in Eastern Asia. Farther to the North, in Canada, Northern Europe and in Northern and Central Asia, emission levels were lower, usually ranging between 50 and 200 kg/km2 on average per country.

Map 1. Concentration of carbon dioxide emissions
(kg/km2 per year)

Source: UNCTAD calculations based on EDGAR -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
and UNCTADstat -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

Notes: CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use (combustion, flaring), industrial processes (cement, steel, chemicals and urea) and product use are shown. Emissions from fuels burned on ships and aircrafts in international transport are not included.

As Figure 3 shows, in 2020, nearly half of the CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, industrial processes and product use came from Eastern and South-Eastern Asia (15.5 Gt). Northern America (5.1 Gt) and Europe (5.1 Gt) jointly added almost one third. Around one quarter (9.6 Gt) was emitted in the rest of the world. In Australia and New Zealand, in Northern America and in Europe, between 220 and 260 g of CO2 was emitted on average for the production of output worth one United States dollar. In Eastern and South-Eastern Asia and in Western Asia and Northern Africa, this rate, the carbon intensity, was higher than 600 g/US$, and in Southern and Central Asia it even exceeded 800 g/US$. In this comparison, the regional differences in price levels are not taken into account. While the economies of Eastern and Southern Asia, of Europe and of Northern America are comparable in size, Eastern and Southern Asia caused around two and a half times as much CO2 emissions as Europe and Northern America each.

Figure 3. Carbon dioxide emissions, emissions intensity and GDP, by region, 2020 (SDG 9.4.1)

Source: UNCTAD calculations based on EDGAR -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
and UNCTADstat -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

Notes: The area of bars measure carbon dioxide emissions. Regions are arranged in the order of the amount of emissions. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use (combustion, flaring), industrial processes (cement, steel, chemicals and urea) and product use are included. Emissions from fuels burned on ships and aircrafts in international transport are not included. US$ values are in constant 2015 prices. Central and Southern Asia includes developing economies in Oceania.

While emissions continue rising, advances in carbon efficiency increasingly offset population growth and rising incomes

Over the last three decades, global fossil CO2 emissions have increased by two thirds: from 22.7 Gt in 1990 to 37.9 Gt in 2019 and dropped temporarily in 2020 to 36.0 Gt (see Figure 1). Much of the increase until 2019 relates to world population growth and increased consumption per capita, since consumption relies on the production of goods and services. In fact, CO2 emissions can be expressed as the product of population size, GDP per capita (GDP/population), and the carbon intensity of production (CO2/GDP):

An increase in GDP, the product of population and GDP per capita, the first two factors in the equation above, leads to rising CO2 emissions, unless carbon intensity, the third factor, decreases at a higher rate than the growth of GDP. Some studies suggest that carbon intensity decreases as a country's level of development rises, to the extent that GDP growth can be offset. This would result in a bell-shaped relationship between GDP and emissions – the so-called "environmental Kuznets curve". So far, research has provided mixed empirical evidence for the validity of this curve -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

At the global level, between 1990 and 2019, real GDP more than doubled – from US$36 trillion to US$84 trillion in 2019, in constant 2015 prices. This is the result of a 45 per cent increase in the world population (1990: 5.3 billion, 2019: 7.7 billion) and a 62 per cent increase in real GDP per capita (1990: US$6 761, 2019: US$10 932) -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. Global carbon intensity reduced by almost one third from 1990 (631 g/US$) to 2019 (449 g/US$). That means, CO2 emissions have grown at a slower pace than GDP. As Figure 4 shows, this decoupling of CO2 emissions from GDP was most significant in Europe, where carbon intensity fell by 56 per cent between 1990 and 2019, and in Northern America where it reduced by a slightly smaller rate (by 49 per cent). As a result, Europe is the only region where the overall amount of CO2 emissions is lower today than in 1990, by 30 per cent. Northern America is almost back at 1990 levels, but the other regions are well above.

