Review of the Gothenburg Protocol: WGSR Conclusions

Review of the Gothenburg Protocol:

WGSR Conclusions

Review of the Gothenburg Protocol:

WGSR Conclusions

8th Joint TFEIP/EIONET MeetingDublin, 23-24 October 2007

Tea AulavuoConvention on Long-range Transboundary Air

Pollution

8th Joint TFEIP/EIONET MeetingDublin, 23-24 October 2007

Tea AulavuoConvention on Long-range Transboundary Air

Pollution

Time schedule

• Protocol into force in May 2005;• EB initiated 1st review in Dec. 2005;• Review to be finalized by Dec. 2007;• Based on review results, Parties decide

on possible revision and/or other further action (at EB_25);

• Revision to be completed by 2009? (WGSR’s proposal)

Time schedule

• Protocol into force in May 2005;• EB initiated 1st review in Dec. 2005;• Review to be finalized by Dec. 2007;• Based on review results, Parties decide

on possible revision and/or other further action (at EB_25);

• Revision to be completed by 2009? (WGSR’s proposal)

Review’s Subject and Scope (art 10)

(i) Emission ceilings (Annex II) (ii) Adequacy of Protocol’s obligations (art. 3) (iii) Progress towards meeting Protocol’s objective

Considering latest scientific info. on:•Health effects, CLs, IA Models•Technological developments

and abatement techniques•Changing economic conditions

Review’s Subject and Scope (art 10)

(i) Emission ceilings (Annex II) (ii) Adequacy of Protocol’s obligations (art. 3) (iii) Progress towards meeting Protocol’s objective

Considering latest scientific info. on:•Health effects, CLs, IA Models•Technological developments

and abatement techniques•Changing economic conditions

WGSR at 40th session (Sept 2007):

a) Welcomed contributions to the review; b) Agreed with main review report, as

amended;c) Requested secretariat to submit

amended report to EB;d) Recommended that EB consider

mandating WGSR to commence in 2008, negotiations on further obligations to reduce emissions, and present outcomes to EB in December 2009.

WGSR at 40th session (Sept 2007):

a) Welcomed contributions to the review; b) Agreed with main review report, as

amended;c) Requested secretariat to submit

amended report to EB;d) Recommended that EB consider

mandating WGSR to commence in 2008, negotiations on further obligations to reduce emissions, and present outcomes to EB in December 2009.

WGSR_40 (Sept 2007): (2) Recommended to this end to i.a:

(i) Set clear environmental targets; (ii) Take into account modelled

optimizedscenarios (possibly differentiated);

(iii) Take into account other political processes;

(iv) Consider including more flexibility in annexes;

(v) Explore possibility for expedited procedure to amend annexes.

WGSR_40 (Sept 2007): (2) Recommended to this end to i.a:

(i) Set clear environmental targets; (ii) Take into account modelled

optimizedscenarios (possibly differentiated);

(iii) Take into account other political processes;

(iv) Consider including more flexibility in annexes;

(v) Explore possibility for expedited procedure to amend annexes.

WGSR_40 (Sept 2007): (3):

(f) Thanked TFIAM and CIAM; Acknowledged uncertainties in emission projections for non-EU Parties; urged Parties to ensure submission of energy and emissions projections data by 15 Feb; invited CIAM to summarize baseline emission trends for Parties and non-Parties, and abatement options for EB_25;

(g) Agreed to address LVs for VOC contents in products in negotiations for further emission reduction.

WGSR_40 (Sept 2007): (3):

(f) Thanked TFIAM and CIAM; Acknowledged uncertainties in emission projections for non-EU Parties; urged Parties to ensure submission of energy and emissions projections data by 15 Feb; invited CIAM to summarize baseline emission trends for Parties and non-Parties, and abatement options for EB_25;

(g) Agreed to address LVs for VOC contents in products in negotiations for further emission reduction.

TFEIP input • Importance of better emission and projection

data!– For modelling purposes - to determine further

measures needed

– For reviewing compliance

• Main problems? Key elements for improving emission reporting? Issues to be made mandatory in poss. revised Protocol?– Identify and propose through EMEP Steering Body

Status of the Emission Reporting Guidelines Status of the Emission Reporting Guidelines

8th Joint TFEIP/EIONET MeetingDublin, 23-24 October 2007

Tea AulavuoConvention on Long-range Transboundary Air

Pollution

8th Joint TFEIP/EIONET MeetingDublin, 23-24 October 2007

Tea AulavuoConvention on Long-range Transboundary Air

Pollution

TFEIP conclusions 18th meeting (May 2007, Dessau):

(a) Agreed on technical changes to GL; and thanked EEA, ETC-ACC, EMEP

centres;

(b) Agreed to forward revised GL to EMEP SB_ 31 for technical acceptance; (available in 07, pending

decision on legal standing and following EB endorsement)

TFEIP conclusions 18th meeting (May 2007, Dessau):

(a) Agreed on technical changes to GL; and thanked EEA, ETC-ACC, EMEP

centres;

(b) Agreed to forward revised GL to EMEP SB_ 31 for technical acceptance; (available in 07, pending

decision on legal standing and following EB endorsement)

TFEIP conclusions (2) :(c) Invited secretariat to inform

Parties about revised GL in official letter initiating 2008 reporting round;

(d) Agreed that reporting using revised GL and templates should start in 2009;

(e) Recommended adding NEC total summary line in reporting tables;

(f) Stressed further need to harmonize European reporting requirements.

