Data needs in future GHG emission control regimes Technical Workshop on Emissions from Aviation and maritime Transport Oslo 4/5 October 2007 Jakob Graichen

Background Initial thoughts on data requirements and reporting obligations of different post 2012 regimes Based on a study prepared for the German Environment Agency and discussion in various EU expert groups Goal is to assess the feasibility of different post 2012 regimes from a reporting point of view => None of the views included in this presentation are official German or EU positions

Differences between post 2012 ideas Inclusion in national totals or sectoral approach Type of target –Absolute or relative (intensity) targets –Mandatory, no lose, dual, (sustainable development) policies and measures, … Differentiation between group of countries Allocation options (if applicable) Scope

Questions from a reporting perspective What data would be needed for a regime? Is it available? Which methodologies would be applicable? Do they exist already? What resources and capacities would be necessary? How would reporting work in practice?

National totals versus sectoral approach National totals Current reporting system No need for split domestic/ international anymore Data needs depend on allocation option Sectoral approach: Data by operator needed, potentially also historical data Operators should have all relevant data on a per flight basis, but might not be easily accessible Current methodologies could be applied New reporting burden to operators New reporting system from operators to UNFCCC needed EU proposal for aviation ETS example of sectoral approach

Type of targets Absolute targets Consistent with current reporting obligations No specific additional reporting requirements Relative targets Additional information on PKM, TKM, distance flown, … needed Potentially historical data needed Data available at operator level but not necessarily available to inventory agencies New type of allowance in the system, rules for conversion in absolute emissions needed for trading Mandatory/ dual/ no lose targets No additional reporting implications (SD) policies and measures Entirely dependent on type of obligation Potentially reporting of action taken, costs, effects, indicators, additionality, … Could be oriented at reporting of PAM in national communications Potentially entirely new reporting, verification and compliance scheme needed Obligations strongly dependent on country (definition of sustainability criteria needed) Many methodological questions to be solved for PAM targets

Differentiation between countries Ideas include No differentiation, all countries treated equally Current Annex I / non-Annex I differentiation (with minor modifications) Multistage approach with differentiated obligations for different group of countries

Interfaces of Stages Global Players in int. aviation Non Annex I Countries Stages can be defined on different levels: macroeconomic national / sectoral Non - Annex I CountriesAnnex I Countries

Example: route based multistage scheme London New York Accra Singapore Seoul Quito burden: stage 1 stage 2 stage 3

Extension of obligations to non-A I Parties Currently no annual inventory reports required from non-Annex I Parties -> additional reporting requirement Depending on type of obligation new data required Capacity building needed Options requiring bottom up data more difficult to implement than top-down variants In general, data for most options discussed should be available in all countries, but potentially not to inventory agencies or in an accessible format Annex I + 15 largest non-Annex I Parties: ~ 90% of global aviation emissions Data for differentiation between countries might be necessary

Allocation and Scope Allocation options 3.Fuel sales: total fuel sales -> current reporting 4.Flag: fuel consumption by airline -> new approach, data available from airlines and often reported in energy balance 5.Route: fuel consumption for all departing planes -> data on individual flights needed (consumption or movement data for modelling) 6.Passenger/ freight: fuel consumption caused by departing passengers/ freight -> as 5 plus passenger/ freight information for all flights needed -> additional info for stop over passengers/ freight needed Scope Activities included –Military –General aviation –Government flights –… Data for general aviation more problematic Fuel based approaches should be possible, options requiring individual flight data difficult

Conclusions For the aviation sector data for many different emission control regimes exist, also in non-Annex I countries Data might not be easily accessible or available Depending on the type of commitment and reporting obligation capacity building in non-Annex I countries needed Stringent regimes based on policies and measures difficult from reporting perspective Classic SBSTA options are not relevant in a sectoral regime SBSTA option 3 the easiest to implement, options 4 & 5 possible with Tier 3 approach; option 6 most demanding Development and implementation of policies and measures in the aviation sector is mainly a political and not a technical issue

Thank you for your attention

Emission Coverage of National and International Aviation in 2000