1. 1 NO 2 exceedances, projections, measures – conclusions from „time extension“

2. Conclusions from the notifications for „time extension“ (AQD Art. 22) for NO 2 The notifications represent a sub-set of NO 2 exceedances in Europe. Advantage: The notifications provide combined information about NO 2 levels in 2010 Exceedance areas Projections for 2015 Reasons for non-compliance in 2010 Measures to achieve compliance by 2015 2

3. Data used for this overview Information provided by the notification is quite heterogeneous.  Some MSs (DE, IT, UK) submitted notifications for all exceedances (even if non-compliance is projected for 2015)  Quantitative information for 2015 not available for all MSs (e.g. FR, NL)  Details on measures and AQ Plans differ largely This overview uses information from AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, FI, IT, and UK. 3

4. Example: Italy Notifications submitted for all 44 exceedance situations. A: Time Extension accepted 2015 B: Time Extension accepted 2013 C: Time Extension rejected. NO2 level in 2015 projected above 40µg/m³ D: Time extension rejected, compliance achieved in 2010 E: Time Extension rejected. Notification states compliance by 2015, but insufficient documentation of measures 4

5. Source apportionment The predominant source sector for all notified exceedances is (local) road traffic. Industry and domestic heating in some cases contribute up to 20%. Regional background contributes up to 25% (absolute levels 10 – 15 µg/m³). 5

6. Exceedance areas (NO 2 annual mean values >40µg/m³) - Methods Exceedance areas are given in most cases as length of road in kilometres. Exceedance areas are identified by  Modelling (most reliable method)  Assessment of emissions  Street sections for with monitoring sites are considered representative 6

7. Exceedance areas 7 TownLength Paris2120 km Strasbourg255 km Lille0.96 km Berlin59.7 km Stuttgart5 km Hamburg243 km München1.54 km Köln5 km Helsinki8 km London1283.4 km Greater Manchester260.5 km

8. Exceedance areas - Conclusions The geographic distribution of NO 2 exceedances and the different extent of exceedance areas reveal some weaknesses in NO 2 assessment:  The monitoring networks strongly focus on large towns and therefore NO 2 LV exceedances are reported mainly in large towns.  Small towns and the neighbourhood of rural motorways are insufficiently covered by NO 2 monitoring networks.  Measurements started in recent years in Germany, especially in the Federal States Baden-Württemberg, Nordrhein-Westfalen und Thüringen observe numerous exceedances in small and medium towns (>6000 inh.).  NO 2 LV exceedances are likely much more widespread than most monitoring networks suggest.  Modelling (in combination with measurement) is essential to identify the extent of exceedance areas. 8

9. Reasons for non-compliance in 2010 A broad majority of notifications states as reasons for non- compliance in 2010: Vehicle emission factors did not decrease as expected (the Commission was broadly blamed for the “failure” of the EURO 4/IV real-world emissions) Increase in Diesel passenger cars caused increase of primary NO 2 emissions Increase in traffic volume Delay in the implementation of measures (mainly construction of bypass roads and public transport facilities) 9

10. Compliance gaps 2010 – 2015 (annual mean) 10 MSMax. NO 2 (2010) for which compliance is reasonable in 2015 Min. NO 2 (2010) for which compliance is not projected in 2015 AT48 µg/m³51 µg/m³ BE44 µg/m³54 µg/m³ BG54 µg/m³ CZ52 µg/m³48 µg/m³ FI53 µg/m³ DE52 µg/m³45 µg/m³ IT49 µg/m³47 µg/m³ UK66 µg/m³ (82 µg/m³ „with additional measures“) 55 µg/m³

11. Change in NO 2 levels 2005 – 2010 – 2015 11 MSCompliance projected in 2015 Non-compliance projected in 2015 2005-20102010-20152005-20102010-2015 AT-0.6-1.3-0.1-1.8 BE-0.5-1.2-0.8-1.3 DE-1.8-0.6-2.1 Annual change in µg/m³ 2005 – 2010 observed 2010 – 2015 projected

12. Measures to achieve compliance by 2015 In most exceedance situations, a combination of different measures is applied to reduce NO x emissions from road traffic: Low emission zone Improvement of public transport Relocation of road traffic to new road tunnels, new motorway junctions or bypass roads Promotion of cycling Management of traffic flow and parking facilities in city centres Low emission vehicles for public transport Speed limit Less congestion and stop&go 12

13. Most effective measures The most effective measures – which reduce NO 2 levels by more than 10% each - are Low emission zones (LEZ), which ban old vehicles with high emission factors from city centres – to be later extended to “newer” vehicles (frequently implemented in DE, less strict in IT, quite rare in other MSs) Relocation of traffic to new roads – it should be kept in mind that this kind of measure likely increases the total traffic volume and the total urban NO x emissions) EURO vehicle emission standards are considered a key element to achieve compliance by 2015 The re-location of a monitoring site can be a very effective “measure”, but is not accepted by the Commission in the TX 13

14. Delay of implementation of measures Delay of implementation frequently affects infrastructure measures – new underground or railway tracks, new roads, tunnels, or motorway junctions – due to Planning difficulties Budgetary difficulties Objections by environmental initiatives against new roads in their neighbourhood 14

15. Possible measures which are not considered Measures suitable to reduce traffic volume (and NOx emissions) which are almost not considered are: Road charge (inner-city charge, congestion charge) – despite some quite “successful” implementations (Stockholm, Oslo, London) Spatial planning targeted at compact settlement structures, avoiding long distances to shopping centres and work places. A decrease of the total road traffic volume is not considered at all. 15

16. Contact & Information Wolfgang Spangl Tel. Nr.: +43 (0)1-31304/5861 E-Mail: wolfgang.spangl@umweltbundesamt.at 16 Umweltbundesamt www.umweltbundesamt.at EEA EIONET Workshop Madrid ■ 26.10.2012