scenarios for the negotiations on the revision of the gothenburg protocol with contributions from...
Post on 18-Jan-2016
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Scenarios for the Negotiations on theRevision of the Gothenburg Protocol
with contributions from Imrich Bertok, Jens Borken-Kleefeld, Janusz Cofala, Chris Heyes, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Zbigniew Klimont, Peter Rafaj, Wolfgang Schöpp, Fabian Wagner
48th Meeting of the Working Group on Strategies and ReviewGeneva, April 11-14, 2011
Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Contents
• Updates of input data
• Target setting
• Emission control costs
• Emission ceilings and implied reduction measures
• Sensitivity cases
• Conclusions
Important changes since the last analyses
Update of NH3 cost information based on material provided by TFRN:
•No measures for small farms (<15 LSU)
•Lower costs for (i) low protein feed, (ii) exhaust air purification (acid scrubbers) and (iii)
manure spreading (due to work done by contractors and reduced need for mineral
fertilizer).
•But manure storage costs not changed
Compared to Draft version of CIAM 1/2011 (presented at TFIAM 39):
•No further measures for off-road sources up to 2020
•Swiss national activity projection
•PRIMES 2009 for EU countries that have not supplied national projections
Activity projections - sources
The Europe-wide PRIMES 2009 projection is adopted as the central case,
and sensitivity analyses are carried out for the National projection
Europe-wide PRIMES 2009 scenario
National scenario
Energy projections
PRIMES 2009 baseline EU-27, CR, MK, NO BE, BG, CY, EE, FR, DE, HU, MK, LV, LT, LU, MT, PL, RO, SK, SI
National projections CH AT, CR, CZ, DK, FI, GR, IE, IT, NL, NO, PT, ES, SE, CH, UK
IEA WEO 2009 AL, BY, BA, MD, RU, RS, UA AL, BY, BA, MD, RU, RS, UA
Agriculture
CAPRI 2009 EU-27, AL, BA, CR, MK, NO, RS AL, BA, BG, CY, CZ, DK, EE, FR, DE, GR, HU, LV, LT, LU, MK, MT, NO, PL, PT, RS, SL
National projections CH AT, BE, CR, FI, IE, IT, NL, RO, SK, ES, SE, CH, UK
FAO 2003 BY, MD, RU, UA BY, MD, RU, UA
Scope for further environmental improvements
relative to the year 2000
-100%
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
EU-27
Non-EU
EU-27
Non-EU
EU-27
Non-EU
EU-27
Non-EU
EU-27
Non-EU
EU-27
Non-EU
EU-27
Non-EU
PM health O3 health Acid, forestarea
Acid, waterarea
Acid av.exceedance
Eutro, area Eutro av.exceed.
Chan
ge in
impa
ct in
dica
tor c
ompa
red
to 2
000
Baseline change 2000-2020 Scope for further technical measures Residual impacts
Health Acidification Eutrophication
Impact indicators and target setting rules
used for this report
• Health impacts of PM2.5:– Years of life lost (YOLL), with actual population – Europe-wide gap closure between CLE and MTFR
• Eutrophication:– Excess deposition accumulated over all ecosystems in a country– For each country same gap closure % between CLE and MTFR– Area of protected ecosystems calculated ex-post
• Acidification– Excess deposition accumulated over all ecosystems in a country– For each country same gap closure % between CLE and MTFR– Area of protected ecosystems calculated ex-post
• Ozone:– For health effects: SOMO35 – For each country same gap closure % between CLE and MTFR– Vegetation and crop impacts calculated in ex-post analysis
Choosing an ambition level
Costs for improving individual effects
Five sets of targets
derived from sensitivity analyses for modifications of
ambition levels of a single effect
Health-PM Acidification Eutrophication Ozone
HIGH 75% 75% 75% 75% High* 75% 75% 75% 50% Mid 50% 50% 60% 40% Low* 25% 25% 50% 25% LOW 25% 25% 25% 25%
Central case`
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
25% 35% 45% 55% 65% 75%
Co
st
Gap closure for single impact indicators (all other 3 at 75% fix)
Health PM
Acidification
Eutrophication
Ozone
High case
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
25% 35% 45% 55% 65% 75%
Co
st
Gap closure for single impact indicators (all other 3 at 25% fix)
Health PM
Acidification
Eutrophication
Ozone
Low case
Additional air pollution control costs (on top of baseline)
0.00%
0.05%
0.10%
0.15%
0.20%
0.25%
LOW Low* Mid High* HIGH
% o
f GD
P in
202
0
EU-27 Non-EU
0.40.6
1.4
3.1
6.8
0.2 0.3
0.9
2.3
3.8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
LOW Low* Mid High* HIGH
Billi
on €
/yr
EU-27 Non-EU
Billion €/yr % of GDP
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
LOW Low* Mid High* HIGH MTFR
Billi
on E
uro/
yr
Morbidity Mortality Uncertainty range Mortality central estimate
Health benefits (compared to baseline case)
EU-27 only, based on Holland et al., 2011
Morbidity endpoints:Chronic bronchitisRespiratory hospital admissionsCardiac hospital admissionsRestricted activity days (RADs)Work days lostRespiratory medication use (children)Respiratory medication use (adults)LRS (including cough) among childrenLRS in adults with chronic symptoms
Work time gained from better air quality vs.