TFEIP conclusions (2) :(c) Invited secretariat to inform

Parties about revised GL in official letter initiating 2008 reporting round;

(d) Agreed that reporting using revised GL and templates should start in 2009;

(e) Recommended adding NEC total summary line in reporting tables;

(f) Stressed further need to harmonize European reporting requirements.

EMEP SB, 31st session, Sept 07 considered

(a) Main changes in revised GL from 2002– Further harmonization (NEC, UNCCC)– Development of reporting nomenclature– Format of projected activity data– Requirement for transparency (IIRs)– Flexibility for defining EMEP grid

(b) Status – Technical revision finalized – Open questions: legal standing, policy

issues, POPs reporting

(c) Implementation (as of 2009)

EMEP SB, 31st session, Sept 07 considered

(a) Main changes in revised GL from 2002– Further harmonization (NEC, UNCCC)– Development of reporting nomenclature– Format of projected activity data– Requirement for transparency (IIRs)– Flexibility for defining EMEP grid

(b) Status – Technical revision finalized – Open questions: legal standing, policy

issues, POPs reporting

(c) Implementation (as of 2009)

EMEP SB recommendations: 31st session, Sept 07

– Enhanced focus on projections; Parties invited to report on projections for 2030 and 2050;

– Mandatory reporting of PM10 and PM2.5

and IIRs

– EB should adopt revised GL, as basis for reporting in 2009; bearing in mind open non-technical questions for WGSR

EMEP SB recommendations: 31st session, Sept 07

– Enhanced focus on projections; Parties invited to report on projections for 2030 and 2050;

– Mandatory reporting of PM10 and PM2.5

and IIRs

– EB should adopt revised GL, as basis for reporting in 2009; bearing in mind open non-technical questions for WGSR

Legal Experts’ conclusions on Guidelines

– Useful policy tool and practical guidance

– Not legally binding (“should” = appropriate)

– Its elements can be given legal effect (to Parties!) only through:• Provisions in Convention or Protocols• EB decisions (cf. 2002/10, 2005/1)

Legal Experts’ conclusions on Guidelines

– Useful policy tool and practical guidance

– Not legally binding (“should” = appropriate)

– Its elements can be given legal effect (to Parties!) only through:• Provisions in Convention or Protocols• EB decisions (cf. 2002/10, 2005/1)

Legal Experts’ conclusions on Guidelines

– Strengthening possible through clear, concise language;

– Practical measures to reinforce implementation• Review of reporting; • Publication of findings; • Analyzing reasons for insufficient

reporting;• Capacity building

Legal Experts’ conclusions on Guidelines

– Strengthening possible through clear, concise language;

– Practical measures to reinforce implementation• Review of reporting; • Publication of findings; • Analyzing reasons for insufficient

reporting;• Capacity building

WGSR at 40th session (Sept 2007):

(a) Took note of legal experts’ conclusions and thanked them;

(b) Reiterated importance of improving quality and comparability of emission data reported;

(c) Invited legal experts to:• Consult with Co-Chairs

of TFEIP;

WGSR at 40th session (Sept 2007):

(a) Took note of legal experts’ conclusions and thanked them;

(b) Reiterated importance of improving quality and comparability of emission data reported;

(c) Invited legal experts to:• Consult with Co-Chairs

of TFEIP;

WGSR_40 invited legal experts to (2):

• Explore possibilities, under existing enabling clauses, to give legally binding effect to GL or parts of them for Parties;

• Draft possible decisions for WGSR to recommend to EB for adoption in 08;

• Elaborate on possibilities to simplify GL language (stronger, more concise and explicit);

• Report to WGSR_41 in April 2008.

WGSR_40 invited legal experts to (2):

• Explore possibilities, under existing enabling clauses, to give legally binding effect to GL or parts of them for Parties;

• Draft possible decisions for WGSR to recommend to EB for adoption in 08;

• Elaborate on possibilities to simplify GL language (stronger, more concise and explicit);

• Report to WGSR_41 in April 2008.

Further information on

• Convention website

http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap

• TFEIP website

http://tfeip-secretariat.org/unece.htm