1 / 17

Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. Progress on modelling emission scenarios. I. Emission scenarios for the EEA Kiev 2003 report Objective: Explore ancillary benefits of Kyoto implementation options in Europe.

tgowen
Download Presentation

Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

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. Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew KlimontInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Progress on modelling emission scenarios

  2. I. Emission scenarios for the EEA Kiev 2003 report • Objective: Explore ancillary benefits of Kyoto implementation options in Europe

  3. Scenarios for the EEA Kiev report Energy scenarios developed with RIVM/IMAGE/TIMER model, for groups of countries 5 alternative energy scenarios: • BL: Baseline:No constraints on GHG emissions • UA: Unilateral implementation of Kyoto/Marrakechcuts onGHG, EU bubble • TFU: 10% reduction of GHG in Europe, with bubbles • TWB: International trading of GHG reductions, banking of 80% of the ‘hot air’ emissions of the Former Soviet Union • TWOHA: International trading, no ‘hot air’ allowed

  4. Emission controls assumed Energy and emission statistics for 1995-1999 used to calibrate RAINS database Emission controls assumed: • Gothenburg Protocol / NEC Directive • LCP Directive • Fuels Directives • Auto-Oil 2

  5. SO2 emissions 2010

  6. NOx emissions 2010

  7. Preliminary conclusions • LCP Directive will over-fulfill NEC Directive for SO2 • No major/significant influence on NOx and VOC • More optimistic assumptions about structural changes will lead to lower emissions in accession countries • For 2010, differences in air pollution impacts of implementation alternatives of Kyoto Protocol are limited, given the present legislation on air pollution

  8. II. Emission projections for the northern hemisphere up to 2020

  9. Emission legislation (1) Europe: 1999Gothenburg Protocol of CLTRAPEU legislation: National Emission Ceilings Directive (2000) Former Soviet Union (FSU):Action implied by Gothenburg Protocol for European part of Russia North America (US + Canada):USClear Skies Initiative Ozone Annex of Canada-U.S. Air Quality Agreement

  10. Emission legislation (2) China:10th Environmental5-years Plan 2000-2005 East Asia (Japan, Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, etc.): Review of national legislations South Asia (India):Essentially uncontrolled Mexico, Middle East, North Africa:Not included in this analysis

  11. SO2 emissions1980-2020

  12. NOx emissions1980-2020

  13. VOC emissions1980-2020

  14. CO emissions1990-2020

  15. Conclusions • “Classical” anthropogenic air pollutants (NOx, CO, VOC, SO2) unlikely to grow in the northern hemisphere in next 20 years • (Controlled) increase in developing countries compensated by controls in industrialized countries • But: “Safe” air quality levels will not be achieved • In industrialized countries only limited potential for further technical emission controls will remain • Developing countries started to control mobile sources; for stationary sources only SO2 controlled

  16. III. Baseline scenario for UN/ECE and CAFE

  17. Baseline scenario Energy scenario: • Commission proposes DG-TREN baseline energy scenario for CAFE • National scenarios for UN/ECE? Agricultural scenario: • EU: No news beyond 2010 (CAPRI not beyond 2010) • Europe-wide trends up to 2020: WATSIM • US scenario for accession countries? • National scenarios for UN/ECE?

More Related