To support the reanalysis exercise in EU FP7 MACC a consistent, high resolution anthropogenic emission database for is needed TNO-MACC emission inventory: Hugo Denier van der Gon, Antoon Visschedijk, Jeroen Kuenen, Magdalena Jozwicka, Rene van Gijlswijk

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids2 TNO European emission databases for AQ modelling a bit of history (and excluding HM and POP data) 1990s emission databases for TNO LOTOS model CEPMEIP base year 1995 focused on PM (TNO, 2000) UBA base year 2000; ¼ x 1/8 lon_lat resolution (~13 x 13 km); priority pollutants (TNO, 2005) GEMS base year 2003; based on UBA (TNO, 2005) increased resolution 1/8 x 1/16 lon_lat (~ 7 x 7 km) (TNO, 2007) TNO base year 2005: On-going improvements in three projects UBA - PAREST (spatial distribution – base year 2005); FP6 EUCAARI (EC/OC); FP7 MEGAPOLI (Mega city scale) FP7 MACC – High resolution emission data for FP7 TRANSPHORM & ENERGEO – focus on transport & energy sectors

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids3 Approach to base year inventory (2005) In the past independent emission inventories were made ….. The TNO year 2005 emission inventory is set up using official reported emissions at the source sector level – as much as possible – Makes use of national expertise & links to the policy arena Emissions are downloaded from the European Environment Agency ( However, the reported emissions by individual countries contain gaps and errors – various consistency checks need to be made. Alternative emissions : IIASA GAINS emissions and /or TNO default. Extreme deviations adjusted - allows maximum use of official data while not hazarding the quality of the final result

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids4 Role of TNO…. We make liberal use of reported EMEP emissions (CEIP) and IIASA GAINS but cater for the models or user (GMES) specific needs: 1.Remove unreliable data. Try to be complete…“make” it complete 2.Add or “do” components that are not or incompletely reported e.g., EC, OC, POPs, HM, etc. 3.High resolution (~ 7x 7 km), consistent distribution patterns for road transport, agriculture, power plants, industry, etc. 4.Modify for specific regions or sources (flexible) 5.Collaborate in interpretation and provide description of input.

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids5 EPER reported power plants overlaying the TNO data base

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids6 Non-urban road transport emissions distributed using a European traffic intensity road map based on EU Transtools project Completed East-ward with simple road network

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids7 MACC European emissions Direct use of reported annual emission data is not possible.... Consistency checks and gapfilling For countries where no emission data for these years are available linear interpolation between 2000 – 2005 and projected 2010 Result is scaling factors relative to 2005 emission by individual source category by country by year Reported data

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids8 Final emission data for UNECE-Europe (TNO MACC emission set) Base year data. AQMEII year

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids9 Emission reduction in 2007 compared to 2003 in EU15, EU12 and Non EU countries

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids10 Checks are done on observed patterns Denmark PM10 increase ~ 20% from 2003 – 2007 = correct Oil platform flaring: error in NL scaling factor SNAP09 –> corrected

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids11 Intensity of NOx emission Europe 2005 on 1/8th x 1/16th degree lon-lat This data is currently being used by various groups (e.g. KNMI, TNO, EMPA) to validate emissions with NO2 satellite data

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids12 NOx emission intensity on the coarser 1/2 x 1/4 degree lon-lat grid (emphasizes point sources)

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids13 Data users…. not just MACC EU FP programmes co-developing; MACC, MEGAPOLI, EUCAARI, users (and extending): PASODOBLE; ENERGEO; TRANSPHORM AQMEII – JRC+ US EPA Smaller projects; PMinter, BOP (NL), UBA and many more Various PhDs at universities (UU, Manchester, VU, etc.) All in all - basically all European model groups…..

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids14 Chemical composition of the MACC PM emissions Air quality models often need to split the PM emissions into its chemical components to account for the particulate behaviour. To accommodate this need a specific PM bulk composition profile file was composed based on work done by TNO in e.g. FP6 EUCAARI and others. Chemical components: elemental carbon (EC), organic carbon (OC), sulphate, sodium and “other mineral components”. Best “service” (within budget ;-)) to MACC regional is to make a PM split table by country by source sector that breaks down the PM10 and PM2.5 into components. (sum = 1) Why per country? Because fuel and technologies differ widely between countries (e.g. residential combustion NL vs Poland)

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids15 METHODOLOGY TNO EUCAARI EC & OC inventory (SHORT VERSION) Start from IIASA’s GAINS PM10/2.5/1 emission inventory Deriving representative size-differentiated EC and OC fractions for over 200 source categories using e.g., Kupiainen et al. 2004, Bond et al. 2004; Streets et al. 2001, Schauer et al and more…. EC and OC calculated as a share of PM10/PM2.5/PM1 emissions. Constrains EC / OC and [size-fractionated EC and OC emission factors for all relevant sources / technologies are not available & and/or can vary widely due to different measurement protocols and analytical techniques]

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids16 Example of application to Austria PM10 emissions

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids17 Spatial distribution of the EC component in PM2.5

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids18 Spatial distribution of EC emission over the North of Spain Spatial distribution of particle- bound sulphate over the North of Spain. Note the importance of point sources.

