1. Modelling perspective: Key limitations of current country projection data in transboundary modelling activities. What improvements are needed? Jan Eiof Jonson and Leonor Tarrason

2. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Why do you need EMEP model results on projections? Input to national implementation plans and procedures. Information on the chemical “weather regime” in 2020.

3. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Meteorologisk Institutt met.no Projections presently used in the EMEP model 1 value per country per sector Ancillary data used per sector Sector aggregation Gridded according to following ancillary data (2004 methodology) Notes SNAP 1: Energy Combustion LPS information for NOx, SOx (IER) LPS from countries, when available Both spatial positions and intensities are presently used SNAP 2: Residential CombustionPopulation (IIASA) SNAP 3: Industrial Combustion 50% Population (IIASA) 50% LPS NOx, SOx (IER, countries) Only few countries have reported LPS data SNAP 4: Production ProcessesLPS NOx, SOx (IER, countries) Both spatial positions and intensities are presently used SNAP 5: Extraction Fossil FuelsGS data for S5 for PM (TNO, CEPMEIP) SNAP 6: Solvent and Product UsePopulation ( IIASA) SNAP 7: Road Transport GS data for S7 for NOx, if available: or GS data for S7 for PM (TNO, CEPMEIP) Only 11 countries have reported gridded sector data for NOx SNAP 8: Other Mobile Sources GS data for S8 for NOx, if available; or GS data for S8 for PM (TNO, CEPMEIP) Only 11 countries have reported gridded sector data for NOx SNAP 9: Waste XX% Population (IIASA) XX% LPS (IER, countries) XX% Agriculture (S10,TNO, CEPMEIP) Fractions per country based in CEPMEIP information SNAP 10: Agriculture & Forestry GS data for s10 for NH3, if available GS data in S10 for PM (TNO, CEPMEIP)

4. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no What data are now missing? Information on relevant NFR sectors Spatial distribution information (gridding) Expected seasonal variations

5. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no My interpretation: Are there inconsistencies and/or effects that you should be aware of? I will not talk about uncertainties in emission estimates Seasonal cycles in emissions (sector) NO/NO2 ratios Changes in emissions from ships (and aviation) Underlying trends (Ozone) (Changes in) landuse, natural PM, biomass burning Meteorological variability (and trends?)

6. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Different sectors – different seasonal cycles: Changes between sectors. Does it matter when you emit???

7. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Calculated difference in NO 2 in µg m -3, 1990 - 2002 Summer (June, July, August) Winter (January, February)

8. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Em1990 scenario: Decrease in summer ozone. Increase north of the Alps in winter.

9. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Does the NO/NO2 ratio matter in the emissions?

10. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Effect of particle trap on NO2 concentrations 2020 emissions

11. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Difference in PM2.5 and somo35 caused by changes in NO/NO2 ratio 2020 emissions

12. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no 2020 Emissions in sea areas (% inside 12 mile zone in red) 16.817.1305.5118.5137.456.9Belgium 51.7575.43650.6690.7534.4134.9Italy 0.5 11.0 5.1 3.7 1.6 PMco Gg PMco 9.113.64.63112.185.6/25 B. Sea 197.88267.689.11544.51731.5/16 Med. 91.7115.539.71024.1770.1/14 Atl. 66.3109.737.5925.1406.2/38 N. Sea 29.551.117.2428.5187.2/54 Baltic PM2.5 Gg PM2.5 CO Gg CO VOC Gg NMVOC NOx Gg NO2 SOx Gg SO2

13. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no SOx emissions from ships in Mg

14. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Effects on Belgium (perturbations scaled to 100%) 7.421.030.590.462.1PM2.5 ng m-3 13215.210.98.334.6Ox N Dep. Mg (N) 15017.36.95.629.6Ox S Dep. Mg (S) Total burden 12 MZROWEUAll

15. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Effects on Italy Perturbations scaled to 100% 3.67/1.57 0.330.51 0.19 PM2.5 ng m-3 1015/448 8015215461.8 Ox N Dep. Mg (N) 1550/347 8015215462 Ox S Dep. Mg (s) Total burden 12 MZROWEUFE

16. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Ozone trends at Mace Head From Simmonds et al. (2004)

17. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no SummerWinter AvgBC scenario: Effect of Mace Head correction Mace Head (IE31)Waldhof (DE02 Obs. ModelNo MH

18. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Conclusions Effects to be aware of: Sector emissions: seasonal cycles Underlying trends: Background ozone, biomass burning, global change Meteorological variability What is missing? Need projections by sector (reported in NFR) Gridded projections (by sector) Emissions from ships (routing)

19. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no MEAN SURFACE OZONE ENHANCEMENTS FROM ANTHROPOGENIC NO x AND NMVOC EMISSIONS BY DIFFERENT CONTINENTS GEOS-CHEM model, July 1997 North America Europe Asia Li et al. [2002]

20. Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no Main features of the EMEP model 3D Eulerian model Polar stereographic projection 132x111 grid. 50kmx50km resolution 20 vertical layers HIRLAM50 meteorology Bott’s advection scheme 20 minutes master timestep, 12 substeps for chemistry Dry and wet deposition 71 chemical compounds, whereof 15 short- lived