Impacts on air pollution from Nordic low CO 2 emission initiatives

1. Impacts on air pollution from Nordic low CO2 emission initiatives Scenario analysis performed with the GAINS model

2. Project description • The project aimed at illustrating co-benefits and trade-offs on air pollution from ambitious air pollution strategies • Project participants • Stefan Åström, Maria Lindblad, Jenny Arnell, IVL • Antti Tohka, Niko Karvosenoja, SYKE • Jesper Bak, DMU • Knut Alfsen, CICERO (with help from SYKE)

3. Project description • Official national energy and emission projections were used as baseline scenarios • National low CO2 emission reports were chosen as low emission scenarios • A ’what-if’ scenario illustrated the impact of increased electricity export to Poland and Germany • The GAINS model was used to calculate differences in emissions and environmental impact • The GAINS cost database and the low CO2 emission reports were used to calculate abatement costs

4. Project results – emissions Emission changes between the BSL and the low emission scenarios *’Other’ emissions is applicable in the 'What-if' scenario. *Germany and Poland are in the emission calculations included in the group Other. • For Sweden, the emission reductions require large behavioural and structural changes • Norway and Denmark will increase their PM emissions due the increase in bio fuel use • In the ’what-if’ scenario, large emission reductions could be reached in Poland and Germany

5. Project results - acidification Area and change in areas with exceedance of Critical Load for acidification *Other is in the case of environmental and health impact calculated from the 'What-if' scenario, on all regions described in the GAINS model outside the Nordic countries • The acidification problem in the Nordic countries improve, but not by much in the low emission scenarios • A bit more improvement is given if Poland and Germany also reduce their emissions by importing Nordic electricity • The improvement in countries outside of the Nordic countries is substantial

6. Project results - eutrophication Area and change in areas with exceedance of Critical Load for eutrophication * Other is in the case of environmental and health impact calculated from the 'What-if' scenario, but on all regions outside the Nordic countries described in the GAINS model • The eutrophication problem in the Nordic countries improve, but not by much in the low emission scenarios • Denmark’s situation will not improve • A bit more improvement is given if Poland and Germany also reduce their emissions by importing Nordic electricity • The improvement in countries outside of the Nordic countries is noticable

7. Project results - health Number of life years lost due to long term exposure of PM2.5 * Other is in the case of environmental and health impact calculated from the 'What-if' scenario, but on all regions outside the Nordic countries described in the GAINS model • The health situation improves in Finland and Sweden • Denmark’s and Norways situation will get worse due to increased PM emissions • Relatively large health benefits in the countries outside the Nordic countries in the ’what-if’ scenario, due to populaiton density

8. life months loss – ’what-if’ life months loss - BSL Project results - health Health improvements would also occur far from the Nordic countries in the ’what-if scenario

9. Project results - costs The Nordic net abatement costs following the low emission scenarios • Costs are calculated as extra costs compared to the baseline • Overall, the costs are negative, but redistribution costs might appear, behavioural and structural changes could not be included • In many countries and sectors, cost savings are reached through reduced energy expenses • The Swedish costs in the PP sector depends on how the sector replies to the reduced electricity demand in Sweden • High transport sector costs in Sweden due to plug-in hybrids

10. Project conclusions • Cost effective CO2 emission reduction strategies are available in 2020 • Some strategies are less cost effective (hybrid cars, some fuel shifts) • Some strategies will require further air pollution emission reduction efforts to avoid health effects • GHG abatement strategies can be designed to avoid trade-offs with air pollution • A specified export of ’green electricity’ would provide substantial benefits for the Nordic countries

11. Project recommendations • Joint Nordic energy strategies would be desirable (reduce uncertainties) • By considering impacts on air pollution, trade-offs can be avoided and co-benefits maximised • The potential for further export of ’green electricity’ should be explored? • Joint Nordic strategies could increase the potential for introduction of renewables such as wind power?

12. Thanks to the Nordic Council of Ministers!