Work time spent to pay for additional emission controls
EU-27, based on Holland et al., 2010
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Baseline LOW Low* Mid High* HIGH Maximumtechnically
feasiblereductions
Hou
rs p
er w
orke
r per
yea
r
Emission control cases in CIAM 1/2011 report
Working time gained from less absence from work
Working time required to pay for measures
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Baseline LOW Low* Mid High* HIGH Maximumtechnically
feasiblereductions
Hou
rs p
er w
orke
r per
yea
r
Emission control cases in CIAM 1/2011 report
Working time gained from less absence from work
Working time required to pay for measures
Additional measures for SO2 (on top of baseline)
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%EU Non-EU EU Non-EU EU Non-EU
SO2
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other SO2 sources
Agricultural waste burning
Residential and commercial
Industry: Other processes
Industry: Other combustion
Industry: Paper and pulp
Refineries
Coke plants: Combustion
Oil-fired power pPlants
Coal-fired power plants
Low* Mid High*
Additional measures for NOx (on top of baseline)
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%EU Non-EU EU Non-EU EU Non-EU
NO
x re
ducti
ons
rela
tive
to b
asel
ine
Other NOx sources
Industry: Other combustion
Conversion: Combustion
Industry: Cement
Industry: Lime
Industry: Glass
Industry: Agglomeration plants - Sinter
Industrial boilers
Power plants
Low* Mid High*
Additional measures for PM2.5 (on top of baseline)
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%EU Non-EU EU Non-EU EU Non-EU
PM re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other PM sourcesAgricultural waste burningResidential waste burningResidential and commercial: BiomassResidential and commercial: CoalIndustry: Other processesIndustry: AluminumIndustry: Fertilizer productionIndustry: Iron and steelIndustry: CementCoal-fired power plants
Low* Mid High*
Additional measures for NH3 (on top of baseline)
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%EU Non-EU EU Non-EU EU Non-EU
NH
3 re
ducti
ons
rela
tive
to b
asel
ine
Agricultural waste burning
Urea fertilizer
Sheep and goats
Poultry
Pigs
Non-dairy cattle
Dairy cattle
Low* Mid High*
Additional measures for VOC (on top of baseline)
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%EU Non-EU EU Non-EU EU Non-EU
VOC
redu
ction
s rel
ative
to b
asel
ine
Other VOC sources
Agricultural waste burning
Sectors falling under the Solvent Directive
Other industries
Other industries: Solvent use
Industry: Chemicals
Industry: Oil production and distribution
Low* Mid High*
Key measures for the mid case
SO2:
FGD for power plants in non-EU
Low S coal in the domestic sector in new EU Member States
NOx:
SCR for power plants in non-EU
NOx controls in some industrial sectors (e.g., cement) (EU and non-EU)
PM2.5:
Dust control for iron & steel industry in non-EU
Agricultural waste burning (EU and non-EU)
NH3:
Measures for cattle, pig and poultry farms
Substitution of urea fertilizer
Agricultural waste burning (EU and non-EU)
VOC:
Additional measures for sectors falling under the Solvents Directive
Agricultural waste burning (EU and non-EU)
