1 / 21

Inventory Review 2006 Preliminary results

Inventory Review 2006 Preliminary results. Vigdis Vestreng, Met.no/MSC-W/ETC-ACC Elisabeth Rigler, UBA-V, ETC-ACC (new) Martin Adams, AEAT, ETC-ACC TFEIP 12-14 June 2006, Amersfoort, the Netherlands. Stage-2 review.

janus
Download Presentation

Inventory Review 2006 Preliminary results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Inventory Review 2006 Preliminary results Vigdis Vestreng, Met.no/MSC-W/ETC-ACC Elisabeth Rigler, UBA-V, ETC-ACC (new) Martin Adams, AEAT, ETC-ACC TFEIP 12-14 June 2006, Amersfoort, the Netherlands

  2. Stage-2 review “I would like to say, that review results will help for inventory improving for further submissions and for preparing of plan of quality assurance and control regarding emission estimation for UNECE/NEC” Stage-2 country specific review reports: Issued 10th May 2006 Replied by deadline 10th June: 11 (22%) Total number last two yrs 37% (18)

  3. OUTLINE 1. Stage 2 review perspective and connection with Stage 1 and Stage 3 2. Developments/Improvements 3. Preliminary results 4. Further streamlining and improvements

  4. Data included in review • Emissions reported under the Convention on LRTAP to the UNECE Secretariat by: March 10th 2006 • Emissions reported under the National Emission Ceilings Directive to the European Commission by: February 28th 2006 • Emission and activity data reported to the UNFCCC by: 08th April 2006 • The LRTAP data was made available to the Parties through a pre-release of WEBDAB.

  5. Tests included in the review • Key source analysis • Timeliness • Format • Completeness by pollutant (priority) • Completeness by sector (NE) • Consistency • X-pollutants • Recalculations • Inventory comparison (LRTAP/NEC/UNFCCC) • Trend plots (national totals) • Time series flagging based on log -10 curve fitting • IEFs

  6. 2006 developements • First draft html reports are “serie” produced • Separate testing and reporting of results for LRTAP and NEC data if the totals are proved to differ by more than 0.1% • Improved key source analysis including percentage contribution for each sector and both aggregated and detailed sectors • Introduction of two average reports, one for Eastern Europe and one for Western Europe • Improved completeness testing with stronger focus on priority compounds, key sources and reporting of Not Estimated • Improved comparability testing by introduction of more pollutant ratios • Inclusion of inventory comparisons with UNFCCC data • Inclusion of trend plots • Streamlining and extension of the time series check for main pollutants to 1980 • Review reports has also been sent from the UNECE secretariat by ordinary snail mail to ten Parties which we were regarded as needing more support (AM, AZ, BA, GE, HR, KG, KZ, LI, RO, TR)

  7. Timeliness Number of submissions increase (up 4%, 2 Parties) Submissions within deadline increased by 3 Parties

  8. COMPLETENESS • 30% (15) of Parties report complete time series 1990-2004 (PMs 2000-2004) in NFR02 for main pollutants and PMs

  9. Completeness

  10. Recalculations and Inventory comparison • Some countries have substantial differences (>20%) in nationalt total from year to year due to recalculations – Stage 2 review will provide overview of the recalc and whether or not these recalc are explained (IIRs and or review replies) and make sense as input to the revision of the GP • NEC/LRTAP differences (as above except GP)

  11. Transparency IIR submission increases 2004: 7 2005: 12 2006:17

  12. HM review by ESPREME

  13. Highlights • Significant gaps and missing sources for HMs other than Hg introduce considerable uncertainties in the modeling and assessment of their environmental fate and thus, finally, their impacts on human health. • Officially reported emissions are substantially underestimated (up to a factor 2 (Cd) • Pb in ”unleaded” gasoline – missing source in some countries • More focus should be placed on estimates of emissions during waste disposal, mainly, incineration of wastes. This source is clearly the least accurately estimated. • Emission measurements can be proposed in selected fossil fuel power plants, as combustion of fossil fuels is the main source of emissions of HMs selected in this review. • Historical trends of HM emissions can be prepared within EMEP using the information on statistics and emission factors properly selected.

  14. Preliminary results: POP review by TNO

  15. POP review by TNO

  16. HM review by ESPREME

  17. Future improvements • x-pollutant tests - landfills • Inconsistency test harmonized with REPDAB • The time series test: Little flagging when large sigma. Use expected value=midpoint instead? Flag when deviate e.g. 20% on SNAP type aggregation level • Deadlines: Submission process for NEC submissions • System for filtering of questions and storing replies • NB! Added values of Stage -2 review and cc report

  18. Key source: West

  19. Key source: East

  20. West (left) East (right)

  21. Preliminary results: HM review by ESPREME

More Related