M. Amann G. Klaassen, R. Mechler, J. Cofala, C. Heyes International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Modelling synergies and trade-offs between.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

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

Advertisements

Air Pollution and Climate

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,

W ORKSHOP MINNI Roma, aprile 2013 GAINS-Italy Giovanni Vialetto, Tiziano Pignatelli Technical Unit on Environment Technologies.

Review of UNEP modelling results applying SLCP mitigation measures in Asia and discussion of key priorities for Southeast and Northeast Asia Kevin Hicks.

Multiple Benefits of Short Lived Climate Pollutant Mitigation for Latin America and the Caribbean Paulo Artaxo, Graciela Raga and the LAC Regional SLCP.

1/18 Long-term Scenarios for Climate Change-Implications for Energy, GHG Emissions and Air Quality Shilpa Rao, International Institute of Applied Systems.

RAINS review 2004 The RAINS model: The approach. Cost-effectiveness needs integration Economic/energy development (projections) State of emission controls,

Environmental Sustainability in the Extractive Industry: The Case for Climate Change Mitigation Dr Uwem E. Ite.

National work with the GAINS model: experiences from Sweden and other countries Работы в рамках модели GAINS на национальном уровне: опыт Швеции и других.

The potential for further reductions of PM emissions in Europe M. Amann, J. Cofala, Z. 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.

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

Green investment scheme and climate change mitigation policy in Ukraine Stavchuk Iryna Climate change program coordinator National ecological centre of.

Copenhagen 29 June Energy and climate outlook: Renewables in a world and European perspective Peter Russ.

LINKAGES AND SYNERGIES OF REGIONAL AND GLOBAL EMISSION CONTROL Workshop of the UN/ECE Task Force on Integrated Assessment Modelling January 27-29, 2003.

Mr. Jiří Spitz ENVIROS, s. r. o., Prague, Czech Republic Phone: Fax: United.

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.

The GAINS model. Rationale Air pollutants and greenhouse gases (GHGs) often stem from the same sources Energy consumption and agricultural activities.

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.

1 Co-benefits of options for cleaner energy use in China Wellcome Trust Meeting, London, May 27, 2008 Kristin Aunan, CICERO China – an important country.

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

1 CICERO research in China on GHG and AP (co-) control in urban areas NILU, November Kristin Aunan Center for International Climate and Environmental.

Toward the integration of air quality and climate strategies at the state level Daniel Cohan CMAS Conference October 29, 2014.

The impacts of the UN/ECE protocols on PM emissions in Europe Preliminary results of a study conducted for the PMEG Meeting, Dessau, March 10, 2006 with.

The GAINS model State of play

Local Air Pollution and Global Climate Change A Cost-Benefit Analysis by Bollen, J., Brink, C., Eerens, H., and van der Zwaan, B. Johannes Bollen Dutch.

Mitigation of primary PM emissions Overview of existing technical and non- technical emissions mitigation techniques M. Amann, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International.

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,

Co-benefits of Integrated Approach to Air Quality Management and Climate Change Mitigation Role of Integrated Assessment Methods in SEA Dr. Vladislav.

1 JRC – Ispra DG JRC and EC4MACS IPTS Institute for Prospective Technology Studies - Peter Russ - Antonio Soria - Szabolc Szekeres IES Institute for Environment.

Clean Air The revision of the National Emission Ceilings Directive and agriculture FERTILIZERS FORUM 23 June 2015.

DAC PROJECT Capacity Building in Balcan Countries for the Abatement of Greenhouse Gases Setting priorities for GHG emissions’ reduction George Mavrotas.

We can stop the deadly Impact of global warming. Boon and Bane of Energy The Agenda 21: Instrument to tackle Global Issues Master Source for Driving the.

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

New concepts and ideas in air pollution strategies Richard Ballaman Chairman of the Working Group on Strategies and Review.

EU Legislation in the field of environment – key developments in 2007 and rd ECENA Plenary Meeting 18 September 2008.

RAINS becomes GAINS and other “future” stories TFIEP Workshop on Emission Projections Thessaloniki, Greece, October, 2006 Zbigniew Klimont EMEP Centre.

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

Non-CO 2 Greenhouse Gas Offset Projects: Basic Considerations Karl H. Schultz Climate Mitigation Works International LLC Panel Three: Design Issues RGGI.

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,

Future challenges for integrated assessment modelling Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

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

Use of emissions & other data reported within the LRTAP Convention in the IIASA GAINS model Z.Klimont Center for.

SOGE, 05/16-17/05, Bonn, Germany Switzerland. SOGE, 05/16-17/05, Bonn, Germany Switzerland, as a Party to the UNFCCC and a member of the international.

The links to global problems Presentation at the 25 th anniversary special event of the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution “Past successes.

Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development The 14th Annual Community Modeling and Analysis System (CMAS) Conference Co-benefits of energy efficiency.

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

The three CAFE policy scenarios Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Chris Heyes, Zbigniew Klimont, Wolfgang Schöpp, Fabian Wagner.

0 National Inter-Ministerial Dialogue on Climate Change Cape Hotel Monrovia, Liberia June 25, 2009 Assessing and Developing Policy Options for Addressing.

Christian Kjaer European Wind Energy Association Bruxelles, 1 June 2005 Green Week Biodiversity: Can it adapt to climate change.

CES KULeuven The Pan EU NEEDS TIMES model: main results of scenario analysis The Pan EU NEEDS TIMES model: main results of scenario analysis SIXTH FRAMEWORK.

Climate Action Team CIWMB Update CIWMB Board Meeting November 15, 2005.