Additional measures for SO2
by country
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
RUSS
BELA
MO
LDSW
ITCR
OA
ALBA
SEM
OM
ACE
UKR
ABO
HEN
ORW
LATV
IREL
LITH
FIN
LPO
RTG
REE
DEN
MES
TORO
MA
POLA
SPAI
HU
NG
SLO
VIT
ALSK
REFR
ANAU
STCZ
REG
ERM
BULG
BELG
NET
HSW
EDU
NKI
LUXE
MAL
TCY
PR
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
SO2
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other SO2 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential and Commercial
Industry: Other Processes
Industry Other Combustion
Industry: Paper and Pulp
Refineries
Conversion Combustion
Oil fired Power Plants
Coal fired Power Plants
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
UKR
ARU
SSBE
LACR
OA
SEM
OM
OLD
BOHE
SWIT
ALBA
MAC
EN
ORW
LITH
POLA
SPAI
BELG
ESTO
LATV
UN
KIH
UN
GIR
ELCZ
REFI
NL
FRAN
SWED
GER
MPO
RTDE
NM
GRE
ERO
MA
NET
HSL
OV
ITAL
SKRE
AUST
BULG
LUXE
MAL
TCY
PR
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
SO2
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other SO2 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential and Commercial
Industry: Other Processes
Industry Other Combustion
Industry: Paper and Pulp
Refineries
Conversion Combustion
Oil fired Power Plants
Coal fired Power Plants
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
UKR
ARU
SSBE
LABO
HECR
OA
ALBA
MO
LDSE
MO
SWIT
MAC
EN
ORW
MAL
TH
UN
GRO
MA
LITH
SKRE
SPAI
POLA
ITAL
PORT
BULG
UN
KIFR
ANIR
ELBE
LGSL
OV
LUXE
LATV
ESTO
CZRE
NET
HG
ERM
DEN
MAU
STFI
NL
GRE
ECY
PRSW
ED
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
SO2
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other SO2 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential and Commercial
Industry: Other Processes
Industry Other Combustion
Industry: Paper and Pulp
Refineries
Conversion Combustion
Oil fired Power Plants
Coal fired Power Plants
Low*
High*
Mid
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
UKR
ARU
SSBE
LACR
OA
SEM
OM
OLD
BOH
ESW
ITAL
BAM
ACE
NO
RW
LITH
POLA
SPAI
BELG
ESTO
LATV
UN
KIH
UN
GIR
ELCZ
REFI
NL
FRAN
SWED
GER
MPO
RTD
ENM
GRE
ERO
MA
NET
HSL
OV
ITAL
SKRE
AUST
BULG
LUXE
MAL
TCY
PR
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
SO2
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other SO2 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential and Commercial
Industry: Other Processes
Industry Other Combustion
Industry: Paper and Pulp
Refineries
Conversion Combustion
Oil fired Power Plants
Coal fired Power Plants
Additional measures for NOx
by country
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
CRO
ABE
LAM
ACE
UKR
AM
OLD
NO
RWSE
MO
RUSS
BOHE
ALBA
SWIT
ESTO
ROM
AIR
ELSK
RELI
THSP
AIG
REE
CYPR
DEN
MLA
TVCZ
RESW
EDH
UN
GFR
ANU
NKI
ITAL
FIN
LSL
OV
BELG
POLA
PORT
MAL
TAU
STBU
LGG
ERM
LUXE
NET
H
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NO
x re
ducti
ons
rela
tive
to b
asel
ine
Other NOx sources
Industry Other Combustion
Conversion Combustion
Industry: Cement
Industry: Lime
Industry: Glass
Industry: Agglomeration plant -sinterIndustrial Boilers
Power Plants
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
BOHE
CRO
ABE
LAU
KRA
MAC
ERU
SSSE
MO
MO
LDAL
BAN
ORW
SWIT
ESTO
ROM
ACY
PRSK
REIR
ELSP
AIG
REE
UN
KIPO
