1. Inventory Planning in Norway UNFCCC Workshop on National Systems Audun Rosland 11 – 12 April 2005

2. 2Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 Institutional arrangement for GHG inventory in Norway  Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) is the designated entity responsible for the inventory and the reporting to UNFCCC  Statistics Norway (SN) is responsible for National Emission Model, and thus most of the emission calculation, documentation and archiving

3. 3Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 Statistics Norway (SN) Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) Reports from large point sources CH4 from landfills Activity data collected by other institutions (e.g. Road traffic, Petroleum Directorate) Statistics collected by SN (e.g. Energy, Industry, Agriculture) UNFCCC Import of HFCs, SF6 and PFCs in products Norwegian Institute on Land Inventory (NIJOS)

4. 4Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 Legal arrangement  So fare the National System and the institutional arrangement have not been formalized by special legal arrangements  SFT’s responsibility has been established through a yearly mandate given by the Ministry of Environment  Formal agreements between SFT and Statistic Norway  Emission data from single plants are reported to SFT (mandatory)  Statistic Norway base their data collection on the Statistic Act  The institutional arrangements will be considered when establishing the National System

5. 5Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 Quality assurance and quality control in Norway  Several QA/QC procedures have been established  Since 1993 methodologies and QA/QC procedures have been developed continuously  Not yet implemented a formal QA/QC plan, but most of the elements are established  The formal QA/QC plan will be fully implemented in 2005

6. 6Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 The existing QA/QC procedure (1):  SFT has the overall responsibility for coordinating the QA/QC procedures  Statistic Norway is responsible for the quality control system with regard to technical activities of the inventory preparation  Tier 1 general QC procedures are performed each year  Source category-specific QC procedures are performed for key sources, for both emission factors, activity data and uncertainty estimates (Tier 2)

7. 7Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 The existing QA/QC procedure (2):  SFT perform a basic QA expert peer review (Tier 1) by person who has not been involved in the calculations and the quality controls  Third party reviews will be establish for the hole or parts of the inventory  Several verification studies have been performed, such as comparison between countries and IPCC default: o1992: Compared Norway’s and Canada’s inventory o1998: Compared country specific and IPCC default method o2000: Compared Canada, NZ, Sweden and Norway

8. 8Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 Prioritization of the improvements  There are always resource constraints  The key sources approach is a key tool for the prioritization  Important to review the methods for all key sources regularly  A tier 2 key source analysis increase the importance on the most uncertain sources  A tier 2 uncertainty analysis increases the knowledge of the different steps in the calculations, but should not necessary be undertaken every year  Important to focus on QA/QC, documentation and archiving procedures

9. 9Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 Important to focus on QA/QC, documentation and archiving procedures Time Improv- ment Emission estimates QA/QC procedures

10. 10Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 Number of pages in Norwegian inventory reports submitted to UNFCCC 1993 - 2004

11. 11Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 In Norway many of the improvements can be linked to events in climate policy development (1):  The introduction of CO 2 tax in the North Sea made it necessary to improve the activity data collection (1994)  Voluntary agreement with the metal industry resulted in a new methodology for PFC for the aluminium (1995)  The LRTAP agreement in 1999 made it necessary to improve the activity data for domestic marine movement and aviation  The method for actual HFC emission were developed when Norway introduced a tax on HFC import (1999 and 2005)

12. 12Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 In Norway many of the improvements can be linked to events in climate policy development (2):  Method for CH 4 from landfills has been updated to meet new regulation for deposal of organic matter (1999 and 2005)  To support the UNFCCC negotiations on HWP Norway developed a estimation methodology for HWP (2001)  Due to the establishment of the national emission trading scheme Norway has developed a regulation for estimating and reporting GHGs on entity level (2002-2004)

13. 13Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 When improving the inventory – important to distinguish between:  Short term technical improvements  Long term improvements where new research is needed (e.g.: N 2 O from agriculture soil) Difficult for single countries to focus on the long term aspects alone – intergovernmental co-operation is needed

14. 14Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 How to improve inventory (1) :  Establish QA/QC procedures and institutional arrangements according to the Guidelines  Secure predictable resources and funds for the development of the inventory  The Norwegian experience: Statistic Norway’s core role is important for the inventory system: oSecure the data input, and hence increases the robustness of the inventory oStatistic institutions can more easily adjust the collection of activity data when needed

15. 15Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 How to improve inventory (2) :  Limit the number of agencies involved in the inventory  Produce preliminary emission figures for preceding year  Establish tiers 2 uncertainty analysis : oNot only as a tool for prioritization and identification of key sources, but oalso a tool to detect the steps in the calculation where improvements are needed  To integrated GHG and LRTAP inventory  Verification studies, e.g. cross-country reviews

16. 16Inventory planning in Norway – Bonn 11 – 12 April 2005 How to respond to ERT comment :  Important to establish a procedure to respond to the comments  Important to start early with the implementation of proposed improvements (before the final report has been published)  Often the comments are focusing on details – but still important respond to increase the confidence in the inventory  Normally ERT’s comments are well known by the Party  But the ERT reports give additional arguments for prioritization when domestic resources are constraint