european commission dg environment national emission...

European Commission DG Environment

National Emission Ceilings Directive Review

Additional Task - Methane

Final Report

May 2005

Entec UK Limited

Certificate No. FS 13881

Report for Michel Sponar DG ENV-C.1 European Commission Avenue de Beaulieu 5 6/103B-1160 Brussels Belgium

Main Contributors Katherine Wilson Ben Grebot Andriana Stavrakaki Caspar Corden Alistair Ritchie Alun McIntyre

Issued by …………………………………………………………

Katherine Wilson

Approved by ………………………………………………………… Alistair Ritchie

Entec UK Limited Windsor House Gadbrook Business Centre Gadbrook Road Northwich Cheshire CW9 7TN England Tel: +44 (0) 1606 354800 Fax: +44 (0) 1606 354810

13636

h:\projects\em-260\13000 projects\13636 ec necd review\reports sent to ec\05 amended final report (20th may 05)\task x\13636 amended final report - task x_05156.doc

European Commission DG Environment

National Emission Ceilings Directive Review

Additional Task – Methane

Final Report

May 2005

Entec UK Limited

Certificate No. EMS 69090

In accordance with an environmentally responsible approach, this document is printed on recycled paper produced from 100% post-consumer waste, or on ECF (elemental chlorine free) paper

Final Report i


May 2005

13636

Executive Summary

Entec UK has undertaken a project for the European Commission (Contract No. 070402/2004/383810/MAR/C1) to support the review of Directive 2001/81/EC, referred to as the National Emission Ceilings Directive (NECD). Following discussions with the EC after the project kick-off meeting, Entec has also included consideration of the “feasibility of an emission ceiling for methane”. This is an additional task beyond the original requirements of the Technical Annex for the project. As such, it has been agreed that only limited allocation of resources is possible in addressing this task.

The work undertaken has comprised a desk-based literature review to address the questions set out below.

1. How much do different sources contribute to emissions?

2. In broad terms, what is the potential ‘added value’ of an emissions ceiling for methane?

3. What are appropriate geographical scales for control - with particular regard for the environmental and health impacts of methane, including links with the formation of tropospheric ozone?

4. What are the issues for emissions reporting, implementation and compliance and how do these compare with other approaches?

5. What are the key points that should be considered by the EC for future work in this area?

Sources The major emission sources for methane in the EU are enteric fermentation, manure management and solid waste disposal on land. Emissions from the energy sector have decreased substantially from 1990 to 2001, whereas emissions from most other sectors have remained unchanged1. The uncertainty associated with methane emissions estimates made by Member States appears to be ‘considerable’2.

Projections to 2010 indicate that reductions will be made in: fossil fuel extraction, as a result of decreasing coal production; agriculture, through reducing animal numbers as a result of changes in productivity and changes in agricultural policy; and waste, through changes brought about under the Landfill Directive3. Under current legislation, by 2020, emissions from the EU25 will decrease by approximately 20% from 1990 levels. The ‘maximum technically feasible

1 European Environment Agency (EEA) (2003) Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990-2001 and inventory report 2003. Submission to the UNFCCC secretariat.

2 EEA (2003) op cit.

3 European Commission (EC) (2001) Commission Staff Working Paper: Third Communication from the European Community under the UN Framework Convention On Climate Change. Brussels, 20.12.2001 SEC (2001) 2053. 30 November 2001.

Final Report ii


May 2005

13636

reduction’ is indicated by Klaassen et al.4 to be 40%. Global emissions are projected to increase up to (and beyond) 2020, with corresponding increases in global atmospheric concentrations.

Under current legislation, IIASA5 estimates that the EU25 methane emissions will be approximately 20,000 kt/a in the 2020. This represents between 4-6% of the projected global anthropogenic emissions in 2020 (IPCC6 estimates between 350,000 and 450,000 kt in 2020). If the IIASA maximum technically feasible reduction could be achieved in 2020, the EU25 contribution would be reduced to between 3-4%.

IIASA has also produced estimates of global anthropogenic emissions of air pollutants and methane up to 20307. Figure 8 depicts projections of global methane emissions under the RAINS current legislation scenario, compared against two IPCC scenarios (SRES A2 and B2) and the global MTFR scenario. Under current legislation, the RAINS model predicts that emissions in 2030 will be 35% higher than in 2000. However, under the MTFR scenario, global emissions of methane in 2030 would stabilise at around 2000 levels.

