1. Presentation title
Second workshop on the revision of the UNFCCC Annex I reporting guidelines
Emission Factor Database
Bonn, Germany, 3–4 November 2010
Astrid Olsson, Programme Officer
UNFCCC secretariat, programme

2. Emission factor data base
Presentation title
EFDB
Emission factor data base
Emission factor database (EFDB) is a library of EFs
Responsibility of user to decide whether EF is applicable to national circumstances. User need to ensure that the GPG practices are followed when selecting EFs from the EFDB
If EF used in inventory must be justified as any other country-specific EF
EFs in the (EFDB) are:
Default IPCC EFs (Revised 1996 GL, GPG, GPG for LULUCF, 2006 GL)
Not checked by editorial board (already approved by governments)
Submitted EFs from countries, experts
Checked by Editorial Board
Not agreed by governments
EFs in EFDB today do not have same formal status as default EFs included in IPCC guidelines/GPGs as agreed by governments

3. Issues raised in Parties’ submissions relating to EFDB
Presentation title
EFDB
Issues raised in Parties’ submissions relating to EFDB
Two Parties have in their latest submissions expressed that they want a reference to EFDB in revised UNFCCC Annex I reporting guidelines (paragraph 12)
If Annex I Parties lack country-specific EF, they could also use EFs or other parameters provided in the IPCC EFDB, where available, provided that these EFs/parameters are considered to be appropriate in the specific national context and are considered more accurate than the default data provided in the IPCC Guidelines
Include a reference to the IPCC EFDB to highlight this additional tool available for inventory compilers

4. Presentation title
EFDB
Discussion points
Is there a role for the IPCC EFDB to update and add default parameters of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines?
What could be the status of EFs in the EFDB vis-á-vis default emission factors in the IPCC GL/GPG approved by?
Could they be used by Parties without justification?
Editorial Board provides enough assurance that the EFs can be used (without justification)? Can/should it do more?