preparations for the review of the gothenburg protocol report to the wgsr september 2006 markus...
TRANSCRIPT
Preparations for the review of the Gothenburg Protocol
Report to the WGSR September 2006
Markus Amann et al., EMEP Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM)
Tasks for the review
• Development of baseline projections for emissions
– Based on national projections of (energy and agricultural) activity projections
– – Compilation of input data
• For EU countries• For non-EU countries
• Assessment of health and environmental impacts
EU countries: NEC baseline projections (EU-25 + BUL+ROM+TK+CRO+N+CH)
• Series of bilateral consultations with 22 Parties in 2005– Review of emission inventories, projections, current legislation
• Energy projections:– National projections from 21 countries– PRIMES scenario for €20 carbon price
• Agricultural projections– National projections from 17 countries– CAPRI scenario for the mid-term CAP reform
• Presentation in Brussels at Conference on September 29. 2006
NEC baseline emission projections (EU-25, National projections, relative to the 2000 levels)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
20
00
20
10
20
20
20
00
20
10
20
20
20
00
20
10
20
20
20
00
20
10
20
20
20
00
20
10
20
20
SO2 NOx VOC NH3 PM2.5
EU-25
NEC baseline emission projections (EU-25,National projections, relative to the 2000 levels)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
SO2 NOx VOC NH3 PM2.5
Austria Belgium Cyprus Czech Republic DenmarkEstonia Finland France Germany GreeceHungary Ireland Italy Latvia LithuaniaLuxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland PortugalSlovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden UK
Bulgaria Croatia Romania TurkeyNorway Switzerland EU-25
Comparison of NEC and CAFE baseline emissionsEU-25, 2020
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
CO2 SO2 NOx VOC NH3 PM2.5
Dif
fere
nce
to
CA
FE
bas
elin
e e
mis
sio
ns
Difference between the national energy projections and the CAFE baseline projectionDifference between the PRIMES €20 projection and the CAFE baseline
Comparison of NEC and CAFE energy projections EU-25, 2020
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Coal Biomass,waste
Heavy fueloil
Diesel, lightfuel oil
Gasoline Natural gas Nuclear Otherrenewables
Dif
fere
nce
to
CA
FE
ba
seli
ne
National energy projections PRIMES €20 scenario
CO2 emissions of the NEC baseline projections EU-25, 2020
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
110%
120%
75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105%
CO2 emissions relative to the UNFCCC base year emissions
Air
po
lluta
nt
emis
sio
ns
rela
tive
to
th
e 0
€ ca
se
PRIMES €20scenario
Nationalenergy
projections
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
110%
120%
75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105%
CO2 emissions relative to the 0 € case
Air
po
lluta
nt
emis
sio
ns
rela
tiv
e t
o t
he
0 €
cas
e
SO2 NOx PM25
Air pollutant emissions as a function of CO2 mitigation (EU-25, 2020)
PRIMES €20scenario
Nationalenergy
projections
Air pollutant emissions as a function of CO2 mitigation (EU-25, 2020)
CAFE BL
National NEC projections
0 €
20 €
90 €
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
110%
120%
75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105%
CO2 emissions relative to the 0 € case
Air
po
lluta
nt
emis
sio
ns
rela
tiv
e t
o t
he
0 €
cas
e
SO2 NOx PM25 Linear (SO2) Linear (NOx) Linear (PM25)
Air pollution control costs for current legislation 2020(SO2, NOx, PM) as a function of CO2 mitigation (EU-25, 2020)
30
35
40
45
50
-20% GHGs -15% GHGs -10% GHGs -5% GHGs GHG Benchmark
Bill
ion
€/y
r
Air pollution control costs
Costs of CAFE TSAP proposal
Input data for non-EU countries
• Bilateral consultations held with:
– Norway, (Switzerland)
– Russia, Ukraine (funded by DG-ENV)
– Belarus
• Draft input data documented in CIAM report 1/2006
• Feedbacks from national experts invited up to end of 2006
• Updated projections in early 2007
Sources of energy projections for non-EU countries
Albania Gothenburg Protocol 1996 Norway National projection 2005/2006
Belarus Gothenburg Protocol, adjusted 2006
Romania PRIMES baseline 2005
Bosnia-H. Gothenburg Protocol 1996 Russia National projection 2002
Bulgaria PRIMES baseline 2005 Serbia-M. Gothenburg Protocol 1996
Croatia Gothenburg Protocol 1996 Switzerland National projection 2005/2006
T.F.Y.R.O. Macedonia
Gothenburg Protocol 1996 Turkey PRIMES baseline 2005
Rep. of Moldova
Gothenburg Protocol 1996 Ukraine National projection 2004
Draft projections of emissions for non-EU countries(relative to the 2000 levels)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%
180%
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
2000
2010
2020
SO2 NOx VOC NH3 PM2.5
Albania Belarus Bosnia-H. BulgariaCroatia T.F.Y.R.O Macedonia Rep. of Moldova NorwayRomania Russia Serbia-M. SwitzerlandTurkey Ukraine Total
Further time table for the Gothenburg review
• December 2006: Deadline for comments on input data for non-EU countries
• May 2007: Draft assessment of environmental impacts presented to TFIAM
• August 2006: Report to the EMEP Steering Body
• September 2007: Report to WGSR
Technical potentials for further PM2.5 reductionson top of “Current legislation” in 2020 [in kt] from sources which are included in existing Protocols
0
250
500
750
1000
Included Not included Included Not included Included Not included
EU-17 EU-10 Non-EU
1: Power plants 2: Non-industrial combustion 3: Industrial combustion4: Industrial processes 7: Road transport 8: Other mobile sources5+6+9+10: Others
The EU-LIFE project EC4MACS:European Consortium for Modelling of Air Pollution and Climate Strategies
• EU funding for a consortium of integrated assessment modelling teams to prepare and maintain modelling tools for air quality and climate policy development– IIASA (CIAM) - Coordinator – MNP/RIVM (CCE) - critical loads data– NTUA Athens – energy projections– Uni Bonn et al. – agricultural projections– LTUA Thessaloniki – transport modelling– AEAT et al. – benefit assessment– MET.NO (MSC-W) – dispersion modelling– Supported by additional contracts for JRC Ispra and Sevilla
• Project time frame 2007-2012• ~4.5 million € EU contribution (on co-funding basis)