Potential ‘added value’ of an emissions ceiling for methane Methane is a greenhouse gas and a precursor for the formation of tropospheric ozone. As one of the ‘basket of six’ greenhouse gases, methane emissions are already covered under the Kyoto Protocol. Member States must report their emissions to the UNFCCC and to the EC, under the greenhouse gas monitoring mechanism. A number of indirect policy interventions may already impact upon methane emissions, e.g. NECD, Air Quality Framework Directive, CAP reform, etc.

An emissions ceiling could potentially provide ‘added value’, if implemented with the primary objective of reducing ground level ozone as emissions of methane are not directly controlled under EU legislation, unlike the other ozone precursors of NOX, VOCs and CO.

Geographical scales for control Methane, although less reactive, is relatively long-lived in the atmosphere and therefore leads to ozone formation on the regional/ hemispheric/global scale, contributing to the ‘background’ level of ozone formation upon which episodes formed by more reactive VOCs are superimposed8.

4 Klaassen, G., Amann, M., Berglund, C., Cofala, J., Höglund-Isaksson, L., Heyes, C., Mechler, R., Tohka, A., Schöpp, W. and Winiwarter, W. (2004) The extension of the RAINS model to greenhouse gases. IIASA Interim Report IR-04-015. April 2004.

5 Klaassen et al. (2004) op cit.

6 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2001) Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Available online at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/142.htm. Accessed January 2005.

7 Cofala, J., Amann, M. and Mechler, R. (2005) Scenarios of World Anthropogenic Emissions of Air Pollutants and Methane up to 2030. Published online at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/rains/global_emiss/Global%20emissions%20of%20air%20pollutants%20.pdf. Accessed May 2005.

8 Keating, T. J., West, J. J. and Farrell, A. E. (2004) Prospects for international management of intercontinental air pollution transport. In A. Stohl (Ed.) (2004) Intercontinental Transport of Air

Final Report iii


May 2005

13636

This preliminary assessment indicates that the influence of methane on both climate change and the formation of tropospheric ozone are at a hemispheric or global scale. This therefore implies that the geographical location of emissions reductions within any given Member State would not have an impact on the potential environmental benefits.

Modelling of the impacts on ozone formation and radiative forcing9 of implementing the global MTFR scenario for methane emissions10 predicts that, in 2030:

• the MTFR-methane scenario would result in a uniform ozone reduction of around 1-2 ppbv throughout most of the northern and southern hemispheres, accounting for around one third of the total ozone reductions associated with the MTFR scenario for all pollutants; and

• radiative forcing would reduce by 0.235-0.311 Wm-2 compared to the current legislation case as a result of reduced methane concentrations and the associated lower ozone burden. For comparison, the radiative forcing from increased CO2 exmissions alone corresponding to the IPCC SRES scenarios (Section 2.2.3) is estimated to be 0.8-1.1 Wm-2 for the period 2000-2030.

Given dual benefits of reduced ozone formation and reduced radiative forcing, the cost-effectiveness of hemispheric or global methane controls should be further analysed.

Additionally, the modelling of methane should be further investigated with EMEP and IIASA. There may be some limitations of current models with regard to practically developing emission ceilings for methane. This reflects the fact that methane has an atmospheric lifetime of 12 years, whereas the RAINS model source data in based on annual meteorologies.

A NEC for methane in the context of current and future reporting requirements Reporting of methane emissions is currently required under the EC’s greenhouse gas monitoring mechanism, as well as annual submissions to the UNFCCC and within the Kyoto Protocol as one of the ‘basket of six’. Furthermore, whilst the current phase of the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) considers only CO2, the Commission has the opportunity to expand the scope of

Pollution (The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, vol. 4, Part G). Springer-Verlag, Berlin. p. 295-320.

Fiore, A., Jacob, D. J. and Field, B. D. (2002) Linking ozone pollution and climate change: The case for controlling methane. Geophysical Research Letters, 29 (19): 25-1.

European Environment Agency (EEA) (2003a) Fact sheet AP5b – EEA31 emissions of ozone precursors.

