M. Amann, W. Asman, I. Bertok, J. Cofala, C. Heyes, Z. Klimont, W. Schöpp, F. Wagner Policy scenarios that meet the environmental objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution Part 1: Changes since the CAFE analysis Presentation for the meeting of the NECPI working group Brussels, December 18-19, 2006

Contents Changes since CAFE Translation of TSAP targets Methodology Input data Translation of TSAP targets Optimized emission reductions Further work

Methodological changes since CAFE (1) Adjusted model structures for Road transport (mileage, COPERT-IV emission factors, etc.) Combustion in small-scale domestic sources VOC emitting sectors (e.g., coil coating!) Agricultural emissions (influence of productivity increases on emission factors) Atmospheric dispersion Functional relationships derived from marginal perturbations of emissions around the TSAP emission levels

Methodological changes since CAFE (2) Urban increments from City-delta-III Higher estimates than used for CAFE Ecosystem-specific deposition for eutrophication: Ecosystems with nitrogen deposition exceeding critical loads in 2000: CAFE with grid-average deposition: 733.000 km2 NEC with ecosystem-specific deposition: 854.000 km2 GAINS instead of RAINS optimization

The GAINS model: The RAINS multi-pollutant/ multi-effect framework extended to GHGs Economic synergies between emission control measures PM SO2 NOx VOC NH3 CO2 CH4 N2O CFCs HFCs SF6 Health impacts: PM  O3 Vegetation damage: O3 Acidification Eutrophication Radiative forcing: - direct - via aerosols - via OH PM SO2 NOx VOC NH3 Health impacts: PM  O3 Vegetation damage: O3 Acidification Eutrophication Physical interactions Multiple benefits

Differences between RAINS and GAINS in the optimization (technology representation) RAINS optimization: Input: Cost curves for each pollutant RAINS cost curves exclude multi-pollutant technologies Optimization decides how far to move up on each cost curve (keeping underlying activity fixed!) GAINS optimization: Input: Costs of individual measures and their emission reduction potentials (for all affected pollutants) Optimization decides which measures to use GAINS in “RAINS” mode: Considers only measures that do not change activity patterns Full GAINS optimization: All measures considered, also those that change the underlying activity (through, e.g., efficiency improvements)

Validation of RAINS cost curves with the GAINS optimization

Potential for emission controls Max. RAINS measures (MRR) vs. max Potential for emission controls Max. RAINS measures (MRR) vs. max. GAINS measures MRR The NEC analysis in this report uses the GAINS model in “RAINS mode” only! DE, 2020, PRIMES00

Revisions of input data since CAFE Updated emission inventories National projections of energy and agricultural activities Assumptions on “Current legislation” Critical loads data Population data Ship emissions

Emissions reported for the year 2000 in 2004 (blue bars) and 2005 (red line)

Emissions reported for the year 2000 in 2004 (blue bars) and 2005 (red line)

Comparison of GAINS emission estimates for 2000 with the latest national inventories

PM emissions for 2000 estimated by GAINS (red line) and reported by countries (bars)

Input data: Energy consumption projected for 2020

CO2 projections up to 2020 implied by the energy projections

Assumptions on current legislation Euro-5/6 for light duty vehicles form part of NEC baseline Inconsistencies between data on fuel consumption, mileage and vehicle numbers Costs will be reported a.s.a.p. IPPC for pigs and poultry farm Transposition into national laws follows examples of countries that have already done so Number of pigs kept on large farms according to ALTERRA study Additional requirements for complying with air quality daughter directives and NEC 2010 directive not considered Variants of GHG policies as sensitivity cases

Scope for emission reductions in 2020

Access to all input data and detailed optimization results for each country and sector available at www.iiasa.ac.at/rains

M. Amann, W. Asman, I. Bertok, J. Cofala, C. Heyes, Z. Klimont, W. Schöpp, F. Wagner Policy scenarios that meet the environmental objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution Part 2: Scenario results Presentation for the meeting of the NECPI working group Brussels, December 18-19, 2006

The first round of NEC policy scenarios Optimization for the TSAP environmental targets applied to NEC projections For three activity projections National projections PRIMES €20 projection For EU-25 Inclusion of BG and ROM (and N and CH) in next round Analysis of EU-wide measures (Euro-VI for HDT, IPPC, etc.) in next round “RAINS mode” optimization – no changes in activity patterns allowed

Translation of the TSAP environmental targets for the NEC analysis

Translation of the TSAP environmental targets for the NEC analysis

Environmental targets of the Thematic Strategy

Costs for achieving the TSAP targets (additional to baseline costs)

Costs for achieving the TSAP environmental targets (costs on top of NEC-baseline, excluding costs of Euro5/6)

Optimized emission reductions for 2020 in relation to the 2020 baseline projections

Optimized SO2 emission reductions for 2020 in relation to 2000

Optimized NOx emission reductions for 2020 in relation to 2000

Optimized PM2.5 emission reductions for 2020 in relation to 2000

Optimized NH3 emission reductions for 2020 in relation to 2000

Optimized VOC emission reductions for 2020 in relation to 2000

Further work Inclusions of national energy projections for Greece Costs of baseline scenario (including transport measures) Inclusion of Bulgaria and Romania, as well as Norway and Switzerland Sensitivity analysis

Possible sensitivity analyses for the next round Inter-annual meteorological variability Scope for EU-wide Euro-VI standards for heavy duty vehicles Scope for EU-wide measures (IPPC, etc.) Cost-effectiveness of reductions in other countries Cost-effectiveness of reductions of ship emissions Interaction with climate policies (GAINS optimization) Sensitivity towards city-delta estimates

Summary and points for discussion Optimization for translated TSAP targets results in costs of 4.1, 2.3 and 1.1 billion €/yr on top of NEC-BL, depending on the climate strategy (excl. costs for Euro5/6) Achievement of eutrophication targets is most costly Associated emission ceilings depend on climate targets Short list for sensitivity analyses? How to handle the range of emission ceilings?