Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 1 Additional technical measures, their reduction potential and costs Based on a study by: Hugo Denier van der Gon, Maarten van het Bolscher & Antoon Visschedijk TNO Built Environment and Geosciences Presented by: Maarten van het Bolscher, Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 2 Contents Output Phase I Aims Methodology Selected Measures and Costs Results –Country specific data Conclusions

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 3 Output of the project – Phase I - HM For Cd, Pb, Hg + 6 other HM (As, Cr, Cu, Ni, Se and Zn) For European UNECE Member States. Emission inventory for 2000 (base year) Projections for 2010, 2015 and 2020 following two scenarios Current Legislation and Current Ratification of HM protocol (CRHM) Current Legislation and Full Implementation of HM protocol (FIHM) Quantify emission reduction due to implementation of the HM Protocol Preliminary list of possible measures to further reduce HM emissions

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 4 Aims of the study Select measures for a possible revision of the HM Protocol Calculate emission reduction and associated costs in 2020 upon a possible revision of the HM protocol Estimate costs of a possible revision of the HM Protocol Phase I + II Provide input for predictive modeling of environmental distribution, exposure of ecosystems, source–receptor relationships

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 5 Methodology Phase II HM 1.Starting point: HM emissions in 2020 Full Implementation HM 2.Key source analysis of remaining emissions upon FIHM 3.Selection of sources for a possible revision of the HM Protocol 4.Select source-specific measures and their associated costs –Package 1 – dust control oriented (all HM) –Package 2 – gaseous emission control (more specific Hg) 5.Calculate emission reduction upon revision and quantify associated costs 6.Distribute emissions to make emission maps for modelling

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 6 Potential additional reduction measures for selected source sectors are summarized in the report e.g. Example of proposed measure for a HM source sector Cement Production Restriction of Hg content in waste fuel (e.g. by prohibiting the use of certain waste fuels) Sinter plantsReplacement of current limit value of 50 mg dust/m3 by 30 or 40 mg/m3 (e.g. by using multiple field ESP, fabric filters or advanced high pressure scrubbing, probably considerable costs) Blast furnacesReplacement of current limit value of 50 mg dust/m3 by 30 mg/m3 (e.g. by using fabric filters) Electric arc furnaces Replacement of current limit value of 20 mg dust/m3 by 10 mg/m3 (e.g. by using fabric filters) Basic oxygen furnaces Introduction of emission limit value (e.g. 10 or 20 mg dust/m3 by using fabric filters)

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 7 Selected Measures and Costs Examples Package 1

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 8 Selected Measures and Costs Examples Package 2 Note: Complete list of measures; see accompanying report

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 9 Results Phase II Avoided emission by country, by measure for 2020 * ) Annual costs by country, by measure for 2020 * ) Here aggregated results for UNECE-Europe are presented and put in perspective to 2000, 2010 and 2020 emissions with current ratification (CR) and/or full implementation (FI) of the HM Protocol * ) Detailed breakdown available in annex, addendum and CD of the TNO report

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 10 Emission in UNECE Europe in 2020 before and after possible revision of the HM Protocol, achieved emission reductions and costs for package 1+2

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 11 Emission in UNECE Europe in 2020 before and after possible revision of the HM Protocol package 1+2, achieved emission reductions

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 12 Emissions with different scenarios - 1 CR = current ratification; FI = full implementation; AM = additional measures

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 13 Emissions with different scenarios - 2 CR = current ratification; FI = full implementation; AM = additional measures

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 14 Combined report The work of TNO, EMEP/MSC-E and the Coordination Centre on Effects (CCE) has been combined in the report: Heavy Metals Emissions, Depositions, Critical Loads Excedances in Europe. Final conclusion is that the policy focus on the three priotrity metals Cd, Pb, and Hg is justified

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 15 Cd

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 16 Relative change HM emissions with different scenarios (year 2000 = 100%)

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 17 Conclusions -1 Total Costs of AM Package 1 (dust reduction) ~9 billion €/yr –mostly (85%) in Non-EU25+ –Note: costs will also be made in EU but are attributed to autonomous measures (e.g. IPPC) Total Costs of AM Package 2 (Hg reduction) ~18.5 billion €/yr –equally distributed in EU25+ and non-EU25+ –Hg is not covered by autonomous measures; Co-benefit of Package 2 may be reduction other gaseous pollutants e.g. PCDD/F Co-benefit for PM is mostly by FIHM (~ 3.7 Mt TSP, 1.2 Mt PM10 and 0.28 Mt PM2.5). FIHM+AM has limited impact because (partly) focus on gaseous emissions.

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 18 Conclusions-2 Additional Measures (AM) (~27,000 M€/yr) are expensive compared to the 1998 HM protocol (estimated at ~440 MECU (1995); Berdowski et al., 1998), but probably well below costs of implementation 2nd S Protocol (roughly estimated at ~ 50-60,000 M € ) Full implementation of the 1998 HM Protocol brings about the biggest step in reduction of HM emissions; a possible revision of the HM protocol is a further improvement and should be seen in this perspective.

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 19 Thanks for your attention More detailed country data available Report available on ? Questions ?

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia. 20 Sources not in the HM Protocol % HM UNECE-Europe 2020 after FI SourcesCdHgPb Residential, commercial and other combustion Industrial combustion Coke ovens Peat (Heat and power prod., residential etc, industrial comb.), sec. Al and iron foundries <0.5