Rabl, A. and Eyre, N. (1998) An Estimate of Regional and Global O3 Damage from Precursor NOX and VOC Emissions. Environment International, 24(8), 835-850.

9 Radiative forcing is the change in the balance between radiation coming into the atmosphere and radiation going out. A positive radiative forcing tends on average to warm the surface of the Earth, and negative forcing tends on average to cool the surface.

10 Dentener, F., Stevenson, D., Cofala, J., Mechler, R., Amann, M., Bergamaschi, P., Raes, F. and Derwent, D. (2004) The impacts of air pollutant and methane emission controls on tropospheric ozone and radiative forcing: CTM calculations for the period 1990-2030. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions, 4, 1-68. Accessed online at: http://www.copernicus.org/EGU/acp/acpd/4/8471/acpd-4-8471_p.pdf. May 2005.

Final Report iv


May 2005

13636

the scheme during the second phase (after 2007) to include other greenhouse gases, such as methane. Given the substantial reporting requirements already in place for methane under the UNFCCC and the EC’s GHG monitoring mechanism, no further reporting requirements are perceived to be necessary to implement a NEC for methane.

Summary The fact that methane is an important contributor to both climate change and the formation of tropospheric ozone cannot be overlooked as policies are developed. Incentives to reduce methane emissions are already in place within climate change policies with the potential to increase their scope in the future. Any further policy measures implemented to reduce the formation of tropospheric ozone, such as the inclusion of methane within the NECD, would need to take account of the projected reductions under current and planned climate change policies.

It is clear that the dual benefits of reduced ozone formation and reduced radiative forcing should prompt further investigation into the cost-effectiveness of hemispheric or global methane controls. From a European perspective, it would be prudent to further investigate the impact that methane emissions from Member States have on the formation of tropospheric ozone within the European area. As part of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Dentener et al. (2004) are planning to conduct a multi-modal experiment to further investigate the expected range of surface ozone concentrations under the MTFR scenarios. This research should therefore be followed closely.

The inclusion of methane within the NEC Directive would focus Member State attention on methane and could therefore be a means by which Europe can move towards the MTFR scenario. However, a decision for the inclusion of methane within the NECD should be made on the basis of further research, to understand the absolute and relative significance of European methane emissions to ozone formation, and also to allow for the development of modelling mechanisms through which ceilings can be calculated.

Recommendations

The recommendations of this task are presented in the separate summary report, which combines the summaries and recommendations of all three tasks together.

Final Report v


May 2005

13636

Contents

1. Introduction 1

1.1 This Report 1 1.2 Scope and Objectives 1 1.3 Structure of the Report 1

2. Sources 3

2.1 Historical emissions 3 2.2 Emissions Projections 6 2.2.1 EU15 estimates submitted to the UNFCCC 6 2.2.2 EU25 preliminary estimates from RAINS 8 2.2.3 Global emissions projections 13 2.3 Summary 14

3. Potential ‘Added Value’ of an Emissions Ceiling for Methane 16

3.1 The Environmental Impacts of Methane 16 3.1.1 Methane as a greenhouse gas 16 3.1.2 Role in the formation of tropospheric ozone 16 3.1.3 Health and safety considerations 16 3.2 Current Policies Affecting Methane Emissions 17 3.2.1 Climate change policies 17 3.2.2 Indirect policy interventions 19 3.3 Potential ‘added value’ of NECs 21 3.4 Summary 21

4. Geographical Scales for Control 22

4.1 Combating Climate Change 22 4.2 Reducing the Formation of Ozone 22 4.3 Modelling the Impacts and Calculating Ceilings 24 4.4 Summary 24

Final Report vi


May 2005

13636

5. A NEC for Methane in the Context of Current and Future Reporting Requirements 27

5.1 Current Reporting Requirements 27 5.1.1 The EC’s greenhouse gas monitoring mechanism 27 5.1.2 Annual submissions to the UNFCCC 28 5.1.3 Further Reporting Requirements to Implement a NEC for

Methane 29 5.2 Future Developments 29 5.3 Summary 29

6. Summary of Key Points 32

7. References 34

Table 1 Uncertainty in estimates of methane emissions as reported by EU15 Member States to the UNFCCC (after EEA, 2003b) 4

