Progress in the development of national baseline scenarios M. Amann, J. Borken, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International Institute.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

M. Amann, I. Bertok, J. Cofala, F. Gyarfas, C. Heyes. Z. Klimont, W. Schöpp, W. Winiwarter The CAFE baseline scenarios: Emission projections.

Advertisements

IIASA Janusz Cofala, Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Emission Projections for 2020 Results from a study for the.

Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Links between climate, air pollution and energy policies Findings from the.

State of model development: RAINS/GAINS International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) M. Amann, W. Asman, I. Bertok, A. Chambers, J. Cofala,

1 Emission data needs for international reporting and assessments Joint UNECE and EIONET workshop on emission inventories and projections 6-8 May 2002,

Integrated Assessment Modeling, cost-effectiveness, and agricultural projections in the RAINS model Zbigniew Klimont International Institute for Applied.

The potential for further reductions of PM emissions in Europe M. Amann, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

Acid Rain Cooperation in Europe. The Problem Svante Oden (1968): “The Acidification of Air and Precipitation and its Consequences.” SOx, NOx -> transported.

Development of the NEC baseline scenario State of play Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

The inclusion of near-term radiative forcing into a multi-pollutant/multi-effect framework Markus Amann Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM)

Agenda Markus Amann Methodology Fabian Wagner Initial results for emissions from energy use and industrial activities Ian McCallum Estimates of mitigation.

The Clean Air For Europe (CAFE) program: Scientific and economic assessment Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

European Environment Agency 11 th Joint EIONET/TFEIP meeting, May 2010, Larnaca Recent WGSR discussions concerning baseline scenarios for the Gothenburg.

M. Amann, W. Schöpp, J. Cofala, G. Klaassen The RAINS-GHG Model Approach Work in progress.

1 Introduction, reporting requirements, workshop objectives Workshop on greenhouse gas and ammonia emission inventories and projections from agriculture.

Brussels, 1-2 September 2004 Improving Air Quality in the enlarged EU: Workshop on Plans and Programmes of Air Quality and National Emission Ceilings Directives.

European Commission: DG Environment Overview of projections data use in the European policy-making process TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections, 30 October.

European Scenarios of Air Pollution and Greenhouse Gases Mitigation: Focus on Poland J. Cofala, M. Amann, W. Asman, I. Bertok, C. Heyes, Z. Klimont, L.

Baseline emission projections for the EU-27 Results from the EC4MACS project and work plan for the TSAP revision Markus Amann International Institute for.

Baseline emission projections for the revision of the Gothenburg protocol All calculations refer to Parties in the EMEP modelling domain Markus Amann Centre.

EC4MACS European Consortium for Modelling of Air Pollution and Climate Strategies GAINS Greenhouse Gas – Air Pollution Interactions and Synergies DG ECFIN.

Application of IIASA GAINS Model for Integrated Assessment of Air Pollution in Europe Janusz Cofala International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

Baseline projections of European air quality up to 2020 M. Amann, I. Bertok, R. Cabala, J. Cofala, F. Gyarfas, C. Heyes, Z. Klimont, K. Kupiainen, W. Winiwarter,

CLRTAP co-operation project seminar Karin Kindbom, 16 April 2013  Black carbon emission inventory  Emission inventory and emission inventory system.

Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont, Wilfried Winiwarter, Wolfgang Schöpp, Frantisek Gyarfas, Imrich Bertok Draft Baseline Scenarios for CAFE.

GAINS databases Links and interactions with the international reporting processes UNECE TFEIP/EIONET meeting Dublin, Ireland, October, 2007 Z.Klimont.

Impact of the EGTEI proposed ELVs on Emission Scenarios UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution Modelling analysis performed by the.

Recent developments at CIAM Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

IIASA M. Amann, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Progress in developing the baseline scenario for CAFE.

Baseline developments for NEC Directie revision Projections Expert Panel 25 October 2007 Dublin, Ireland Eduard Dame DG Environment C5, Energy & Environment.

Current knowledge and possible systematic biases Linkages with greenhouse gas policy Fabian Wagner M. Amann, C. Berglund, J. Cofala, L. Höglund, Z. Klimont,

Information on NECD and Gothenburg Protocol revisions Eduard Dame DG Environment European Commission Energy & Environment.

Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Progress on modelling emission scenarios.

Baseline emission projections for the revision of the Gothenburg protocol Markus Amann Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM) International.

Janusz Cofala and Markus Amann Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM) International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Application.

