1. Centralised and national submissions of transport emissions Giorgos Mellios Thomas Papageorgiou Leon Ntziachristos EEA project manager: Martin Adams LABORATORY OF APPLIED THERMODYNAMICSARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY THESSALONIKI Vienna, May 11, 2009 Study funded by EEA in the framework of the ETC/ACC IP2009; undertaken by LAT/AUTh

2. Outline Background Objectives Methodology Discussion Outlook

3. Background: Centralised calculations European policy is mostly based on centralised tools to calculate emissions and for projections –The TREMOVE model is used in transport projections and to perform impact assessments (Euro 5&6, Euro VI, CO2&cars, …) –TREMOVE estimates demand based on cost of transportation and uses COPERT to calculate emissions Several of the TERM indicators for environmental assessment are produced on the basis of models (such as TREMOVE…) –e.g. TERM 28 on specific emissions of air pollutants, TERM 33 on the average age of vehicle fleet

4. Background: Data sources and usage In 2008, EC (DG ENV) collected and produced streamlined road stock and activity data for all EU27 MSs + (CH, HR, NO, TR) to feed COPERT and TREMOVE (FLEETS project) –Base year: 2005 –Historic years : Mostly back to 1995 (some countries already starting 1970) EC (DG ENV) will base transport projections to 2030 on these data –TREMOVE for impact assessments –EC4MACS (GAINS, PRIMES) for integrated assessment

5. Background: Centralised vs. national ConditionCentralisedNational Knowledge of local environment  Data updating  Consistency in methodology  Impartiality  Completeness  /  Transparency for third parties  QA/QC  / 

6. Objectives Compare centrally calculated and national submissions of transport emissions, with emphasis on road transport –To check whether centralised calculations are consistent with national data –QC to identify (and explain) cases where national data exhibit unusual departures from centrally calculated emissions

7. Methodology: National submissions For main pollutants (CO, VOC, NOx, PM): emission data officially submitted to CLRTAP For CO 2 : emission data officially submitted to UNFCCC Data collected for EEA30 countries (except Iceland and Liechtenstein), years 2000 and 2005 Aggregated and sectoral (except CO 2 ) data available for most countries

8. Methodology: Centralised calculations Transport activity data from the FLEETS database (vehicle stock, mileage, speeds, shares, etc.) –Data obtained from international sources (Eurostat, ACEA, …) and national data (experts, projects) Data collected for EEA30 countries (except Iceland and Liechtenstein) and for years 2000 and 2005 Calculations performed with COPERT 4 (v6.1) to estimate pollutant and CO 2 emissions –Mileage adjusted to match national fuel use statistics (from UNFCCC submissions) –Bias to be introduced if UNFCCC and CLRTAP equivalent fuel consumptions differ

9. Results: Emissions comparison Preliminary results only shown in this presentation –Total emissions (kt) –Indicators (g/kg fuel)

10. Results: Total emissions (kt) National data 2000 Centralised 2000 Countries with no data National data 2005 Centralised 2005 Countries with no data EU15 CO1491514520DK, GR, LU96089222DK, LU NMVOC24072261DK, GR, LU14531329DK, LU NOx47654863GR, LU37794039LU PM 2.5 259222GR, LU217171GR, LU CO 2 758743760157LU786181790687LU EU27 CO1538714898 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU, LT,LU,MT,PL,RO 1186011128 DK, LU, MT NMVOC24772318 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU, LT,LU,PL,RO 18211621DK, LU NOx48624970 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO 45474710LU PM 2.5 264226 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO 253195BG, GR, LU, RO CO 2 836381836377CY,LU,MT886457885369CY, LU, MT EEA30 CO1592515631 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU,L TLU,MT,PL,RO,TR 1224311535DK, LU, MT, TR NMVOC25482418 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU,L T LU,PL,RO,TR 18681674DK, LU, TR NOx496151275127 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO,TR 46254815LU, TR PM 2.5 269231 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO,TR 257199BG,GR,LU,RO,TR CO 2 890892889462CY,LU,MT945948940660CY, LU, MT

11. Results: Indicators (g/kg fuel) National data 2000 Centralised 2000 Countries with no data National data 2005 Centralised 2005 Countries with no data EU15 CO61.159.4DK, GR, LU37.836.3DK, LU VOC9.99.3DK, GR, LU5.75.2DK, LU NOx19.519.9GR, LU14.915.9LU PM 2.5 1.10.9GR, LU0.90.7GR, LU CO 2 31073112LU30973114LU EU27 CO57.055.2 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU, LT,LU,MT,PL,RO 41.338.7 DK, LU, MT VOC9.28.6 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU, LT,LU,PL,RO 6.35.6DK, LU NOx18.018.4 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO 15.816.4LU PM 2.5 1.00.8 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO 0.90.7BG, GR, LU, RO CO 2 3096 CY,LU,MT30853081CY, LU, MT EEA30 CO55.354.2 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU,L TLU,MT,PL,RO,TR 40.037.7DK, LU, MT, TR VOC8.88.4 BG,CZ,DK,GR,HU,L T LU,PL,RO,TR 6.15.5DK, LU, TR NOx17.217.8 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO,TR 15.115.7LU, TR PM 2.5 0.90.8 BG,CZ,GR,HU,LT LU,PL,RO,TR 0.80.6BG,GR,LU,RO,TR CO 2 30913086CY,LU,MT30903072CY, LU, MT

12. Results: CO Indicators Increasing National CO

13. Results: Classification of CO deviations

14. Results: ΝOx Indicators Increasing National NOx

15. Results: Classification of NOx deviations

16. Results: More details available Excel spreadsheets provide more information on individual vehicle classesExcel spreadsheets Italy – CO Austria - CO

17. Discussion CO2 emissions in good agreement due to mileage tuning Fair agreement for other pollutants at an aggregated level – no bias Differences increase when looking in more detail –Country level –Sector level Centralised NOx emissions somewhat higher due to higher HDV EF in Copert 4 than Copert 3 Exercise appears useful to and may be used to improve/better understand data

18. Outlook Draft report under preparation to disseminate to parties for commenting (due end of May) Rerun calculations with 2008 national submissions Prepare final report, including country comments/corrections by October 2009

19. Thank you for your attention! …looking forward to fruitful collaboration!