Table 2 Measures reported to the UNFCCC in 2001 for reducing methane emissions across the EU15 (EC, 2001) 6

Table 3 ‘With measures’ projections of methane emissions for EU15 (EC, 2001) 6 Table 4 Information used within the preliminary RAINS estimates (Klaassen et al., 2004) 6 Table 5 Impact of agricultural abatement techniques for ammonia on other emissions (Brink et al.,

2002) 6

Figure 1 Changes in methane emissions for the EU15 (after EEA, 2003b) 3 Figure 2 Sectoral breakdown of EU15 methane emissions for 2001 (after EEA, 2003b) 4 Figure 3 Sources of methane emissions in 1990 (Klaassen et al., 2004) 5 Figure 4 RAINS estimated emissions and projections (after Klaassen et al., 2004) 12 Figure 5 Comparison of emissions reductions projected to 2020 under current legislation and that

under IIASA’s MTFR scenario (after Klaassen et al., 2004) 12 Figure 6 Anthropogenic methane emissions (Tg(CH4)/yr) estimated for six SRES Marker-

Illustrative scenarios – See Appendix A (after IPCC, 2001) 13 Figure 7 Atmospheric composition using six SRES Marker-Illustrative scenarios for anthropogenic

emissions. Abundances prior to year 2000 are taken from observations, and the IS92a scenario computed with current methodology is shown for reference. All SRES A1-type scenarios have the same emissions for HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 (appearing a A1B), but the HFC-134a abundances vary because the tropospheric OH values differ affecting its lifetime. The IS92a scenario did not include emissions of PFCs and SF6. (IPCC, 2001) 13

Figure 8 Projected development of CH4 emissions by world region (million tons CH4) (Cofala et al., 2005) 14

Figure 9 Proportion of global GHG emissions by species in 2000 (US EPA, 2004) 16 Figure 10 Increase in background ozone ‘Current legislation’ scenario, 2000-2030 (ppbv) (Amann et

al., 2004b) 23 Figure 11 Decadal annual averaged ozone volume mixing ratio differences (ppbv). Illustrates the

impact on background ozone concentrations following MTFR methane emission reductions compared to the current legislation scenario, during the 2020s (Dentener et al., 2004). 24

Appendix A IPCC Scenarios

Final Report 1


May 2005

13636

1. Introduction

1.1 This Report Entec UK has undertaken a project for the European Commission (Contract No. 070402/2004/383810/MAR/C1) to support the review of Directive 2001/81/EC, referred to as the National Emission Ceilings Directive (NECD). Following discussions with the EC after the project kick-off meeting, Entec has also included consideration of the “feasibility of an emission ceiling for methane”. This is an additional task beyond the original requirements of the Technical Annex for the project. As such, it has been agreed that only limited allocation of resources is possible in addressing this task.

1.2 Scope and Objectives The work undertaken has comprised a desk-based literature review to address the questions set out below.

1. How much do different sources contribute to emissions?

2. In broad terms, what is the potential ‘added value’ of an emissions ceiling for methane?

3. What are appropriate geographical scales for control - with particular regard for the environmental and health impacts of methane, including links with the formation of tropospheric ozone?

4. What are the issues for emissions reporting, implementation and compliance and how do these compare with other approaches?

5. What are the key points that should be considered by the EC for future work in this area?

1.3 Structure of the Report The structure of this report follows the key questions presented in Section 1.2 above:

Section 2 investigates the significance of various sources;

Section 3 discusses the potential ‘added value’ of an emissions ceiling for methane;

Section 4 assesses the geographical scales for control;

Section 5 highlights issues for emissions reporting, implementation and compliance;

Section 6 identifies the key points that should be considered by the EC for future work; and

Section 7 lists the references.

Final Report 2


May 2005

13636

Final Report 3


May 2005

13636

2. Sources

2.1 Historical emissions Under the UNFCCC, Member States have submitted their own National Communications and the European Commission has also submitted an overarching Communication for the EU15 (EC, 2001). Likewise, Member States report their own emissions inventories and the European Environment Agency has submitted a report for the EU15 (EEA, 2003b)11.

