1. M. Amann, I. Bertok, R. Cabala, J. Cofala, F. Gyarfas, C. Heyes, Z
M. Amann, I. Bertok, R. Cabala, J. Cofala, F. Gyarfas, C. Heyes, Z. Klimont, K. Kupiainen, W. Winiwarter, W. Schöpp
Scope for further emission reductions: The range between Current Legislation and Maximum Technically Feasible Reductions

2. General assumptions All calculations for 2020
Current legislation (CLE) case: CAFE baseline scenario, “with climate measures”
Maximum technicallay feasible reduction” (MTFR) case assumes maximum reductions also in non-EU countries and sea regions
All impact assessments for 1997 meteorology

3. Scope for further improvements

4. Long-term trends of EU-25 emissions CAFE “Climate policy” projection, relative to year 2000 [= 100%]

5. Scope for further technical emission reductions “Illustrative Climate” vs. Climate policy” scenario, EU-25, 0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
SO2
NOx
VOC
NH3
PM2.5
2000
CLE-2020 CP
CL-2020-IC
MFR-2020-CP
MFR-2020-IC

6. Anthropogenic contribution to PM2.5 [µg/m3]
CLE MTFR
Contributions of primary and secondary inorganic aerosols to PM2.5 Calculations for 1997 meteorology

7. Loss in life expectancy attributable to anthropogenic PM2.5 [months]
Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
Loss in average statistical life expectancy due to identified anthropogenic PM2.5 Calculations for 1997 meteorology
Provisional estimates with generic assumption on urban increment of PM

8. Loss in life expectancy attributable to anthropogenic PM2.5 [months]
Provisional estimates with generic assumption on urban increment of PM

9. Remaining gaps for loss in life expectancy 2000 = 100% gap to no-effect level

10. Health-relevant ozone concentrations [SOMO35, ppm.days]
Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
Grid average concentrations Calculations for 1997 meteorology

11. Premature deaths attributable to ozone [cases per year]

12. Remaining gap for premature deaths attributable to ozone (effect in 2000 = 100% gap)

13. Vegetation-relevant ozone concentrations AOT40 [ppm.hours]
Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
Critical level for forests = 5 ppm.hours
Calculations for 1997 meteorology

14. Acid deposition to forests
Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
Percentage of forest area with acid deposition above critical loads, using ecosystem-specific deposition, Calculation for 1997 meteorology

15. Acid deposition to forests % of forest area with acid deposition above CL

16. Remaining gap for forest acidification (effect in 2000 = 100% gap)

17. Acid deposition to semi-natural ecosystems including HABITAT areas
Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
Percentage of area of semi-natural ecosystems with acid deposition above critical loads using ecosystem-specific deposition. Calculation for 1997 meteorology

18. Acid deposition to semi-natural ecosystems including HABITAT areas

19. Remaining gap for semi-natural ecosystems (effect in 2000 = 100% gap)

20. Acid deposition to freshwater bodies
Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
Percentage of catchments area with acid deposition above critical loads, using ecosystem-specific deposition. Calculation for 1997 meteorology

21. Acid deposition to freshwater bodies Percentage of catchments area with acid deposition above CL

22. Excess of critical loads for eutrophication
Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
Percentage of ecosystems area with nitrogen deposition above critical loads using grid-average deposition. Calculation for 1997 meteorology

23. Excess of critical loads for eutrophication Percentage of ecosystems area with nitrogen deposition above CL

24. Remaining gap for eutrophication (effect in 2000 = 100% gap)

25. Conclusions There is scope for further emission reductions
Meaningful targets for optimization can only be between CLE and MTFR. Must be above the MTFR everywhere
Choice of targets determines distributions of burdens
Proposal for initial optimization runs:
Optimization for 3 ambition levels for each environmental problem, evaluation of impacts for all other problems
Some joint optimizations?
Assumptions for non-EU countries?
2020 and 2015?

26. Wish list ranked according to priority
Policy runs (3*5 scenarios) for 2020 – including cost estimates
Explore uncertainties through sensitivity analyses
MTFR for national scenarios
Different meteorological years
Increased hemispheric background for O3
Policy packages
EURO-V/VI
CAP reform scenario
Scenario with maximum Europe-wide measures
Include emerging technologies (e.g., beyond SCR)
Ultimate MTFR scenario
Look at 2010
All results 10 days before meeting