1. Stakeholder Expert Group on the Review of EU Air Policy 6-7 June 2011
Vehicle emissions – implications of real world emissions on air quality and air emissions 1

2. The air quality situation Main reasons for exceedances
What are the reported reasons for the exceedances in the zones according to the Member States?
For the daily PM10 the most mentioned single reason exceedance cause are local traffic (31%), domestic heating (17%) and local industry and power generation (14%). In most of the cases no reason has been given for exceedances of the ozone alert threshold. NO2 year exceedances are caused predominantly by local traffic (85%).
Figure 7 shows the main reasons mentioned for exceedances for the daily LV of PM10, the annual LV of NO2, O3 health TV and the daily LV of SO2. The percentages mentioned are the shares from the total reported reasons by the Member States.

3. The air quality situation Summary for NO2
¾ of MS, 270 cities affected
NO2 levels of up to 115µg/m³
small decrease of NO2 at urban traffic sites
larger decrease for NOx
Sources: traffic, diesel vehicles (primary NO2) 3
Source: Umweltbundesamt, Vienna, 2010

4. Comparison of emission standards and emission factors
Gasoline cars: Real emission (reflected by emission factors) follow standards in type approval => “expected” = “real”
Diesel cars: Real emissions for EURO 3, 4 and 5 much higher than standards => expected ≠ real
For EURO 6 ? – are there any data / factors already?
Data: COPERT IV as implemented in GAINS (e.g. EC4MACS project).
Courtesy: Leonidas Ntziachristos (LAT-Laboratory of Applied Thermodynamics, Thessaloniki, GR)

5. Change of emission factors over time
comparison between COPERT II (1995) and COPERT 4 (2011) emission factors
COPERT II emission factors have been used to feed RAINS (model used for Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution)
How can we learn from the past and avoid same pitfalls again?
Data: COPERT II and IV as implemented in RAINS./GAINS.
Courtesy: Leonidas Ntziachristos (LAT-Laboratory of Applied Thermodynamics, Thessaloniki, GR)

6. Impact of higher EF for diesel vehicles (EU27 in 2020)
Jens Borken-Kleefeld
Impact of higher EF for diesel vehicles (EU27 in 2020)
Emissions road transport EU27 in 2020
Baseline: PRIMES 2009 & EF COPERT 4
=> 1560 kt NOx
If …
…50% less diesel cars than projected => -11%
…old COPERT 2 EF were true => -16%
…COPERT 2 EF & 50% less diesel cars => -19%
…Euro 5/6 = Euro 4 (i.e. ‘failure’) => +100%
Future road transport emissions higher than previously expected as
projected EF reductions not realised,
more diesel cars than thought,
higher total transport activity (not shown here).
How much road transport’s emission will really be depends crucially on the performance of Euro 5/6!
On the scenarios:
BL + COPERT 4 EF: Most recent projection.
50% less diesel cars to show the impact of the strong increase
Old COPERT 2 EF: To show the impact due to unexpected reductions
Old COPERT 2 EF & 50% less diesel cars gives an estimate of the original projection
BL + COPERT 4 EF + failure of Euro 5/6: EF for Euro 5/6 were set equal to Euro 4 level, i.e. No further improvement. As emission from these concepts are still uncertain and given past experience failing reductions (on real world driving) cannot be ruled out, this shows how much emissions could actually increase, if Euro 5/6 would not deliver.
Data: COPERT IV as implemented in GAINS (e.g. EC4MACS project). Vehicle mileage: Calibrated to PRIMES BL Own calculations.
Courtesy: Jens Borken-Kleefeld (IIASA – Laxenburg/AT)
IIASA GAINS - gains.iiasa.ac.at 6

7. Conclusions (1)
Remaining challenges for air quality mainly PM, NO2/NOx and ozone
for NOx/2 main source is local traffic
Anticipated emission reductions have not materialised
Main reasons for exceedances: high real-driving NOx and primary NO2 emissions and increased number of diesel cars (higher traffic volume and share of diesel)
Real driving emissions sometimes made other measures (low emission zones) less effective 7

8. Conclusions (2)
EURO 6/VI must deliver what it promises in order to solve AQ problems for NOx/2
The less EURO 6/VI delivers the more complementary measures MS may have to take (eg traffic restrictions), in particular in “hotspots”
But timing issue, transitory measures may be necessary until EURO 6/VI delivers, eg. retrofitting 8