Figure 1 has been constructed from the Community emissions inventory report (EEA, 2003b) and demonstrates that emissions have reduced significantly in the Community as a whole. Emissions are dominated by the agriculture, waste and energy sectors. A breakdown of the sectoral emissions for 2001 (Figure 2) demonstrates that the main contributors are:

• enteric fermentation (39%);

• manure management (14%); and

• solid waste disposal on land (25%).

Figure 1 Changes in methane emissions for the EU15 (after EEA, 2003b)

11 All submissions are available at: http://unfccc.int/national_reports/items/1408.php. Accessed November 2004.

Final Report 4


May 2005

13636

Figure 2 Sectoral breakdown of EU15 methane emissions for 2001 (after EEA, 2003b)

Table 1 provides an indication of the uncertainty associated with these estimates, as reported by EU15 Member States. Where estimated, the uncertainty surrounding emission estimates appears to vary between 20% and 50%.

Table 1 Uncertainty in estimates of methane emissions as reported by EU15 Member States to the UNFCCC (after EEA, 2003b)

Country Data source Basis of uncertainty estimate

Uncertainty associated with emissions estimates for CH4

Austria Federal Environment Agency – Austria (2001)

Uncertainty analysis including systematic and random uncertainty for 1990 and 1997

48% for 1990 emissions estimates


Denmark National Environmental Research Institute (2002)

Assumption made in second national communication

Factor of 2

Finland Ministry of the Environment (2002)

Monte Carlo simulation (IPCC Tier 2 method)

-19/+20%

Final Report 5


May 2005

13636

Country Data source Basis of uncertainty estimate

Uncertainty associated with emissions estimates for CH4

Germany Bericht (2002) Statement within national communication

Uncertainties are ‘considerable’, mainly due to uncertainties of activity data and emission factors, and to a lesser extent a lack of information on ‘emission-causing’ activities. In general, uncertainty on combustion emissions is much lower than non-combustion emissions. Uncertainties are also estimated to be higher for emissions after 1999 because they should be considered as preliminary estimates.

Ireland Environmental Protection Agency (2002)

Tier 1 method provided by the IPCC (2000)

Overall uncertainty of 11% in the 2000 inventory, with uncertainty of CO2 and CH4 alone estimated at 4%.

Netherlands Olivier et al. (2002)

Tier 1 method provided by the IPCC (2000)

±25% for 2000 emissions estimates

±7% for the trend 1990-2000 emissions

Sweden Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (2003)

Assumptions made in the national communications

Factor of 2

United Kingdom

National Environmental Technology Centre (2003)

Monte Carlo simulation (IPCC Tier 2 method)


Figure 3 demonstrates the global variation in sources of methane emissions, comparing the EU25 with Europe and the World.

Figure 3 Sources of methane emissions in 1990 (Klaassen et al., 2004)

Final Report 6


May 2005

13636

2.2 Emissions Projections

2.2.1 EU15 estimates submitted to the UNFCCC Measures projected to reduce methane emissions are reported for the European Community as a whole in the Third Communication to the UNFCCC (Table 2) (EC, 2001). The impacts of these measures on emissions in 2010 are presented in Table 3.

From Table 3, it is evident that the main source sectors in the future will be agriculture and waste. The EC (2001) reports that the two main sources of methane emissions in agriculture are enteric fermentation and manure management, which are largely dependent on livestock numbers. Projections of livestock numbers were therefore used to estimate future agricultural emissions. These livestock projections take account of the CAP reform adopted in the framework of Agenda 200012, but do not account for the CAP reform agreement of 2003 (Section 3.2.2).

For waste, the projections in Table 3 reflect emissions ‘with existing EU measures’, but not including measures taken at the Member State level. A ‘no action’ baseline was calculated assuming that waste generation per capita, the proportion of waste disposed of in landfills and the landfill gas recovery rates remain constant. The requirements of the Landfill Directive13 were then factored in. The projections are at a Member State level to allow for the different rate of compliance required by the Directive. The EC (2001) states that estimates of landfill emissions generally have a fairly high level of uncertainty, mainly owing to the complex emissions mechanism. Furthermore, accurate waste statistics can be difficult to collect and an improvement in the collection of statistics often reveals that previous figures were underestimates (EC, 2001).

12 http://europa.eu.int/comm/agenda2000/index_en.htm

13 That the proportion of biodegradable waste disposed to landfill is decreased and that landfill gas recovery rates are increased.