LAH
UN
GLI
THIT
ALCZ
REFR
ANDE
NM
PORT
LATV
BULG
SWED
BELG
GER
MSL
OV
AUST
FIN
LM
ALT
NET
HLU
XE
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NO
X re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other NOx sources
Industry Other Combustion
Conversion Combustion
Industry: Cement
Industry: Lime
Industry: Glass
Industry: Agglomeration plant -sinterIndustrial Boilers
Power Plants
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
BOHE
CRO
AU
KRA
SEM
ORU
SSBE
LAM
ACE
NO
RWM
OLD
ALBA
SWIT
ESTO
SKRE
ROM
ACY
PRIR
ELPO
RTU
NKI
BULG
HU
NG
SPAI
CZRE
FRAN
GRE
EPO
LAIT
ALDE
NM
LITH
BELG
SWED
GER
MLA
TVFI
NL
SLO
VAU
STM
ALT
NET
HLU
XE
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NO
X re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other NOx sources
Industry Other Combustion
Conversion Combustion
Industry: Cement
Industry: Lime
Industry: Glass
Industry: Agglomeration plant -sinterIndustrial Boilers
Power Plants
Low*
High*
Mid
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
BOH
ECR
OA
BELA
UKR
AM
ACE
RUSS
SEM
OM
OLD
ALBA
NO
RWSW
IT
ESTO
ROM
ACY
PRSK
REIR
ELSP
AIG
REE
UN
KIPO
LAH
UN
GLI
THIT
ALCZ
REFR
AND
ENM
PORT
LATV
BULG
SWED
BELG
GER
MSL
OV
AUST
FIN
LM
ALT
NET
HLU
XE
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NO
X re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other NOx sources
Industry Other Combustion
Conversion Combustion
Industry: Cement
Industry: Lime
Industry: Glass
Industry: Agglomeration plant -sinterIndustrial Boilers
Power Plants
Additional measures for PM2.5
by country
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
MO
LDBE
LARU
SSCR
OA
SEM
OSW
ITAL
BAU
KRA
MAC
EBO
HEN
ORW
LITH
ROM
AG
REE
PORT
ESTO
SPAI
HU
NG
SKRE
BULG
SLO
VLA
TVPO
LAIT
ALCZ
REFR
ANBE
LGAU
STG
ERM
UN
KIN
ETH
FIN
LDE
NM
CYPR
IREL
LUXE
MAL
TSW
ED
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
PM re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other PM sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential waste burning
Residential and Commercial:BiomassResidential and Commercial: Coal
Industry: Other Processes
Industry: Aluminum
Industry: Fertilizer Production
Industry: Iron and Steel
Industry: Cement
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
UKR
ARU
SSM
OLD
BELA
CRO
AM
ACE
SEM
OAL
BASW
ITBO
HEN
ORW
PORT
ROM
ALI
THBU
LGG
REE
ESTO
SKRE
HU
NG
SPAI
SLO
VLA
TVFR
ANIT
ALPO
LABE
LGCZ
REAU
STDE
NM
GER
MU
NKI
NET
HFI
NL
LUXE
SWED
CYPR
IREL
MAL
T
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
PM re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other PM sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential waste burning
Residential and Commercial:BiomassResidential and Commercial: Coal
Industry: Other Processes
Industry: Aluminum
Industry: Fertilizer Production
Industry: Iron and Steel
Industry: Cement
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
UKR
ARU
SSM
OLD
CRO
ABE
LAM
ACE
SEM
OBO
HEAL
BASW
ITN
ORW
PORT
ROM
ABU
LGSL
OV
LITH
GRE
EES
TOH
UN
GSP
AIBE
LGSK
REFR
ANIT
ALU
NKI
LATV
CZRE
POLA
FIN
LDE
NM
AUST
GER
MN
ETH
SWED
IREL
LUXE
MAL
TCY
PR
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
PM re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other PM sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential waste burning