Integrated Assessment of Air Pollution and Greenhouse Gases Mitigation Janusz Cofala International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Laxenburg,

1 Review of the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) and National Emission Ceilings (NEC) Directives Marianne Wenning DG ENV, Head of Unit,

UN ECE WORKSHOP ON INTERACTION BETWEEN AIR-QUALITY MONITORING AND AIR-PROTECTION STRATEGIES IN EECCA Geneva, 11 June th Pan-European Environment.

Katarina Mareckova, Robert Wankmueller, Marion Pinterits, Melanie Tista CEIP, ETC ACM TFEIP, 11 May 2015, Milan Status of emission reporting Review of.

Data sources for GAINS Janusz Cofala and Stefan Astrom.

GAINS emission projections for the EU Clean Air Policy Package Work in Zbigniew Klimont Task Force on.

IIASA analysis of near-term mitigation potentials and costs in Annex I countries.

Baseline emission projections and scope for further reductions in Europe up to 2020 Results from the CAFE analysis M. Amann, I. Bertok, R. Cabala, J. Cofala,

Comparison of GHG mitigation efforts between Annex 1 countries Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

Preparations for the review of the Gothenburg Protocol Report to the WGSR September 2006 Markus Amann et al., EMEP Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling.

Scenarios for the Negotiations on the Revision of the Gothenburg Protocol with contributions from Imrich Bertok, Jens Borken-Kleefeld, Janusz Cofala, Chris.

Workshop on Energy-related National and EU-Wide Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emissions 27 to 28 februari 2002 Emissions of CO 2 from the energy sector.

An outlook to future air quality in Europe: Priorities for EMEP and WGE from an Integrated Assessment perspective Markus Amann Centre for Integrated Assessment.

Scope for further emission reductions: The range between Current Legislation and Maximum Technically Feasible Reductions M. Amann, I. Bertok, R. Cabala,

TFIAM 36 th meeting Laxenburg, 6-7 October 2009 draft chairmans report available as informal document.

Inventory issues – Gothenburg Protocol – RAINS TFIEP Workshop on Emission Projections Thessaloniki, Greece, October, 2006 Zbigniew Klimont EMEP Centre.

The GAINS optimization approach – Basic background information Fabian Wagner International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) IIASA workshop.

Clean Air for Europe ROLE OF ENERGY BASELINE IN CAFE 28 February 2002 Matti Vainio DG Environment, Air Quality and Noise Unit.

Dr. Benoît ESNAULT (CRE) and Dr. Stefanie NEVELING (BNetzA)

Preparations for the revision of the Gothenburg Protocol

Progress on modelling emission scenarios

State of play in developing the NEC baseline scenario

Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Updating the Baseline and Maximum Control scenarios State of play of the.

Three policy scenarios for CAFE

M. Amann, W. Asman, I. Bertok, J. Cofala, C. Heyes,

M. Amann, I. Bertok, R. Cabala, J. Cofala, F. Gyarfas, C. Heyes, Z

Emission Projections for 2020

&file 22/02/2019 National Programmes under the National Emission Ceilings Directive (NECD) André Zuber, European Commission, DG Environment Working group.

M. Amann, W. Asman, I. Bertok, J. Cofala, C. Heyes,

EUROPEAN TOPIC CENTRE ON AIR AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Draft Baseline Scenarios for CAFE

Steve Pye / Mike Holland NEC-PI Working Group, 19th June 2007

Contact: Third stakeholder meeting on CAFE Baseline 30 April 2004 Issues related to the energy baseline Dr. L. Mantzos, M. Zeka-Paschou.

Janusz Cofala and Zbigniew Klimont

J. Cofala, Z. Klimont, F. Wagner, M. Amann

Presentation transcript:

Progress in the development of national baseline scenarios M. Amann, J. Borken, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Working Group on Strategies, Geneva, April 12-15, 2010

Contents Available scenarios Comparison of base year emission inventories Key assumptions in national projections Environmental impacts Conclusions

Data sources of draft national projections for Gothenburg Protocol revision: energy National scenariosIEA WEO 2009PRIMES 2008 C&E (NEC report #6) Austria (transport only)AlbaniaBelgiumLatvia CroatiaBelarusBulgariaLithuania Czech RepublicBosnia-H.CyprusLuxembourg DenmarkMoldovaEstoniaMalta FinlandRussiaFrancePoland GreeceSerbiaGermanyRomania IrelandUkraineHungarySlovakia ItalyTurkeySlovenia NetherlandsTFYROM (PRIMES2009) Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland UK

