1. FRENCH PM WORK IN PROGRESS With the contribution of: Sonia Babu, Jean-Pierre Chang, Carole Levy, Bénédicte Oudart, Emanuel Rivière Jean-Pierre Fontelle

2. PM INVENTORY Previous inventory : (before mid 90s)  TSP only New inventory : (supported by the French Ministry of Environment )  Geographical area : France  Limited number of sources  TSP, PM10, PM2.5, PM1.0 (primary sources)  Annual time series from 1990 to 1998  200 types of sources : all defined in SNAP 97+ additional sources

3. SECTORS CONSIDERED  road transport : exhaust, brake, tyre and clutch wear.  other mobile sources : air traffic, railways, inland waterways, sea transport, machinery, household and gardening. Stationary sources :  Agriculture  Nature  Waste incineration Mobile sources :  Combustion – industrial and non industrial

4. COMPARISON WITH OTHER COUNTRIES Goal : to complete and to validate the French PM inventory  total emissions Observations : high discrepancies in  emissions by sectors  emission factors  source coverage  methodologies

5.  Industrial processes : SECTORS CONSIDERED iron and steel industries, cement, lime, plaster, glass production, road paving, bricks and tiles, fine ceramic materials, non-ferrous metal industries, aluminium, lead and zinc, adipic acid, chipboard, sugar and flour production, storage and transport of cereals, etc...

6. RESULTS IN BRIEF

7. TEACHINGS  Problem in defining the inventory fields (eg : resuspension ?)  Not complete (missing sources)  Lack of knowledge (missing and obsolete data)  Data from foreign studies possibly misused  Large discrepancies between various sources of information  Extremely high uncertainty

8. COMPARISON OF INVENTORIES Comparison between TNO (edit.1997), IIASA (edit.2000) results and other national inventories * related to a limited number of sources (35% of sources considered for TSP)

9. SOME EXAMPLES  Combust. in manufac. industry : combustion plants > 50MW  Combustion in households : EF TSP (g/GJ) Heavy fuel oil Wood CITEPA 35 15 OFEFP/ BUWAL 23 80 EF wood (g/GJ) TSP PM10 CITEPA 500 175 OFEFP / BUWAL 150 ITALY 1560 IIASA 150 EPA 870

10. SOME EXAMPLES  District heating plants : combustion plants < 50MW  Aluminium production (electrolysis) : EF TSP (g/GJ) Coal CITEPA 100 OFEFP / BUWAL 50 EF (kg/t) TSP PM10 CITEPA 9 5 OFEFP / BUWAL 2 ITALY 1 IIASA(uncontrolled)25 TNO (Eastern Europe) 7 TNO (Western Europe) 3

11. SOME EXAMPLES  Road transport : gasoline diesel oil EF mg/km PC LD Moto. HD CITEPA highway 11 13 7 525 TSP rural 12 146 634 urban 21 207 1141 Total6 650 IIASA 4-stroke55 970 PM10 2-stroke 610

12. EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENCES IN SOURCE COVERAGE NB : 1990 TSP mass emissions are indicated in ( ) % refer to TSP

13. NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SOURCES  Sugar production  Charcoal manufacture Conclusion : SNAP and other nomenclatures to be revised ?  Flour production  Fireworks  Explosives production  Wood work  Cereals handling  Smoking meat  Shoe’s sole wear  Smoking  Tilling of arable land crops  Construction  Road abrasion  Quarrying  Harvesting  Use of BBQ

14. OBSERVATIONS From discussion between experts :  limited knowledge in most countries  very limited number of available inventories  need for more monitoring campaigns  fugitive emissions much more complex to estimate and probably represent a significant amount of total emissions  stress politicians on the high level of uncertainties and risk to use irrelevant information when elaborating regulation involving high economic impact

15. CONCLUSION  French inventory to complete and to improve Further French work :  Need for exchange of knowledge between experts, initiatives for cooperation is welcome, especially regarding transparency of data  As primary sources represent a minor part of total PM, would it not more efficient to focus essentially on secondary sources ?  Need to consolidate PM inventories before use by policy makers  Revision of the French Inventory in 2001 by CITEPA  Comparison study on methodology used by different countries to carry out PM inventories (final report expected for September 2001) by CITEPA  Projection study, 2015-2020 (expected for October 2001) by CITEPA and INERIS

16. CITEPA’s web site www.citepa.org