From Economic Activity to Ecosystems Protection in Europe Riku Suutari, Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont Wolfgang Schöpp From Economic Activity to Ecosystems Protection in Europe An Uncertainty Analysis for two Scenarios of the RAINS Model A study funded by the UK Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions

Uncertainty Analysis Through Error propagation Emission model Dispersion model Critical load model Regional emissions Transfer matrices Critical load functions Deposition estimate Protection isolines Environmental impact

Methodology Emission calculations Model: Expected emissions: Covariance: where em = emission z = uncertainty factor for expected emission act = the activity level a = uncertainty factor for the activity level aef = controlled emission factor per unit of activity e = uncertainty factor for the emission factor af = application rate for the abatement technology g = uncertainty factor for the application rate

Methodology Deposition calculations Model: Expected deposition: Covariance: where w = wet deposition transfer coefficient w = uncertainty factor for the w d = dry deposition transfer coefficient d = uncertainty factor for the d = spatial variability in a grid area x and y = pollutant i and p = region j and q = activity causing emissions k and m = removal technology e = EMEP150 grid

Assumed uncertainties in input parameters Coefficients of variation NOx NH3 Activity rates 1990 2010 0.06-0.20 0.12-0.30 0.05-0.50 0.10-1.00 Emission factors 0.05-0.10 0.075-0.15 0.15-0.40 Removal efficiencies 0.005-0.05 0.015-0.10 0.05-0.15 Transfer coefficients Critical loads CLmax 0.22 0.12

Assumed Uncertainties of SO2 Emission Factors

Assumed Uncertainties of NOx Emission Factors

Assumed Uncertainties of NH3 Emission Factors

Top 10 SO2 source sectors UK, 1990

Top 10 SO2 source sectors UK, 2010

Top 10 NOx source sectors UK, 1990

Sensitivity Analysis for UK Emission Estimates

Uncertainties in deposition estimates Confidence intervals, 2010

Uncertainties in deposition estimates Confidence intervals, 2010

Ecosystems protection 2010 Deterministic case and uncertainty range

Ecosystems protection 2010 5% and 95 % probability

Probability of Unprotected Ecosystems Area in 2010

Conclusions General Methodology is now available, but incomplete and preliminary conclusions: The most uncertain elements in uncertainty analyses are the uncertainties Correlations, distributions difficult to quantify Uncertainties only for specific model output, but not for general ‘model’

Conclusions Emission estimates Error compensation potential determines uncertainties of estimates Uncertainties of SO2 estimates (sometimes) larger than those for NOx and NH3 Implication for design of emission inventories

Conclusions Deposition Estimates Error compensation important Isolated sources Inter-annual variability Negative correlation between NOx and NH3 deposition S and NH3 deposition more uncertain than NOx

Conclusions Ecosystems Protection Distribution/range of critical loads determine uncertainties Significant uncertainty range around median estimate Implications for target setting – new approach required? Uncertainties in ecosystems protection smaller than many uncertainties of input parameters

On the Internet The full paper and PowerPoint slides of this presentation are available at http://www.iiasa.ac.at/~rains