Spatial allocation of diffuse emissions sources Comparison of spatial allocation of diffuse emissions sources of the E-PRTR with high resolution national emission inventories, example The Netherlands Wim van der Maas, 11 October 2011 the GMES and emission inventories workshop

Content Spatial allocation of national emissions Importance of emission allocation in NL Comparison with the E-PRTR allocation Recent improvements in NL Other relations with GMES HFC23 article, a wake-up call? Conclusions The GMES and emission inventories workshop, 11 Oct 2011

From proud to humble to realistic Three questions: Is the quality of our spatial allocation sufficient given its importance for air quality modeling? Do we agree on a smaller EMEP grid? Does the emission inventory community need GMES? From proud to humble to realistic Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Allocation of National emissions in the Netherlands: A PRTR since 1974 GIS (Geographical Information System) integrated from 1990 Allocation of diffuse emission to air, soil and water as a routine task Developed EDGAR IN 1994 Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Research National allocation on 500*500m2 for air quality modelling Lots of political attention Recently also used to calculate deposition maps in relation to Nitrogen deposition on ‘Natura2000’ sites Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Why is the spatial allocation of emissions so important to us? The Netherlands had problems to meet the Air Quality Standards on NOx and PM10 And needed tooling to predict the air quality locally From the 1990’s air quality modeling is based on the PRTR Calibrated by an air quality measurement network This model and the background emission maps are part of an air quality law This law is used to allow (or not) infrastructural projects Lots of attention from the (local) governments, NGO’s and the general public Recent development: N-deposition on local ‘Natura2000’ area’s And again the spatial allocated emission are crucial in the process Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

No new roads, industrial activity etc. when in the future the air quality standards (or deposition limits) are not met Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Spatial distribution Each source category has a spatial distribution 34 concepts how to allocate, a few hundred different allocation maps e.g. intensity of road use for each type of vehicle or domestic heating: a map for each type of housing Always the national totals are spatially allocated Point sources, line sources and area sources We keep the allocation data in its original form From this to the other geographical layer: 5*5km2 municipalities, provinces, water boards, river basins etc. 1*1km2, 500*500m2 for internal use – e.g. air quality modelling e.g. Percentage of a road in a municipality Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Road intensity Intensity of road use by passenger cars on national roads Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

NACE categorization After positioning the individual reporting facilities (typical 80% of the emissions) The remaining emissions are allocated by the number of employees and NACE code Each facility with its coordinates (115.000 companies) Here for NACE 15.8 food production Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Model data NH3&N2O from manure Run off Transport of containerships Deposition (wet & dry) N-deposition 1*1 km Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Land use coverage (25*25m2) Renewed every 4 year (LGN 6 uses 2008 data) Top 10 vector maps Multi-temporal satellite data Landsat Aerial photographs: Two sets of true-color aerial photographs with 0,5 meter resolution Agricultural statistics Validation on the ground for type of crop (85% match) Use of farm grassland Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Lessons learned on Spatial distribution (allocation) Now a routine task, but still intensive (1 fte) Yearly Data Acquisition Plan, most statistical data for free Additional budget for yearly improvements Never good enough Local policy initiatives are not always reflected Local initiatives for monitoring versus consistency Protocol to follow if a local authority want data into the national system. Some recent improvements: AIS transponder data for shipping Road traffic model, covering all road, also the urban ones Energy use per household Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

E-PRTR allocation compared (1*1 km2) Univ. of Stuttgart (Jochen Theloke) created EU wide maps of the emission per sector for the EC Using national totals reported for other obligations and E-PRTR point source emissions And EU-wide available proxies for the allocation of diffuse sources For some sectors we compared both datasets And – a little bit naughty – we started with residential combustion But the same counts for agriculture (agricultural detailed census versus land use (Corine)) and traffic. Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Residential combustion, 1*1 km, NOx emission Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Residential combustion, 1*1 km, CO emission Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Differences 80% of the grids differ more than 20% on CO emission Both use national energy statistics Both allocate the same national emission Allocation based on population density NOx from residential combustion dominated by natural gas CO dominated by wood combustion (open fire places) NL uses as proxy the type of house (free standing) Open fire place only used in the evening on special occasions E-PRTR uses as proxy the availability of wood (forest nearby) Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Urban traffic NOx concentration: new methodology NL used to use population density as a proxy Underestimation of e.g. distribution centers Overestimation of residential area’s and the inner cities Invested in a very detailed model, including traffic-counting by the municipalities of 50% of the total amount of urban traffic Results are – for this moment - disappointing: For Amsterdam a slightly better correlation with the measurements But not significant For Rotterdam some measurement stations are even worse correlated For this year we keep using the old methodology, to avoid complications with the local authorities Who took measurements based on the old methodology …… Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Evidence for under-reporting HFC-23 Wake-up call from the presented article NL reported: With an uncertainty of 50% Article states 26 – 46 Mg in period July 2008 –July 2010 Discussion between the Ministry, the Competent Authority (Province) and the American owner of the facility To be continued … Year Mg (Gg CO2 eq.) 2008 18 (212) 2009 13 (154) 2010 33 (391) Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Conclusions Is the quality of our spatial allocation sufficient given its importance for air quality modeling? High resolution emission inventories are better but not good enough Given the role in air quality policies in NL The uncertainties are high and difficult to communicate Uncertainties in the national total in NL  NOx ±15% Many diffuse sources (traffic, agriculture) are key sources Spatial uncertainties due to the proxies used (Temporal and stack height) Do we agree on a smaller EMEP grid? Only if it goes together with information about spatial uncertainties We don’t want to give false expectations Does the emission inventory community need GMES? We need all the help we can get Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop

Thank you for the attention Wim van der Maas 11 October 2011 The GMES and emission inventories workshop