The three CAFE policy scenarios Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Chris Heyes, Zbigniew Klimont, Wolfgang...
-
Upload
gabriel-mckinney -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of The three CAFE policy scenarios Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Chris Heyes, Zbigniew Klimont, Wolfgang...
The three CAFE policy scenarios
Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Chris Heyes, Zbigniew Klimont, Wolfgang Schöpp, Fabian Wagner
Assumptions
• CAFE baseline “with climate measures” for 2020
• Agricultural projections without CAP reform
• Further measures for road emissions taken
• Meteorology of 1997
Costs for gap closures between CLE and MTFR
*) excluding costs for road sources
CLEMTFR
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Gap closure between CLE and MTFR
Billion Euro/year
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Acidification optimized PM optimized Eutrophication optimized Ozone optimized
Composite gap closure indicatorsSum of gap closure percentages of all environmental end points
0%
100%
200%
300%
400%
PM optimized Ozone optimized Acid optimized Eutro optimized Joint optimization
PM Acidification Eutrophication Ozone
Targets selected for the optimization
CLE Case “A”
Case “B”
Case “C”
MTFR
Years of life lost due to PM2.5 (EU-wide, million YOLLs)
137 110 104 101 96
Acidification (country-wise gap closure on cumulative excess deposition)
0% 55% 75% 85% 100%
Eutrophication (country-wise gap closure on cumulative excess deposition)
0% 55% 75% 85% 100%
Ozone (country-wise gap closure on SOMO35)
0% 60% 80% 90% 100%
Emission control costsfor three ambition levels for the four targets*)
*) excluding costs for road sources
0
10
20
30
40
MTFR Case "C" Case "B" Case "A" CLE
Billion Euro/year
PM optimized O3 optimized Acidification optimizedEutrophication optimized Joint optimization
Effects in 2000 and for CAFE medium ambition 2020
PM Eutrophication Ozone
Acid, forests Acid, lakes Acid, semi-nat.
Optimized emission reductions for EU-25of the D23 scenarios [2000=100%]
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
SO2 NOx VOC NH3 PM2.5
% of 2000 emissions
Grey range: CLE to MTFR Case "A" Case "B" Case "C"
Costs per pollutant for EU-25on top of CLE
0
10
20
30
40
Case "A" Case "B" Case "C" MTFR
Billion Euros/year
Road sources SO2 NOx NH3 VOC PM
Measures taken in the D23 medium ambition scenario
• SO2
– Low sulphur coal
– Low sulphur heavy fuel oil
– Flue gas desulphurization
• NOx
– Combustion modifications
– Selective non-catalytic and catalytic reduction
– NOx reduction from light- and heavy-duty diesel vehicles
• PM– High efficiency dedusters
– New boiler types in the residential sector
– Good housekeeping measures on oil boilers
– Low sulphur fuels for (national) sea traffic
Measures taken in the D23 medium ambition scenario
• Ammonia– Application of pig and cattle
manures with low ammonia application measures
– Substituting ammonium nitrate by urea
– Covers on manure storage for pigs and cattle
– Changes in feeding strategies
• VOC – Control of fugitive losses in
organic chemical industry
– Switch emulsion bitumen in road paving
– Paint application (coatings)
– Stage II VOC controls
– Liquid fuel production (improved flare and reduction of fugitive losses)
Distribution of costs[€/person/year]
0
20
40
60
80
Aus
tria
Bel
gium
Cyp
rus
Cze
ch R
ep.
Den
mar
k
Est
onia
Fin
land
Fra
nce
Ger
man
y
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Irel
and
Italy
Latv
ia
Lith
uani
a
Luxe
mbo
urg
Mal
ta
Net
herla
nds
Pol
and
Por
tuga
l
Slo
vaki
a
Slo
veni
a
Spa
in
Sw
eden UK
EU
-25
Total Costs (Euro/person/yr) Low ambition Medium ambition
0
20
40
60
80
Aus
tria
Bel
gium
Cyp
rus
Cze
ch R
ep.
Den
mar
k
Est
onia
Fin
land
Fra
nce
Ger
man
y
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Irel
and
Ital
y
Latv
ia
Lith
uani
a
Luxe
mbo
urg
Mal
ta
Net
herla
nds
Pol
and
Por
tuga
l
Slo
vaki
a
Slo
veni
a
Spa
in
Sw
eden UK
EU
-25
Total Costs (Euro/person/yr) Low ambition Medium ambition High ambition
*) excluding costs for road sources
Distribution of physical benefitsCAFE Case “B”
% point improvements in total European effect indicators*), sum over four effects
*) between CLE and MTFR
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Aus
tria
Bel
gium
Cyp
rus
Cze
ch R
ep.
Den
mar
k
Est
onia
Fin
land
Fra
nce
Ger
man
y
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Irel
and
Ital
y
Latv
ia
Lith
uani
a
Luxe
mbo
urg
Mal
ta
Net
herla
nds
Pol
and
Por
tuga
l
Slo
vaki
a
Slo
veni
a
Spa
in
Sw
eden UK
YOLL gains Eutrophication Acidification Ozone
Conclusions
• Three cases calculated for three ambition levels: costs of 6, 11 and 15 billion €/year
• For targets on PM, eutrophication, acidification and ozone
• Resulting emission reductions are cost-effective and have equitable distributions of costs and physical benefits