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids19 EEA Questions: What are the data flows, challenges and successes in developing emissions inventory data for GMES projects? What made TNO-MACC a successful EI for GMES & AQ modelling? High resolution –> 50 x 50 km is not sufficient Gap filled, checked for errors (PM2.5 > PM10 etc.) – complete, replace unlikely figures Consistent in space (one grid, all countries distributed in equal quality, transparent & easy to implement) Consistent in time (over the years) trends are trends, not artifacts A group that is responsible for your emission grid and answers your questions….E.g., When there is no EC grid, we make it….(if project funded) When a certain hotspot doesn’t show up in the satellite image – we jointly try to clarify….errors? Artifacts of distribution? Or overestimated emissions? Really…every user has questions….e.g. in FP7 Pasodoble we don’t develop emissions we only provide & answer questions

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids20 Is there a mismatch between available emission inventory data and application of these in GMES and atmospheric modelling projects? Available from EEA or from TNO? ;-) Domain EU27 is not enough; reporting is slow in including new pollutants (EC, PN); unclear what (semi-natural) sources are missing; strike a balance between official & accurate… Annual totals and lumped species (NMVOC) are not the detail that is needed What has been done to “fix” this mismatch? This is apparently no ones task……Case by case basis, depending on projects and project needs “fixing” lags behind: time profiles, NMVOC splits often outdated “Emission reporting/inventory world” often has different aims (fulfilling of an obligation, policy negotiations) This is not understood by GMES and AQ users.

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids21 Example of what a user from another discipline will not understand Consistency in base year reported EI data (PM10; kt) It’s great that this can still be downloaded!!!!! Thnx to CEIP.

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids22 PM10 discrepancies…. (max. Base Year value – min. BY value)/ min BY value Realize that often we discuss measures that have a few % impact. It might be progress in emission reporting…. but clear that some guidance is needed for a user to understand and believe in the data

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids23 What are the key datasets that are important? EEA gap-filled data & CEIP webdab, IIASA GAINS All spatial distribution proxy maps (road network, point sources etc.) TNO’s own bottom-up data: Activity data (statistics) & EFs to fill gaps, cross check How is the data kept up-to-date? It is not!.. ..again case by case, depending on projects. For example, to limit costs we work with base years. Current base year is Next base year should be would be the right year to work on that but no funds yet…. It should not just be “keep up-to-date” but also improve!!! Quite a problem…difficult/impossible to convince e.g the Dutch government that they need to fund a project that harmonizes and cross-checks European data – why should they? All in all –the wrong perspective…my personal back of enveloppe figure: EU27 spends ~ milj euro/yr on emission reporting (incl GHG) but impossible to get 1% to improve across the board or establish base years every 5 years…..

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids24 Wrap-Up & outlook the TNO-MACC emission data is widely used (MACC, various other EU IPs, AQMEII) we can claim it is state of the art – used by basically all model groups in Europe! It links in with “accepted” and “reported” data (but omits outliers) – thus being close to policy making Gaps are filled, it is complete but substantial uncertainties exist A time series of – now 1999 added (EURODELTA_3) Note that the high resolution is a down-scaled approach – large deviations are possible (FP7 MEGAPOLI experience) In MACC-II we hope to work on updating of temporal profiles, inclusion of , and improved shipping emissions Improvements are now feasible using source apportionment studies For specific “problems” we make full bottom-up inventories again…there is a clear need for scientific “shadow” emission inventories for particular pollutants or source sectors

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids25 Contact: Acknowledgements: EUCAARI

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids26

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids27 The FP7 MEGAPOLI experience: Emission inventories at local, national and regional scales are not consistent. Partly spatial distribution issues – A GMES user will need help… Partly under & overestimating? Combining various resolutions and projections is time consuming!

Hugo Denier van der Gon TNO-MACC European Emission grids28 Uncertainties? Sure, plenty! 1.Errors in the emission factor approach propagate in the final data (example: (How) representative (?) driving cycles ) 2.Countries do not always estimate emissions in a uniform and transparent manner & Reporting is an administrative obligation. 3.Europe is many different countries – no country wants to “judge” others…. and no other agency really pursues it. 4.VOC splits as available from older projects…needs update! 5.This is still a top-down approach – major improvements can be made by using local or national spatial data (ITM presentation Denier van der Gon et al.,) but…workload explodes and less “consistent” 6.Missing sources like resuspension – who’s problem are they?