Residential and Commercial:BiomassResidential and Commercial: Coal
Industry: Other Processes
Industry: Aluminum
Industry: Fertilizer Production
Industry: Iron and Steel
Industry: Cement
Low*
High*
Mid
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
UKR
ARU
SSM
OLD
BELA
CRO
AM
ACE
SEM
OAL
BASW
ITBO
HE
NO
RW
PORT
ROM
ALI
THBU
LGG
REE
ESTO
SKRE
HU
NG
SPAI
SLO
VLA
TVFR
ANIT
ALPO
LABE
LGCZ
REAU
STD
ENM
GER
MU
NKI
NET
HFI
NL
LUXE
SWED
CYPR
IREL
MAL
T
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
PM re
ducti
ons r
elati
ve to
bas
elin
e
Other PM sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Residential waste burning
Residential and Commercial:BiomassResidential and Commercial: Coal
Industry: Other Processes
Industry: Aluminum
Industry: Fertilizer Production
Industry: Iron and Steel
Industry: Cement
Coal fired Power Plants
Additional measures for NH3
by country
-50%
-45%
-40%
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
CRO
AN
ORW
SEM
OBO
HEBE
LAU
KRA
MO
LDRU
SSAL
BAM
ACE
SWIT
ESTO
SKRE
HU
NG
GER
MCY
PRRO
MA
SPAI
FRAN
ITAL
LATV
LITH
POLA
GRE
EPO
RTSW
EDFI
NL
LUXE
UN
KIIR
ELAU
STCZ
RESL
OV
BELG
DEN
MBU
LGN
ETH
MAL
T
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NH
3 re
ducti
ons
rela
tive
to b
asel
ine
Other NH3 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Urea Fertilizer
Sheep and Goats
Poultry
Pigs
Non-Dairy Cattle
Dairy Cattle
-50%
-45%
-40%
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
CRO
ASE
MO
NO
RWU
KRA
MO
LDBE
LABO
HEAL
BAM
ACE
RUSS
SWIT
ESTO
SKRE
HU
NG
GER
MRO
MA
LITH
CYPR
SPAI
FRAN
ITAL
LATV
POLA
GRE
ESL
OV
PORT
FIN
LSW
EDAU
STLU
XEU
NKI
IREL
CZRE
BULG
BELG
DEN
MN
ETH
MAL
T
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NH
3 re
ducti
ons
rela
tive
to b
asel
ine
Other NH3 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Urea Fertilizer
Sheep and Goats
Poultry
Pigs
Non-Dairy Cattle
Dairy Cattle
-50%
-45%
-40%
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
CRO
ASE
MO
NO
RWM
OLD
UKR
ARU
SSBO
HEBE
LAAL
BAM
ACE
SWIT
ESTO
HU
NG
SKRE
FRAN
LITH
ITAL
CYPR
SPAI
GER
MRO
MA
PORT
LATV
GRE
ECZ
REPO
LASL
OV
AUST
SWED
FIN
LLU
XEIR
ELU
NKI
MAL
TBU
LGBE
LGDE
NM
NET
H
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NH
3 re
ducti
ons
rela
tive
to b
asel
ine
Other NH3 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Urea Fertilizer
Sheep and Goats
Poultry
Pigs
Non-Dairy Cattle
Dairy Cattle
Low*
High*
Mid
-50%
-45%
-40%
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
CRO
ASE
MO
NO
RWU
KRA
MO
LDBE
LABO
HE
ALBA
MAC
ERU
SSSW
IT
ESTO
SKRE
HU
NG
GER
MRO
MA
LITH
CYPR
SPAI
FRAN
ITAL
LATV
POLA
GRE
ESL
OV
PORT
FIN
LSW
EDAU
STLU
XEU
NKI
IREL
CZRE
BULG
BELG
DEN
MN
ETH
MAL
T
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
NH
3 re
ducti
ons
rela
tive
to b
asel
ine
Other NH3 sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Urea Fertilizer
Sheep and Goats
Poultry
Pigs
Non-Dairy Cattle
Dairy Cattle
Additional measures for VOC
by country
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
MO
LDCR
OA
SWIT
UKR
ARU
SSSE
MO
MAC
EBE
LABO
HEAL
BAN
ORW
GER
MRO
MA
BULG
IREL
HU
NG
UN
KIPO
RTG
REE
LATV
LITH
CZRE
POLA
LUXE
ESTO
BELG
SPAI
SWED
MAL
TAU
STSL