Data sources of draft national projections for Gothenburg Protocol revision: Agricultural projections National scenariosFAO outlook 2003CAPRI 2009 projections AustriaBelarusBelgiumLatvia CroatiaMoldovaBulgariaLithuania FinlandRussiaCyprusLuxembourg IrelandTurkeyCzech RepublicMalta ItalyUkraineDenmarkNorway NetherlandsEstoniaPoland RomaniaFranceSlovenia SlovakiaGermanyPortugal SpainHungary SwedenGreece Switzerland UK

Review process Activity data, emission factors and resulting emissions were prepared for review: gothenburg-protocol-revision Additional comments and material sent by 18 countries have been implemented by February Most countries that have sent national scenarios provided also info on control strategies (e.g., national interpretation of flexibilities in the Commission's proposal for IED). Transport emission factors and assumptions about turnover for all EU and EFTA countries based on COPERT IV model. Further feedbacks invited for March 15, but many countries commented after this date. Not all of these comments are already implemented.

State of play on country comments No. CountryLast commentsStatus 1 Austria24.03.Not implemented (sent data on activities and em. factors but not in GAINS format) 2 Belgium17.03Implemented 3 Croatia19.03.Not implemented (suggested further corrections to control strategies) 4 Czech Rep Not implemented (suggested corrections to PM emission factors) 5 Finland03.03.Implemented 6 France24.03.Implemented (IIASA responded, no concrete suggestions for changes) 7 Greece26.03.Not implemented (suggested further corrections to em. factors and control strategies) 8 Hungary24.03.Not implemented (sent data on activities and em. factors but not in GAINS format) 9 Ireland16.03.Implemented 10 Malta23.03.Implemented (IIASA responded, no concrete suggestions for changes) 11 Norway17.03.Implemented 12 Portugal02.02.Implemented 13 Romania01.04.Not implemented (sent projection of coal use in the power sector) 14 Slovakia23.03.Not implemented (sent inconsistent national energy scenario - large discrepancies with statistics) 15 Spain23.03.Not implemented (not analyzed: newest em. inventory and comparison with national projection) 16 Sweden22.03.Implemented 17 Switzerland17.03Implemented 18 UK31.03.Implemented

Base year inventory for 2005 For many countries there are disagreements between national and IEA energy statistics Two versions in GAINS: –National scenario: use of national statistics –PRIMES scenario: use of IEA/PRIMES statistics There are differences between national inventories reported to CEIP and GAINS estimates –National inventories are moving targets as national inventories for 2000 and 2005 keep changing –Main reasons for disagreement: Different energy/activity statistics Missing sources in national inventories GAINS uses COPERT emission factors Insufficient communication with national experts

Emission estimates for 2000 and 2005 GAINS estimates (draft) vs. CEIP Aug2009 inventory PROVISIONAL RESULTS SO 2 NO x NH 3 VOC

PM2.5 emission estimates for 2000 and 2005 GAINS estimates (draft) vs. CEIP Aug2009 inventory PROVISIONAL RESULTS PM2.5

Comparison of assumed GDP growth between 2005 and 2020

Comparison of oil prices assumed in national scenarios for 2020

Comparison of carbon prices assumed for 2020 National scenarios vs. PRIMES C&E package

Baseline emission projections National projections: Energy 1.National scenarios, if available 2.PRIMES 2008 Climate & Energy Package, if available 3.IEA World Energy Outlook 2009 Agriculture 1.National agricultural projections, if available 2.CAPRI projections 3.FAO 2008 projections PRIMES 2009 baseline (basis for envisaged NEC proposal): Energy 1.PRIMES 2009 baseline, if available (current national energy and energy policies, no full achievement of C&E package targets) 2.IEA World Energy Outlook 2009 Agriculture 1.CAPRI projections 2.FAO 2008 projections + Current policies on air pollution (national policies + advanced EU proposals)

Assumed GDP growth in National and PRIMES scenarios National scenarios assume higher GDP growth than PRIMES2009

Baseline emissions projections for 2020 PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Baseline emission projections for 2020 SO 2 PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Baseline emission projections for 2020 NO x PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Baseline emission projections for 2020 NH 3 PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Baseline emission projections for 2020 VOC PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Baseline emission projections for 2020 PM2.5 PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Loss in statistical life expectancy PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Excess of CL for acidification in forest soils PROVISIONAL RESULTS

Conclusions National projections received from 18 countries. There are differences in statistical data for 2000 and 2005 between national and international statistics. Implications for emission ceilings? National scenarios do not employ internationally coherent assumptions on economic development, climate policy, oil prices, etc. While for some countries differences in emission projections between national projections and PRIMES2009 are significant, differences in calculated environmental impacts are limited.