ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS INDUSTRIALES UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID DEPARTAMENTO DE INGENIERIA QUÍMICA INDUSTRIAL Y DEL MEDIO AMBIENTE SPAIN’S EMISSION PROJECTIONS (SEP) PROJECT WORK UNDER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SPANISH MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND THE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADRID (UPM) Geneve, 13 th December 2006 MINISTERIO DE MEDIO AMBIENTE. DIRECCIÓN GENERAL DE CALIDAD Y EVALUACIÓN AMBIENTAL Dr. Julio Lumbreras [email protected]
MINISTERIO DE MEDIO AMBIENTE. DIRECCIÓN GENERAL DE CALIDAD Y EVALUACIÓN AMBIENTAL. WORK UNDER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SPANISH MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND THE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADRID (UPM). SPAIN’S EMISSION PROJECTIONS (SEP) PROJECT. Dr. Julio Lumbreras [email protected]. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIORDE INGENIEROSINDUSTRIALES
UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICADE MADRID
DEPARTAMENTO DE INGENIERIA QUÍMICA INDUSTRIAL Y DEL MEDIO AMBIENTE
SPAIN’S EMISSION PROJECTIONS(SEP) PROJECT
WORK UNDER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SPANISH MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND THE TECHNICAL
UNIVERSITY OF MADRID (UPM)
Geneve, 13th December 2006
MINISTERIO DE MEDIO AMBIENTE. DIRECCIÓN GENERAL DE CALIDAD Y
Heavy metals: lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd) and mercury (Hg)
Kyoto Protocol
Carbon dioxide (CO2)
Methane (CH4)
Nitrous oxide (N2O)
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6)
As mass of each individual compound
In CO2 equivalent weighted according to
its global warming potential
13th December 2006. 6EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
1.4.- Methodology
- The projections are developed under EEA and US EPA framework
- The usual projection level is national (SNAP activity) and in annual
basis.
- Projections are specifically calculated for each pollutant included in
the activities considered.
- Projections are associated to scenarios:
Starting considerations:
- Technological
- Socioeconomic
- Statistical
- Legislative
Hypothesis:
- Activity rates
- Emission factors
- Emission trends
= SCENARIO
- Macroeconomic variables are exogenous to the model
13th December 2006. 7EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
Scenarios
• Business as usual: statistical methods are used to provide future emissions, activity rates and/or emission factors. The only information used are past data without taking into account possible effect of measures. It is a “reference” scenario and it has physical constrains. Equivalent to “without measures”.
• Base: it includes every plan, policy or measure officially adopted that has any effect in atmospheric emissions. Equivalent to “with measures”.
• Target: it incorporates additional measures aimed at achieving the targets included in both National Emissions Ceilings Directive and Kyoto Protocol. Equivalent to “with additional measures”.
13th December 2006. 8EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
SCENARIOS
Base
BAU
SCENARIOS
Base
BAU
Emission data (Inventory)
Socioeconomic data
Sectoral studies
Legislation
Technological aspects
Basic information
- Activity Rate trend (A)
- Emission factor trend (EF)
- Emission trend (E)
- Control Factor (CF) and Growth Factor (G)
First Hypotheses
Method for calculation
n
kkjjaiji CFtEFAE
1,,,
n
kkjjaiaji CFgEGE
1,,,
Evaluated
emissions
Belowthreshold?Results
Definition of a T
arget scenario
YES NOCONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS
CLRTAPKyoto Protocol
NEC
SCENARIO
Target
SCENARIO
Target
Target Hypotheses
- Activity Rate (A)
- Emission factor (EF)
- Emission (E)
- Control & Growth Factors (CF & GF)
13th December 2006. 9EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
Integration criteria
- Development of ‘macroscenarios’ for coherence assurance
Projection estimation
AR = activity rateConsistency
criteria
Relationships, implications
Group of related activities
SNAP 1
SNAP 2
SNAP ...
AR 1AR 2
Hypothesis homogenization
Proj 1
Proj 2
Proj ...
Macroscenario
Σ Proj
- Once the relationship mapping has been clearly identified, it is only a
matter of introducing consistency conditions into the hypothesis made
under each scenario for a particular activity rate
13th December 2006. 10EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
1.5.- EmiPro
- EmiPro (Emission Projections) is a software tool specifically developed
to handle all the data and procedures involved in the SEP project.
Last non-Beta version,currently v4.0
- Start screen -
13th December 2006. 11EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
- Generally, projections are made on national basis
But, the setting of thresholds derived from CLRTAP and NEC Directive’s
commitments must be done taking into account only a subset of the total
national emissions
Solution:
- Implementation of a parallel database system inside EmiPro
corresponding to the three different geographic and pollutant scopes.