OV
DEN
MSK
REN
ETH
ITAL
FIN
LFR
ANCY
PR
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
VOC
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other VOC sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Sectors falling under the SolventDirective
Other Industries
Other Industries: Solvent Use
Industry: Chemicals
Industry: Oil Production andDistribution
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
MO
LDCR
OA
RUSS
UKR
ASW
ITN
ORW
BELA
SEM
OM
ACE
BOHE
ALBA
MAL
TG
ERM
ROM
AU
NKI
BULG
IREL
PORT
LATV
HU
NG
NET
HAU
STLI
THBE
LGLU
XECZ
REG
REE
SPAI
POLA
ESTO
SWED
DEN
MFR
ANSK
REIT
ALSL
OV
FIN
LCY
PR
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
VOC
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other VOC sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Sectors falling under the SolventDirectiveOther Industries
Other Industries: Solvent Use
Industry: Chemicals
Industry: Oil Production andDistribution
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
MO
LDCR
OA
RUSS
UKR
ASW
ITBE
LAN
ORW
SEM
OM
ACE
BOHE
ALBA
SLO
VM
ALT
IREL
GER
MU
NKI
ROM
AN
ETH
PORT
HU
NG
BULG
LATV
AUST
CZRE
BELG
GRE
ELI
THLU
XEES
TOSP
AIPO
LAFR
ANDE
NM
ITAL
SWED
SKRE
FIN
LCY
PR
UN
ECE
EU27
nonE
U
VOC
redu
ction
s re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e
Other VOC sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Sectors falling under the SolventDirective
Other Industries
Other Industries: Solvent Use
Industry: Chemicals
Industry: Oil Production andDistribution
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
MO
LDC
RO
AR
US
SU
KR
AS
WIT
NO
RW
BE
LAS
EM
OM
AC
EB
OH
EA
LBA
MA
LTG
ER
MR
OM
AU
NK
IB
ULG
IREL
POR
TLA
TV
HU
NG
NE
THA
US
TLI
TH
BE
LGLU
XE
CZ
RE
GR
EE
SPA
IPO
LAE
STO
SW
ED
DE
NM
FRA
NS
KR
EIT
AL
SLO
VFI
NL
CYP
R
UN
EC
EE
U2
7n
onE
U
VO
C r
ed
uct
ion
s re
lati
ve t
o b
ase
lin
e
Other VOC sources
Agricultural Waste burning
Sectors falling under theSolvent DirectiveOther Industries
Other Industries: SolventUseIndustry: Chemicals
Industry: Oil Productionand Distribution
Low*
High*
Mid
Three sensitivity analyses
1. For national activity projections:
– Emission ceilings could become unachievable for fundamentally different assumptions on energy and agricultural policies (compared to PRIMES/CAPRI)
2. Additional targets on radiative forcing:
– The scenarios reduce the negative forcing (and thus increase radiative forcing) in the EMEP domain by up to 0.1 W/m2 (compared to a current total forcing from long-lived greenhouse gases of about 2.7 W/m2).
– Low cost measures are available to limit increase in radiative forcing from stricter SO2 controls (particle filters, agricultural waste burning,
etc.)
3. Excluding the urban increment (‘city-delta’) for PM:
– Urban increments do not have large influence on national emission ceilings for optimized scenarios based on a gap closure approach
– However, urban increments affect absolute estimates of health effects
Conclusions
• The report presents five scenarios aiming at 25% to 75% of the feasible improvements for each air quality effect, with additional emission control costs ranging from 0.6 to 10.6 billion €/yr. Modified targets for ozone would have largest impact on control costs.
