Http://gains.iiasa.ac.at Progress in the development of national baseline scenarios M. Amann, J....

http://gains.iiasa.ac.at

Progress in the development of national baseline scenarios

M. Amann, J. Borken, J. Cofala, Z. KlimontInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

Working Group on Strategies, Geneva, April 12-15, 2010


Contents

• Available scenarios

• Comparison of base year emission inventories

• Key assumptions in national projections

• Environmental impacts

• Conclusions


Data sources of draft national projections for Gothenburg Protocol revision: energy

National scenarios IEA WEO 2009 PRIMES 2008 C&E (NEC report #6)

Austria (transport only) Albania Belgium Latvia

Croatia Belarus Bulgaria Lithuania

Czech Republic Bosnia-H. Cyprus Luxembourg

Denmark Moldova Estonia Malta

Finland Russia France Poland

Greece Serbia Germany Romania

Ireland Ukraine Hungary Slovakia

Italy Turkey Slovenia

Netherlands TFYROM (PRIMES2009)

Norway

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

UK


Data sources of draft national projections for Gothenburg Protocol revision:Agricultural projections

National scenarios FAO outlook 2003 CAPRI 2009 projections

Austria Belarus Belgium Latvia

Croatia Moldova Bulgaria Lithuania

Finland Russia Cyprus Luxembourg

Ireland Turkey Czech Republic Malta

Italy Ukraine Denmark Norway

Netherlands Estonia Poland

Romania France Slovenia

Slovakia Germany Portugal

Spain Hungary

Sweden Greece

Switzerland

UK


Review process

• Activity data, emission factors and resulting emissions were prepared for review:

http://gains.iiasa.ac.at/index.php/policyapplications/gothenburg-protocol-revision

• Additional comments and material sent by 18 countries have been implemented by February 2010.

• Most countries that have sent national scenarios provided also info on control strategies (e.g., national interpretation of flexibilities in the Commission's proposal for IED).

• Transport emission factors and assumptions about turnover for all EU and EFTA countries based on COPERT IV model.

• Further feedbacks invited for March 15, but many countries commented after this date. Not all of these comments are already implemented.


State of play on country comments

No. Country Last comments Status

1 Austria 24.03. Not implemented (sent data on activities and em. factors but not in GAINS format)

2 Belgium 17.03 Implemented

3 Croatia 19.03. Not implemented (suggested further corrections to control strategies)

4 Czech Rep. 23.03. Not implemented (suggested corrections to PM emission factors)

5 Finland 03.03. Implemented

6 France 24.03. Implemented (IIASA responded, no concrete suggestions for changes)

7 Greece 26.03. Not implemented (suggested further corrections to em. factors and control strategies)

8 Hungary 24.03. Not implemented (sent data on activities and em. factors but not in GAINS format)

9 Ireland 16.03. Implemented

10 Malta 23.03. Implemented (IIASA responded, no concrete suggestions for changes)

11 Norway 17.03. Implemented

12 Portugal 02.02. Implemented

13 Romania 01.04. Not implemented (sent projection of coal use in the power sector)

14 Slovakia 23.03. Not implemented (sent inconsistent national energy scenario - large discrepancies with statistics)

15 Spain 23.03. Not implemented (not analyzed: newest em. inventory and comparison with national projection)

16 Sweden 22.03. Implemented

17 Switzerland 17.03 Implemented

18 UK 31.03. Implemented


Base year inventory for 2005

For many countries there are disagreements between national and IEA energy statistics

• Two versions in GAINS:– National scenario: use of national statistics– PRIMES scenario: use of IEA/PRIMES statistics

There are differences between national inventories reported to CEIP and GAINS estimates– National inventories are moving targets

as national inventories for 2000 and 2005 keep changing– Main reasons for disagreement:

• Different energy/activity statistics• Missing sources in national inventories• GAINS uses COPERT emission factors• Insufficient communication with national experts


Emission estimates for 2000 and 2005GAINS estimates (draft) vs. CEIP Aug2009 inventoryPROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

AT

BE

BU

CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR

HU IE IT LT LU LV MT

NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

CH IS NO AL

BH BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o C

EIP

in

ven

tory

2000 PRIMES2009 2005 PRIMES2009 2000 National 2005 National

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

AT

BE

BU

CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

CH IS NO AL

BH BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o C

EIP

in

ven

tory


SO2 NOx

NH3 VOC0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

AT

BE

BU

CY

CZ

DK EE FI FR DE

GR

HU IE IT LV LT LU MT

NL

PL

PT

RO SK SL

ES

SE

UK

CH

NO AL

BY

BH

CR

MK M

RU

RS

TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o C

EIP

in

ven

tory


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

CH N AL

BH BY

CR M

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o C

EIP

in

ven

tory



PM2.5 emission estimates for 2000 and 2005GAINS estimates (draft) vs. CEIP Aug2009 inventoryPROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

