1. M. Amann, W. Asman, I. Bertok, J. Cofala, C. Heyes,
Z. Klimont, W. Schöpp, F. Wagner
Sensitivity analyses
Meeting of the NECPI working group, March 29-30, 2007

2. Costs of the single-objective scenarios

3. Sensitivity analyses
Impact of city-delta estimates on optimized emission reductions
Impact of ship emissions
EU-wide harmonization of IPPC ELV for large boilers
2003 meteorology
Water and nitrate directive
More ambitious climate scenario

4. Case 1: Sensitivity of optimized emissions towards different City-deltas
Reference case assumes City-deltas as described in the recent report
Two sensitivity cases:
With double city-deltas
Without city-deltas
Target reduction applied to modified YOLL calculation
For national activity projections, with Euro-VI

5. Sensitivity of optimized SO2 reductions against different City-deltas 2020 with Euro-VI, national activity projections

6. Sensitivity of optimized NOx reductions against different City-deltas 2020 with Euro-VI, national activity projections

7. Sensitivity of optimized PM2
Sensitivity of optimized PM2.5 reductions against different City-deltas 2020 with Euro-VI, national activity projections

8. Sensitivity of optimized NH3 reductions against different City-deltas 2020 with Euro-VI, national activity projections

9. Case 2: Impacts of IPPC interpretations for large boilers
Two interpretations of IPPC directive for large boilers
Reflecting the ranges of emission limit values given in IPPC directive
For SO2, NOx and PM2.5 emissions
Compared to
NEC baseline (with national interpretations of IPPC)
Optimized emission levels (without Euro-VI)

10. National SO2 emissions 2020 from different IPPC interpretations for large boilers

11. National NOx emissions 2020 from different IPPC interpretations for large boilers

12. Case 3: Sensitivity against different assumptions on emissions from ships – assumptions (1)
Baseline
SO2
Sulphur content as in the EU Marine Fuel Directive (OJ L 191/59, 2005): 1.5% S in residual oil for all ships in SECA (North Sea and Baltic Sea); 1.5% S fuel all passenger ships in other sea regions surrounding the European Union; 0.1% S fuel at berth in ports
NOx
MARPOL NOx standards for ships built since 2000
Ambition level 1 - all ships
As in the baseline
Slide valve retrofit on all slow-speed engines pre-2000
Internal engine modifications for all new engines post-2010
Ambition level 2 - all ships
0.5% S in residual oil or scrubbing equivalent (2g SO2/kWh) in SECA, and for passenger vessels everywhere. Cargo vessels as in the baseline
Humid air motors for all new engines post-2010

13. Case 3: Sensitivity against different assumptions on emissions from ships – assumptions (2)
Ambition level 3 - all ships
SO2
Passenger and cargo ships:
SECA - 1.0% S in residual oil from 2010, 0.5% or scrubbing equivalent from 2015.
Other sea regions - as in the baseline but 0.5% or scrubbing equivalent from 2020
NOx
Pre-2010 vessels: 15% reduction above baseline level through available retrofit measures.
Post-2010 vessels: 50% reduction above baseline level.
Ambition level 4 - all ships
As ambition level 3
Post-2010 vessels: Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology

14. Costs for achieving the TSAP targets (National activity projections, no Euro-VI)

15. Emissions from land-based sources and ships for meeting the TSAP targets

16. SO2 emissions for the ship control scenarios (National activity projections, no Euro-VI)

17. NOx emissions for the ship control scenarios (National activity projections, no Euro-VI)

18. PM2.5 emissions for the ship control scenarios (National activity projections, no Euro-VI)

19. NH3 emissions for the ship control scenarios (National activity projections, no Euro-VI)

20. Impacts of water and nitrate directives Indicative assessment
NH3 emissions in 2020 (million tons)

21. Implications of a more ambitious climate scenario Indicative results: Costs for air pollution and GHG mitigation

22. Conclusions
Uncertainties of the city-delta estimates influence the assessment of absolute health impacts, but – in the examined case (!) - have only small impact on emission reductions derived from relative reduction targets.
A harmonized interpretation of IPPC ELV would lead to significant further emission reductions. For NOx, such action could deliver significant shares of the suggested emission reductions. Cost-effectiveness needs to be explored.
Control of ship emissions are highly cost-effective compared to the suggested reductions for land-based sources. Nitrogen is key.