Over the past 29 years, carbon intensity has decreased less in regions primarily associated with the developing world than in developed regions. Eastern and South-Eastern Asia released over 2.4 times more CO2 in 2019 than in 1990. This increase was mainly driven by a rapid rise in income levels, with annual average growth rates of real GDP-per-capita above 3 per cent in all five-year periods since 1990. Since around 2008, however, we can also observe a reduction in carbon intensity also in that region. In the five-year period from 2015 to 2020, emissions per US-dollar value of output were already 16 per cent lower than in the five-year period from 2010 to 2014, indicating an annual average reduction of 3.4 per cent. A reduction by 4.6 per cent would have been required to offset the combined effect of GDP-per-capita and population growth. Rising carbon efficiency in recent years can be observed also in Central and Southern Asia. In that region, like in Western Asia, Africa and in Latin America and the Caribbean, high population growth constitutes a major challenge for the reduction of GHG emissions (see Figure 4).

Figure 4. Population, GDP per capita and carbon intensity contributions to CO2 emissions growth, by region
(Average annual growth to previous five years, in per cent)

Source: UNCTAD calculations based on EDGAR -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
and UNCTADstat -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

Notes: CO2 emissions from industrial processes (cement, steel, chemicals and urea) and product use are excluded. Annual average growth rates are calculated from 5 years averages. GDP is measured in constant 2015 prices. Central and Southern Asia includes developing economies in Oceania.

Deindustrialization during the higher stages of economic development (see section Towards sustainable industrialization and higher technologies) is likely to be a factor behind the stronger increase in emissions observed in the developing than in the developed world. Furthermore, as countries are connected by global value chains and trade relations, there is evidence that observed growth in carbon intensity of GDP in developing regions is driven by demand for carbon-intensive final products in other regions. In fact, studies based on inter-country input-output tables find that demand-based CO2 emissions of developed economies are generally higher than their production-based emissions, while most developing economies are net-exporters of CO2 emissions embodied in final products -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. As environmental policy is more stringent in some regions than in others, companies can save production costs by relocating carbon intensive production processes globally, a process described as "carbon leakage" -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. The "pollution haven" hypothesis suggests that poorer countries tend to set low pollution standards to attract pollution intensive FDI -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

After the COVID-19 pandemic, still far away from a change of tack

The slowdown of economic activity during the COVID-19 pandemic brought about an unprecedented drop in GHG emissions and gave a hint of the efforts roughly needed to bring emissions down to reach the Paris Climate Agreement’s targets. The lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic were involuntary, unplanned, and accompanied by high socio-economic costs. In the fight against global warming, although time is running out, the world needs effective strategies for a transition to a green economy including measures to alleviate the social and economic costs.

The first figures available for 2021 indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic caused just a temporary interruption in the longer-term harmful trend of steadily increasing emissions, and the world appears to be far from the path towards the targets of the Paris Climate Agreement. The only evidence of slightly favourable development in latest emissions statistics is the slowdown of the pace at which GHG emissions increase each year.

As population and per-capita incomes grow, policies to reduce emissions need to focus on carbon intensity. The private sector plays a key role in the introduction of more carbon efficient production methods. The next section will show the efforts under the 2030 Agenda to make the contributions of businesses towards that end more visible. Europe serves as an example in which GDP growth has been more than offset by advancements in carbon efficiency. Northern America seems to be following suit. Recently, carbon intensity has been diminishing in large parts of Asia. Overall, however, regions of the developing world are struggling to cope with the challenges imposed by high population or output-per-capita growth. Thereby climate change continues to be an alarming challenge for people and the planet.

Involving the private sector in the sustainable development agenda

Recent global trends, not the least of which is the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasize the role of sustainability reporting in transitioning to a more sustainable economy. The business sector is identified in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda as a significant player in the financing of sustainable development -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. Their actions contribute directly or indirectly to the attainment of all SDGs, including the state of the environment and GHG emissions. Nonetheless, the business sector is mostly absent from the SDG targets and is explicitly mentioned in only one of them: target 12.6, which calls for a greater integration of sustainability information in the regular reporting cycle of firms.

This target and the related reporting are important for making companies’ contribution to the 2030 Agenda visible and for encouraging them to review how their operations affect their stakeholders and the environment. Sustainability reporting promotes transparency in the business sector and increases business accountability to society. The COP26 Climate Conference as well as the launch of the International Sustainability Standards Board, establishing a global set of sustainability-related reporting standards, pave the way for enterprise sustainability reporting. Governments and regulators now embrace environmental and social sustainability standardization as a central concern. In this context, large and listed companies are moving faster following new requirements of stock exchanges, while smaller businesses need more guidance and capacity building to ensure access to finance through sustainability reporting in the post-COVID-19 recovery.