Final Report 7


May 2005

13636

Table 2 Measures reported to the UNFCCC in 2001 for reducing methane emissions across the EU15 (EC, 2001)

Sector Policy measure Objective Type of instrument Status Implementing entity

Energy Encouragement of energy industry reduction of methane

To encourage the continued effort to reduce emissions of methane from pipeline infrastructure and to promote methane capture from closed mines

Voluntary agreement To be launched EU/Member States

Industry Framework guidelines for good practice

Framework for voluntary agreements at an EU level

Promote as part of appropriate mix of policy instruments and best practice

Voluntary agreements Proposed Guidelines 2002

Directive 2003

EU, industry, Member States

Industry IPPC Directive Integration of pollution issues into permits for plant operation Regulation Implemented EU/Member States

Industry Policy action – voluntary agreements Recovery rates for waste packaging Framework EU/Member States

Industry Policy action – EMAS Environmental auditing Voluntary agreement Implemented EU/Member States

Agriculture CAP (market policies) Sustainable agriculture Regulation Implemented EC

Agriculture CAP (rural development policy) Sustainable agriculture Regulation Implemented Member States

Waste management Landfill Directive Amount of waste to landfills, recovery of landfill gas Regulation To be implemented by Member States 2000/1

Member States

Waste management Directive on Waste Packaging Recovery rates for waste packaging Regulation Implemented/revision planned Member States

Waste management Directive on End-of-Life Vehicles Acceptance of used vehicles and recovery by their producers Regulation Implemented Member States

Waste management Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)

Recovery of WEEE Regulation Planned Member States

Waste management Revision of Sewage Sludge Directive Re-direct the use of sewage sludge Regulation Planned Member States

Final Report 8


May 2005

13636

Table 3 ‘With measures’ projections of methane emissions for EU15 (EC, 2001)

Sector Emissions in base year (MtCO2eq.)

2010 Emissions (MtCO2eq.)

Changes due to…

Energy supply 12 12

Fossil fuel extraction 95 60.5 Decreasing coal production

Industry 0 0.4

Transport 5 3

Agriculture 194 178 Decreasing animal numbers due to changes in productivity and changes in agricultural policy

Waste 155 126 Landfill Directive

Total 462 380

2.2.2 EU25 preliminary estimates from RAINS The RAINS14 model developed by IIASA15 is an integrated assessment model combining information on economic and energy development, emission control potentials and costs, atmospheric dispersion characteristics and environmental sensitivities towards air pollution. The model considers threats to human health posed by fine particulates and tropospheric ozone as well as risk of ecosystems damage from acidification, excess nitrogen deposition (eutrophication) and exposure to elevated ambient levels of ozone. These are considered in a multi-pollutant context quantifying the contributions of sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), ammonia (NH3), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and primary emissions of fine (PM2.5) and coarse (PM10-PM2.5) particles (Schöpp et al., 1999).

Building on previous work under the CAFE programme, IIASA has begun to extend the RAINS model to include emissions of greenhouse gases (Klaassen et al., 2004). The emphasis of the envisaged tool is on identifying synergistic effects between the control of air pollution and the emissions of greenhouse gases. It is not yet proposed to extend the RAINS model towards modelling the climate system.

The RAINS projections are based on the activity data and emission factors presented in Table 4, which also demonstrates the interaction with other gases for each of the major methane sources and the potential control options. From the baseline projections, IIASA then goes on to estimate emissions for 1990, 2000 and 2020. The preliminary results for Europe as a whole (except Cyprus, Malta and the European part of Russia) indicate that under current legislation, methane emissions in 2020 will be 18% lower than in 1990, with a maximum technically feasible reduction (MTFR) in 2020 accounting for 43% of the 1990 emissions (Figure 4 and Figure 5).

14 Regional Air Pollution Information and Simulation

15 International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Final Report 9


May 2005

13636

Table 4 Information used within the preliminary RAINS estimates (Klaassen et al., 2004)

Activity Emission factors Sector Sub-sector

Determined by…

Source Determined by… Source

Potential abatement measures Interactions with other gases

Agriculture Enteric fermentation

Animal numbers RAINS-Europe database and FAO (2002)

Digestive system – degree of fermentation determines methane emissions. Ruminants (cattle, goats, sheep) have highest emissions, followed by pseudo ruminants (horses) and monogastric animals (pigs).