AT

BE

BU

CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

CH IS NO AL

BH BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o C

EIP

in

ven

tory


PM2.5


Comparison of assumed GDP growthbetween 2005 and 2020

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

CZ

RE

DEN

M

ES

TO

GR

EE

IRE

L

ITA

L

NETH

NO

RW

SPA

I

SW

ED

SW

IT

UN

KI

GD

P2

02

0 r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

5

C&E2008 National PRIMES2009


Comparison of oil prices assumed in national scenarios for 2020

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

CZ DK FI GR IE IT NL NO PT ES SE CH UK

Oil p

rice a

ssu

med

for

20

20

(U

S-$

/b

arr

el)


Comparison of carbon prices assumed for 2020National scenarios vs. PRIMES C&E package

0

10

20

30

40

50

CZ DK FI GR IE IT NL NO PT ES SE CH UK

Carb

on

pri

ce (

€/t

CO

2)

National scenario PRIMES C&E package


Baseline emission projections

National projections:• Energy

1. National scenarios, if available

2. PRIMES 2008 Climate & Energy Package, if available

3. IEA World Energy Outlook 2009

• Agriculture1. National agricultural

projections, if available2. CAPRI projections3. FAO 2008 projections

PRIMES 2009 baseline (basis for envisaged NEC proposal):

• Energy1. PRIMES 2009 baseline, if

available (current national energy and energy policies, no full achievement of C&E package targets)

2. IEA World Energy Outlook 2009

• Agriculture1. CAPRI projections2. FAO 2008 projections

+ Current policies on air pollution (national policies + advanced EU proposals)


Assumed GDP growthin National and PRIMES scenarios

NO

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

0% 100% 200% 300%

GDP increase in National scenario

GD

P incr

ease

in

PR

IMES

200

9

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

AU

ST

BELG

BU

LG

CYPR

CZ

RE

DEN

M

ES

TO

FIN

L

FRA

N

GER

M

GR

EE

HU

NG

IRE

L

ITA

L

LATV

LITH

LUX

E

MA

LT

NETH

NO

R

PO

LA

PO

RT

RO

MA

SK

RE

SLO

V

SPA

I

SW

ED

SW

IT

UN

KI

GD

P2

02

0 r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

5

National PRIMES2009

National scenarios assume higher GDP growth than PRIMES2009


Baseline emissions projections for 2020PROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

EU Non-EU

EU Non-EU

EU Non-EU

EU Non-EU

EU Non-EU

SO2 NOx NH3 VOC PM2.5

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0

2020 National 2020 PRIMES


Baseline emission projections for 2020SO2 PROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BH BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0

National projection PRIMES2009


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BG BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0


Baseline emission projections for 2020NOx PROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

AT

BE

BU

CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BG BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0



Baseline emission projections for 2020NH3 PROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%A

TB

EB

G CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BH BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DK EE FI FR DE

GR


NL

PL

PT

RO

SK SL

ES

SE

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BY

BH

CR

MK M

RU

RS

TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0


Baseline emission projections for 2020VOC PROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

AT

BE

BU

CY

CZ

DK EE FI FR DE

GR


NL

PL

PT

RO

SK SL

ES

SE

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BY

BH

CR

MK M

RU

RS

TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BH BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0


Baseline emission projections for 2020PM2.5 PROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BH BY

CR

MD

MK

RS

RU TK

UA

Em

issio

ns r

ela

tive t

o 2

00

0



Loss in statistical life expectancyPROVISIONAL RESULTS

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR


NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

NO

CH AL

BY

BH

CR

MK M

RU

RS

UA

Loss in

sta

tisti

cal life

exp

ecta

ncy (

mon

ths)

2000 National PRIMES


Excess of CL for acidification in forest soilsPROVISIONAL RESULTS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE

ES FI FR GR

HU IE IT LT LU LV NL

PL

PT

RO SE

SK SL

UK

EU

CH

NO AL

BH BY

CR M

MK

RS

RU

UA

Fore

st

are

a w

here

CL(a

cid

) are

exceed

ed

2000 National PRIMES


Conclusions

• National projections received from 18 countries.

• There are differences in statistical data for 2000 and 2005 between national and international statistics. Implications for emission ceilings?

• National scenarios do not employ internationally coherent assumptions on economic development, climate policy, oil prices, etc.

• While for some countries differences in emission projections between national projections and PRIMES2009 are significant, differences in calculated environmental impacts are limited.

Http://gains.iiasa.ac.at Progress in the development of national baseline scenarios M. Amann, J....

Documents

Transcript of Http://gains.iiasa.ac.at Progress in the development of national baseline scenarios M. Amann, J....