SDG indicator 12.6.1 measures the number of companies that publish sustainability reports. Developing consistent reporting on the indicator requires aligning multiple reporting frameworks, including the International Integrated Reporting Council -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
framework, the Global Reporting Initiative -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
standards, the standards proposed by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
, the Climate-related Financial Disclosure Recommendations -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
, the EU Non-financial Reporting Directive -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
, the Framework on Environmental, Social and Governance Factors -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
and the -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
Guidance on Core Indicators.1

To this end, UNCTAD and UNEP, as joint custodians of SDG indicator 12.6.1, identified four dimensions for sustainability reporting: economic, environmental, social and institutional. As a “minimum reporting requirement”, only reports that cover certain elements in a meaningful way will be counted as sustainability reports for the SDG indicator. To further strengthen sustainable practices and accountability, the agencies also identified an “advanced reporting requirement” with more comprehensive reporting rules.

In September 2019, the IAEG-SDGs approved the concepts and methods developed by UNCTAD and UNEP, and data collection for the indicator began. The framework does not add new reporting requirements, instead it suggests a way to reconcile the existing frameworks.

UNCTAD regularly convenes a Group of Experts on ISAR to discuss international accounting and reporting standards, in order to improve the availability, reliability and comparability of financial and non-financial enterprise reporting, and especially to integrate sustainability information into business reporting.

Enterprise sustainability reporting increases significantly but unequally across the regions

Official statistics for SDG 12.6.1 are not yet available as companies are still setting up the new sustainability reporting. UNCTAD and UNEP, as custodians of indicator 12.6.1, continue to identify and analyze new data sources for more comprehensive reporting on the indicator. The preliminary analysis of over 10 000 companies around the world shows that 61 per cent of companies in the sample publish a sustainability report. The number has more than doubled from 2016. Additionally, according to a report by KPMG -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
, third-party assurance of sustainability information has also increased, exceeding 50 per cent among the largest companies in the world.

From a geographical perspective (see Figure 5), the results show a high differences in the volume of sustainability reporting across the regions. While the regional results based on the preliminary sample need to be interpreted with caution, they provide indications of trends. In North America, the number of reports almost tripled and Europe and Asia experienced a twofold increase from 2016 to 2020. However, in Africa and Latin America, the data show a much slower increase in the number of enterprise sustainability reports.

Figure 5. Development of enterprise sustainability reporting, by region
(Number of reports)

Source: UNCTAD calculations based on -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

Note: Preliminary data from a sample of over 10 000 companies.

Looking at the breakdown by industry, the manufacturing, financial and insurance sectors feature the highest publication volume of sustainability reports. The utilities sector maintains a majority of companies consistently publishing sustainability reports from 2016 to 2020. Overall, almost all sectors have seen a twofold increase in the number of sustainability reports published annually since 2016.

In terms of company size, the data show that the largest companies publish the highest number of sustainability reports. KPMG highlights that 80 per cent of the top 250 companies worldwide and the top 100 companies in 52 countries now report on sustainability. Throughout the sample, the number of small and medium-sized companies publishing a sustainability report has sharply increased from some reports in 2016 to a few hundred in 2020.

Regarding the quality of the sustainability reports analyzed, the majority of environmental indicators disclosed comprise CO2 direct emissions, energy consumption, and water withdrawal. Less attention is given to recycled water. In the social dimension, almost 30 per cent of the reports cover occupational health and safety and employees’ training. In the area of corporate governance, all reports cover board diversity, and half include a sustainability commitment by the company. Furthermore, around 70 per cent of major companies connect their business activities with the SDGs.

All in all, the sample data show that the 2030 Agenda has built momentum and enterprise sustainability reporting has increased. This has led to closer engagement of international organizations and businesses to develop a commonly agreed upon and harmonized set of indicators.

Notes

  1. The Guidance on Core Indicators, developed by UNCTAD upon request by the 34th session of the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on ISAR, lists the main elements for entity reporting to monitor company-level contributions towards SDGs -—
    – ‒
    - –
    —-
    -—
    – ‒
    - –
    —-
    -—
    – ‒
    - –
    —-
    -—
    – ‒
    - –
    —-
    .

References

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.

Click on a star to rate this page!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count 0

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

Share this page: