1. The potential for further reductions of PM emissions in Europe M. Amann, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

2. Contents CAFE baseline emission projections Scope for further technical and non-technical reductions of primary PM emissions How do measures directed at PM10 affect PM2.5? Cost-optimized reductions to reduce ambient PM2.5 concentrations in Europe

3. CAFE baseline emission projections

4. PM10 RAINS PM emission estimates vs. national inventories, 2000 PM2.5 National inventoryRAINS estimate

5. CAFE emission baseline With climate measures” baseline projection, EU-25

6. Scope for further technical emission reductions

7. Main emission control options for PM 850 options considered in RAINS Removal efficiency Large stationary boilers Electrostatic precipitators (3 stages)96 - 99.9 % Fabric filters99.9 % Industrial boilers and furnaces Cyclones74 % Electrostatic precipitators96 - 99.9 % Fabric filters99.9 % Good housekeeping (oil boilers)30 % Residential and commercial sources New boilers and stoves (coal and biomass)30 -80 % Fabric filters for larger boilers99.2 % Filters in households (kitchen)10 % Fireplaces - inserts (catalytic, non-catalytic)44 – 70 % Good housekeeping (oil boilers)30 % Ban on open burning of waste100 %

8. Main emission control options for PM continued Removal efficiency Industrial processes Cyclones39 – 85 % Electrostatic precipitators93 - 99.9 % Fabric filters99.2 - 99.9 % Wet scrubbers97.3 - 99.5 % Fugitive emissions - good practices40 – 80 % Flaring - good practices5 % Storage and handling - good practices36 – 40 % Mining - good practices50 % Spraying water at construction sites35 %

9. Main emission control options for PM continued Removal efficiency Transport Cars and light duty trucks: EURO 1 - EURO 5 standards35 – 99 % Heavy duty trucks: EURO 1 - EURO 5 standards36 – 98 % Street washing?? Non-road sector: Euro equivalents36 – 98 % Agriculture Free range poultry28 % Low till farming, alternative cereal harvesting39 % Feed modification38 % Hay silage54 % Ban on open burning of waste100 %

10. Projected PM emissions in Europe 2000-2020 EU-15EU-10Non-EU

11. Sectoral emissions of PM2.5 CAFE calculations, EU-15

12. Sectoral emissions of PM2.5 CAFE calculations, EU-10

13. Sectoral emissions of PM2.5 RAINS estimates, Non-EU countries

14. Contribution to primary PM2.5 emissions “With climate measures” scenario, EU-15 [kt]

15. Scope for non-technical measures Local traffic restrictions –Difficult to model (with RAINS) Accelerated phase-out of solid fuels in home heating –E.g., removal of subsidies for local coal heating, or EU structural funds for replacement of heating systems General reduction of carbonaceous fuel consumption through a carbon tax –CAFE analysis: illustrative scenario with 90 €/t CO 2 carbon price (compared to 20 €/t CO 2 in baseline)

16. Scope for non-technical measures Effect of a 90 €/to CO 2 carbon tax, according to PRIMES calculations With current legislation With maximum technically reductions

17. PM10 vs. PM2.5 How do measures directed at PM10 affect PM2.5?

18. Removal efficiencies of control measures [Efficiency for PM10 / efficiency for PM2.5]

19. Share of PM2.5 in PM10 emissions from different sources

20. Cost-optimized emission reductions to reduce health-relevant PM2.5 concentrations in Europe Based on WHO advice of assuming equal potency of all anthropogenic PM components

21. Cost-optimal emission reductions for meeting the CAFE PM targets

22. Costs for meeting the CAFE PM targets

23. Sectoral emission reductions of PM2.5 for the CAFE Case B policy scenario, beyond CLE, EU-25

24. Sectoral emission reductions of PM2.5 for the CAFE Case “B” policy scenario

25. Conclusions In EU-25, primary PM emissions will decline by approx. 40% between 2000 and 2020 because of CLE (as are NO x and VOC emissions). No significant changes in non-EU countries. In EU-25, equal amount could be reduced in addition with currently available technical measures. Largest potentials for further reductions in domestic sector and for industrial processes. Co-benefits of PM2.5 reduction on PM10 depend on sector and measure chosen (and vice versa). Cost-effective approaches to reduce health-relevant PM concentrations involve other precursor emissions. Majority of costs occur for controlling other pollutants than for PM. In a cost-effective approach, largest reduction of primary PM should come from small sources and from industrial processes.