Centre Interprofessionnel Technique d’Etudes de la Pollution Atmosphérique Interprofessional Technical Centre on Atmospheric Pollution Studies French experience in prospective scenarios Energy – Climate – Air pollution Estimations of emissions of GHG and air pollutants in 2020 and 2030 Jean-Pierre FONTELLE TFEIP Stockholm 2-3 May 2011

2 Content Framework and scenarios produced Emissions of GHG in France in 2020 and 2030 Emissions of air pollutants in France in 2020 and 2030 Conclusions Study conducted by CITEPA in March 2011 (N. ALLEMAND, J. JABOT, E. DEFLORENNE, C. GUEGUEN, E. PROUTEAU, J-M. ANDRE, J-P. CHANG, R. JOYA, E. MATHIAS, J-P. FONTELLE) OPTINEC 4 – Scénarii prospectifs climat – air – énergie. Evolution des émissions de polluants en France à l’horizon 2020 et 2030

3 Estimations of future energy consumption Based on specific work coordinated by the French Ministry of Ecology and carried out by ENERDATA with the POLES and MEDPRO models Validation of assumptions in cooperation with different experts of the Ministry and the industry sectors Future energy demand and characteristic based on a large number of parameters :  Demography, number of households, future economic growth, costs of energy, costs of carbon,  Energy demand per sector : industry, building, tertiary activities, agriculture, transport (all modes),  Trends for each sector in energy efficiency, energy savings,  Changes in energy mix (especially use of renewable energy).

4 Scenarios produced PGBusiness as usual (before 2007) AMEExisting PAMs adopted < 2010 AMSMExisting PAMs < effect expected from supplementary PAMs AMSOExisting PAMs < full compliance with the target as a result ofsupplementary Policies (this scenario underlines possible differences where the real effect is different from the initial efficiency expected) AMSO F4similar to AMSO until 2020, continuation on the basis of theoretical compliance with a reduction of emissions by a factor 4 in 2050 PAMs : policy and measures

5 GHG emissions (LULUCF excluded) (Mainnland France + Overseas territories) MT éq CO , , PG551,5-2% AME501,6-11% AMSM475,1-16% AMSO434,6-23% AMSO F4 434,6-23% 2030 PG583,03% AME510,6-10% AMSM463,1-18% AMSO422,3-25% AMSO F4 385,4-32%

6 Emissions of GHG (LULUCF excluded) (Mainland France + Overseas territories) PG AMEAMSMAMSOAMSO F4

7 GHG emissions – France GHG emission trends - energy sector

8 Pollutant emissions – Mainland France 3 scenarios AME, AMSM and AMSO only tested for air pollutants, Emissions of SO 2, NOx, PM 10, PM 2.5, NH 3, COVNM estimated in 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030, Estimations of emission trends split according to two configurations :  One based on the current legislation as of 01/01/2010,  Another based on additional measures taken after 01/01/2010 (the new IED of 24 November 2010) and a set of potential additional measures proposed by the Ministry (scenarios marked “mPA”

9 SO 2 emissions _____ provisional ceiling in 2020 according to different ambition levels

10 SO 2 emissions by sectors AME AMSM AMSM mPA AMSO AMSO mPA

11 NOx emissions – Mainland France _____ provisional ceiling in 2020 according to different ambition levels

12 NOx emissions by sectors AME AMSM AMSM mPA AMSO AMSO mPA

13 PM 2.5 emissions – Mainland France _____ provisional ceiling in 2020 according to different ambition levels

14 PM 2.5 emissions by sectors AME AMSM AMSM mPAAMSO AMSO mPA

15 Highlights on prospective emissions exercise Conclusions Such an exercise is necessary for assessing feasibility of complying with future ceilings in the frame of current negotiations (Gothenburg Protocol) Energy savings needed to meet the EU Climate/Energy targets and the French national targets enable emission reductions linked to the production and use of energy (SO 2, NOx, a part of PM 2.5 and NMVOCs (biomass combustion)) scenario AMSM mPA but not enable the following to be reached :  All targets in 2020 (SO 2 only in compliance),  The most ambitious current targets under no circumstances

16 Highlights on prospective emissions exercise Conclusions Emissions of NOx, PM 2,5 and NMVOCs can be significantly impacted by the increase in use of biomass which is included in climate PAMs. For the scenario AMSO, in which the use of biomass is the most important, emissions of PM 2.5 are higher than with the scenario AMSM (emissions of PM 2.5 and NMVOCs are potentially high in small domestic appliances where energy efficiency is low and the combustion is not regulated and well controlled ; NOx emissions are higher with wood than natural gas and light distillates). Therefore, the best scenario regarding GHG emission reductions is not the best for all air pollutant emission reductions (eg. PM 2.5 and NMVOCs)

Thanks for your attention 17 CITEPA – 7 Cité Paradis – PARIS The reference for the atmosphere of the future