Climate Policy and Green Tax Reform in Denmark Some conclusions from the 2009 report to the Danish Council of Environmental Economics Presentation to the.

Contacts: Energy, environment and climate assessment using the MARKAL energy system model U.S. EPA Office of Research.

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

Progress on modelling emission scenarios

Markus Blesl, Tom Kober IER; University of Stuttgart

MULTIPLE BENEFITS PATHWAYS APPROACH – EXPERIENCE FROM BANGLADESH

Three policy scenarios for CAFE

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

Presentation transcript:

M. Amann G. Klaassen, R. Mechler, J. Cofala, C. Heyes International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Modelling synergies and trade-offs between mitigation of GHGs and air pollution with the RAINS model

Linkages between air pollution and climate Air pollutants have radiative forcing: Ozone controls serve air quality and climate concerns Aerosols/PM damage human health and influence climate Environmental impacts of CC and AP are interlinked Synergies and trade-offs in emission controls

A multi-pollutant/multi-effect framework extended to GHGs PMSO 2 NO x VOCNH 3 CO 2 CH 4 N2ON2O CFCs HFCs SF 6 Health impacts: PM  O 3  Vegetation damage: O 3  Acidification  Eutrophication  Radiative forcing: - direct  - via aerosols  - via OH 

Introducing GHGs into RAINS Develop cost curves for GHGs (CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O, HFC, PFC, SF 6 ) in addition to SO 2, NO x, VOC, NH 3, PM, (BC, CO) Country-by-country, medium-term up to 2030 Include structural changes as means for emission controls Capture synergies and trade-offs

CO 2 control options in the power sector Shift from  to  GasHydro Bio- mass Wind onshore Wind offshore Solar PV Other renew. Carbon capture Brown coalxxxxxxx Hard coalxxxxxxxx Heavy fuel oil xxxxxxx Natural gasxxxxxx

CO 2 cost curve Germany, power sector, 2020

Options to control CH 4 TechnologyCost (€/tCH4) TechnologyCost (€/tCH 4 ) Paper recycling-1750 Further gas use in gas extraction 7 Improved feeding-1231 Housing adaptation15 Increased gas flaring-377 Alternative rice strains45 Improved I&M for gas distribution -200 Digestion66 Gas use in oil extract.-187 Integrated waste water systems100 Recovery in coal mines-67 Doubling leak control1203 Gas use in gas extraction -57 Waste diversion1438 Ban of agricultural waste burning 0 Replace gray cast iron network2378 Propionate precursors4250

CH 4 cost curve France, 2020

First preliminary results

Data and assumptions Latest RAINS energy- & cost data For EU-25, excluding Cyprus and Malta (EU-23) For 2020

Reference case (REF) CAFE “without climate measures” energy projections for 2020 Air pollution control according to recent EU legislation (NEC Directive, LCP Directive, Auto-Oil, etc.)

Scenario 1: Fuel-shift CO 2 control in the power sector Cost-effective fuel shift measures to reduce CO 2 emissions in the power sector by 15 % Subject to exogenous electricity demand

Fuel shifts applied to reduce CO 2 emissions

CO 2 [Mt ] NO x [kt] SO 2 [kt] PM2.5 [kt] Changes in emissions compared to REF, EU Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel

Differences in premature deaths (cases/year, compared to REF) Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel

Emission control costs (billion €/yr, compared to REF) Control ofFuel-shift scenario CO CH 4 0 GHGs+3.5 SO NO x -0.3 PM-0.6 Air pollutants-2.3 Total+1.2

Scenario 2: Multi-gas Multi-GHG control In each country, the equivalent CO 2 reductions of the Fuel-shift scenario are achieved with CO 2 and CH 4 controls

CH 4 reduction measures applied in the Multi-gas scenario

Fuel shifts applied in the Fuel-shift and Multi-gas scenarios

CO 2 [Mt ] NO x [kt] SO 2 [kt] PM2.5 [kt] Changes in emissions compared to REF, EU-23 CH Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel CH 4

Differences in premature deaths (cases/year, compared to REF) Fuel-shiftMulti-gasBio-fuel

Emission control costs (billion €/yr, compared to REF) Control ofFuel-shiftMulti-gas CO CH GHGs SO NO x PM Air pollutants Total

Scenario 3: Bio-fuels Increased biomass use in households Shift to biomass use for domestic heating: 10% of light fuel oil is replaced by biomass

CO 2 [Mt ] NO x [kt] SO 2 [kt] PM2.5 [kt] Changes in emissions compared to REF, EU-23 CH 4

Differences in premature deaths (cases/year, compared to REF)

Emission control costs (billion €/yr, compared to REF) Control ofBio-fuel scenario CO CH 4 0 GHGs+0.6 SO NO x 0 PM0 Air pollutants-0.1 Total0.5

Further work Finalization of cost curves for other GHGs Optimization tool: –Separate and joint optimization of emission controls for air pollutants and GHGs: –With constraints (targets) for air quality –With constraints (targets) for radiative forcing/GWP –Simulation of emission trading, emission taxes Implementation for developing countries

Conclusions (1) Important synergies and trade-offs exist between air pollution control and GHG mitigation Integration can maximize synergies and avoid trade-offs To be truly cost-effective, climate policies have to account for cost savings of reducing traditional air pollutants - both for industrialized and developing countries

Conclusions (2) Multi-pollutant/multi-effect/multi-scale strategies: offer more flexibility and increased potential for economic efficiency harness multiple benefits of measures when costs are increasing connect global long-term climate objectives with concrete local near-term benefits