• Up to the High* case, costs are already compensated by gains in work time
• Key measures:
– All countries:
• Agricultural waste burning
• NH3 from livestock farming, substitution of urea fertilizer
• SO2 and PM controls for domestic stoves
• VOC from sectors falling under the Solvents Directive
– Non-EU:
• SO2 and NOx controls for power plants
• NOx controls for some industrial boilers
• PM controls for industrial processes
Access to all data via GAINS-Online
URL: http://gains.iiasa.ac.at
Version: GAINS-Europe
Scenario group: CIAM 1/2011-March
Scenarios:
Data for the year 2000: GOTH_2000
Optimized scenarios:•PRIMES baseline: GOTH_PRIMESBL2009_baseline_rev1•LOW case: GOTH_PRIMESBL2009_LOW_rev1•Low* case: GOTH_PRIMESBL2009_Low-star_rev1•Mid case: GOTH_PRIMESBL2009_MID_rev1•High* case: GOTH_PRIMESBL2009_High-star_rev1•High case: GOTH_PRIMESBL2009_HIGH_rev1•Maximum feasible reductions: GOTH_PRIMESBL2009_MFR_rev1
Additional slides
Sensitivity analysis 1 – National activity projections:
Distance between optimized cases and MTFR of national scenario
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Aus
tria
Bel
gium
Bul
gari
a
Cypr
us
Czec
h_R
epub
lic
Den
mar
k
Esto
nia
Finl
and
Fran
ce
Ger
man
y
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Irel
and
Ital
y
Latv
ia
Lith
uani
a
Luxe
mbo
urg
Mal
ta
Net
herl
ands
Pola
nd
Port
ugal
Rom
ania
Slov
akia
Slov
enia
Spai
n
Swed
en
Uni
ted_
King
dom
Alb
ania
Bel
arus
Bos
nia_
Her
zego
win
a
Croa
tia
Mac
edon
ia
Mol
dova
Nor
way
Rus
sian
_Fed
erati
on_E
Serb
ia_M
onte
negr
o
Swit
zerl
and
Ukr
aine
Diff
eren
ce b
etw
een
th
e M
TFR
em
issi
on
s o
f th
e N
atio
nal
sce
nar
io a
nd
th
e em
issi
on
cei
lings
o
pti
miz
ed fo
r th
e PR
IMES
pro
jecti
on
s
Low* case Mid case High* caseSO2
• Emission ceilings could become unachievable for fundamentally different assumptions on energy and agricultural policies (compared to PRIMES/CAPRI)
Sensitivity analysis 2 – Radiative forcing:
Instantaneous radiative forcing over the EMEP region
for cost-effective air pollution scenarios (from aerosol emissions)
-680
-660
-640
-620
-600
-580
-560
-540
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Radi
ative
For
cing
ove
r the
EM
EP re
gion
[mW
/m2]
Gap closure
Health-PM Acidification
Eutrophication All four effects
BaselineMTFR
*)
Fo
r co
mp
aris
on
: to
tal f
orc
ing
fro
m lo
ng
-live
d G
HG
s: ~
2.7
W/m
2
Sensitivity analysis 2 – Radiative forcing:
Costs for reducing radiative forcing
in addition to the air quality targets
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
-700 -680 -660 -640 -620 -600 -580 -560
Cost
s ab
ove
base
line
(MEu
ro/y
r)
Radiative Forcing above EMEP region (mW/m2)
LOW
Low*
MID
High*
HIGH
Cost-effective air pollution scenarios for the four effects
Sensitivity analysis 2 – Radiative forcing:
Cost-effective changes in emissions for reducing radiative
forcing, in addition to the targets for air quality impacts
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
-700 -680 -660 -640 -620 -600 -580 -560
SO2
Emis
sion
s (k
ton)
Radiative Forcing above EMEP region (mW/m2)
LOW
Low*
MID
High*
HIGH
SO20
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
-700 -680 -660 -640 -620 -600 -580 -560
NO
x Em
issi
ons
(kto
n)
Radiative Forcing above EMEP region (mW/m2)
LOW
Low*
MID
High*
HIGH
NOx
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
-700 -680 -660 -640 -620 -600 -580 -560
PM2.
5 Em
issi
ons
(kto
ns/y
r)
Radiative Forcing above EMEP region (mW/m2)
LOW
Low*
MID
High*
HIGH
PM2.5
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
-700 -680 -660 -640 -620 -600 -580 -560
NH
3 Em
issi
ons
(kto
n)
Radiative Forcing above EMEP region (mW/m2)
LOW
Low*
MID
High*
HIGH
NH3
• To reduce radiative forcing at low costs:
– SO2 emissions are cut to a lesser extent (mainly in non-EU countries).
– The resulting increase in PM2.5 levels is compensated by additional cuts in NH3 emissions.
Sensitivity analysis 3:
No urban increment for EU (and non-EU) countries
• Urban increments do not have large influence on national emission ceilings for optimized scenarios based on a gap closure approach
• However, urban increments affect absolute estimates of health effects
Emissions in the EU-27 for the mid case and the variant without urban increment (kilotons)
SO2 NOX PM2.5 NH3 VOC
Mid case (original) 2508 5046 907 2819 5437
Sensitivity case without urban increment
2513 5046 910 2820 5436
Difference (absolute) -5 0 -3 -2 0
Difference (%) -0.18% 0.00% -0.33% -0.06% 0.00%
top related