None of them stores NUTS-3 level information:
Design issues
13th December 2006. 12EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
EMEP-Base:
- SNAP 11 (nature) emissions are excluded
- NMVOC from SNAP 10 (agriculture) are excluded
- Canary Islands, Ceuta and Melilla are not included
- Domestic airport traffic (LTO cycles<1000m) and domestic cruise traffic (h > 1000 m) emissions are excluded
- International airport traffic (LTO cycles<1000m) and international cruise traffic (h > 1000 m) emissions are included
Results
CORINAIR DB2004
General:
- National scope
- All SEP’s project pollutants
EMEP-BaseGeneral
SEP (1990-2000)
EMEPGeneral
EmiPro (1990-2020)
Activity-rate historical datasets analysis and
geographical disaggregation criteria
- Parallel projection scheme and information stored in each database
13th December 2006. 13EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
- Storage and recovery of past (history) emissions
Main functionalities
- Generation of projections from history data and algorithm factors
- Storage and recovery of projected emissions
- Reports generation
13th December 2006. 14EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
Quality Assurance/Quality Check
Main functionalities
Macroscenariocalculation report:
projections included
Emission projection atmacroscenario level
Time frameselecction
Pollutantselection
Switchbetween
graphical -tabular views
Macroscenariocalculation report:
projections included
Emission projection atmacroscenario level
Time frameselecction
Pollutantselection
Switchbetween
graphical -tabular views
13th December 2006. 15EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
1.6.- Updating system
Dic
Nov
Oct
Sep
Ago
Jul
Jun
May
Abr
Mar
Feb
Ene
Dic
Nov
Oct
Sep
Ago
Jul
Jun
May
Abr
Mar
Feb
Ene
Dic
Nov
Oct
Sep
Ago
Jul
Jun
May
Abr
Mar
Feb
Ene
Dic
Nov
Oct
Sep
Ago
Jul
Jun
May
Abr
Mar
Feb
Ene
Updated NEI (series 1990-year i-2)
year i
year i+1
Projections 2001-2020 (NEI series 1990-year i-3)
Publication of new methodology (series 1990-year i-2)
Projection update (NEI series 1990-year i-2)
Inclusion of new policies and measures
Inclusion of new policies and measures
Updated NEI (series 1990-year i-1)
9-month delay
13th December 2006. 16EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
Conclusions from updating system
Other updates
- It is possible to obtain consistent emission projections 9 months after
NEI publication
- New policies and measures are included into emission projections as
they appear vs. NEI annual updates
- Base year intended to be changed every 5 years
- Temporal scope is extended, if necessary, when the base year is
updated
- Historical data up to new base year are included
- Previous projected series are kept
13th December 2006. 17EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
2.1.- Ex-post evaluation
- Each 2 years:
- Projection values are checked against official NEI estimates
- Comparison at group and national level
- Deviation analysis:
a) due to trend estimation (non-updated NEI)
b) due to methodological issues (updated NEI)
13th December 2006. 18EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
2.2.- RAINS comparison
- Development of a 4-level hierarchy nomenclature (sub-SNAP =
F. use (kt N) 1052,00 1062,63 -1,0 1090,26 1074,17 1,5 1049,00 1074,17 -2,3
- Most of the drivers were underestimated
- Projected NOx emissions by PJ consumed in 2010 (153 t/PJ) will be lower
than the value associated to 1999 negotiations (162 t/PJ)
- SEP and IIASA estimates show a reasonable agreement
2.4 Possible causes for accomplishment delay
* Amann et al. November 1999. “Integrated Assessment Modelling for the Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone in Europe”. Report number “Lucht & Energie 132” from the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, Department for Air and Energy. The Netherlands.
13th December 2006. 28EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
2010 comparison SEP-G.P. RAINS-G.P.
Population (Mp) +12.15% +12.15%
GDP (billion €) +10.20% -
Energy (PJ) +27.99% +27.99%
Cattle (Mheads) -5.53% +2.34%
Pigs (Mheads) +29.70% +32.72%
Poultry (Mheads) +118.45% +104.61%
Fertiliser use (kt N) +3.64% -0.29%
Current situation 2005* G.P. %
Population (Mp) 44,11 40,57 +8,7%
GDP (billion €) 641,19 631,20 +1,6%
Energy (PJ) 6119,43 5215,00 +17,3%
Cattle (Mheads) 6,65** 6,00 +10,9%
Pigs (Mheads) 24,89** 20,30 +22,6%
Poultry (Mheads) 178,35** 83,10 +114,6%
Fertiliser use (kt N) 1052,29** 1052,00 +0,0%* Total National
** Data from 2004
13th December 2006. 29EMEP Executive Body Spain’s Emission Projections. UPM.
3.- Conclusions
- Spain has a consistent methodology to evaluate emission projections
- A tailored software tool (EmiPro) supports data management, quality
checks and report generation
- A specific nomenclature (SEP) has been developed based on a SEP-
RAINS mapping
- Spain’s projections have been compared against RAINS results using
this mapping and the trends are very similar
- NOx protocol could be accomplished between 2009-2010 (Base
scenario)
- Measures considered would reduce 600 kt in 2010 (2909 kt from 2001)
- Difficulties in the achievement could be partly explained by unrealistic