Level of feed intake

Brink et al. (2002), based on Houghton et al. (1997)

Improved feed conversion efficiency, e.g. through replacement of roughage by concentrates, change to high fat diet, increase feed intake, use of non-structural carbohydrates (10% removal efficiency; expected implementation rate of 50% in 2010)

Include propionate precursors (25% removal efficiency for dairy cows and 10% for non-dairy; expected implementation rate of 50% in 2010)

Manure management

Animal numbers RAINS-Europe database and FAO (2002)

Temperature has an important influence on manure management, emission factors differ for cool (< 15°C), temperate (15-25°C) and warm (> 25°C) annual mean temperatures.

Brink et al. (2002), based on Houghton et al. (1997)

Housing adaptation and complete emptying of stable cellar (10% removal efficiency; expected implementation rate of 50% in 2010). This is already included in the RAINS NH3 module.

Controlled fermentation of manure (50/75% removal efficiency depending on type of digestion; expected implementation rate of 50% in 2010)

During treatment of manure nitrous oxide (N2O) and NH3 are also emitted

Rice cultivation

Area rice fields FAO (2002) Season, soil type, soil texture, use of organic matter and fertiliser, climate, soil and paddy characteristics and agricultural practices. Thus, country specific factors are used.

Country-specific, based on Houghton et al. (1997)

Alternative rice strains (25% removal efficiency; no information to date on expected implementation rate)

Final Report 10


May 2005

13636


Determined by…



Waste Solid Municipal solid waste disposal

Houghton et al. (1997)

Per-capita emission factors for the total population - the estimated degradable organic carbon content of the waste is used to gauge the methane generation potential, assuming that all methane is released in the same year as the waste is land filled.

Country-specific, based on Houghton et al. (1997)

Paper recycling (24% removal efficiency; 100% application potential)

Waste diversion, e.g. composting, incineration, anaerobic digestion, etc. (100% removal efficiency; 100% application potential)

Methane recovery and use (100% removal efficiency; 80% application potential)

Landfill capping (100% removal efficiency; 20% application potential)

VOCs also emitted during waste disposal

Wastewater Population RAINS database

In European countries the bulk of wastewater is treated aerobically, therefore emissions are simply calculated as a function of population.

Country-specific, based on 1990 values contained in the UNFCCC and EDGAR databases, estimating sewage emissions per head

Integrated sewage system (involves aerobic degradation step) (90% removal efficiency)

When wastewater is discharged, N2O emissions are also released.

Industry Coal production

Amount of coal mined

RAINS database

RAINS uses country-specific emission factors, taking into account the fraction of underground mining in each country and applying the appropriate emission factors for underground and surface mining as well as post-mining activities.

Using coal production structures as documented in Olivier et al. (1996) to weight IPCC emission factors given in Houghton et al. (1997)

Upgrade or new installation with 80% recovery

Gas production

Amount of gas produced

RAINS database

IPCC guidelines provide different (ranges of) emission factors for Western and Eastern European countries.

Houghton et al. (1997) Increased gas utilisation on offshore platforms (Stage 1) (20% removal efficiency)

More advanced gas utilisation on offshore platforms (Stage 2) (30% removal efficiency)

VOCs also emitted during gas production, distribution and consumption

Final Report 11


May 2005

13636


Determined by…



Amount of gas consumed and produced

RAINS database


Houghton et al. (1997) Inspection and maintenance (4% removal efficiency)

Doubling leak control for pipelines (10% removal efficiency)

Replacement of grey cast iron network (38% removal efficiency)

VOCs also emitted during gas production, distribution and consumption

Oil production Amount of crude oil produced

RAINS database


Houghton et al. (1997) Flaring rather than venting (23% removal efficiency)

Use of associated gas for sale or electricity generation (27% removal efficiency)

VOCs also emitted during oil refining

Biomass Biomass consumption

Amount of biomass burned

RAINS database

RAINS does not include biomass burning for non-energy purposes, e.g., natural forest fires, burning of savannas, etc. One factor used from the IPCC guidelines

Houghton et al. (1997) CO2 emissions associated with residential bio-fuel combustion

Agricultural waste burning

Amount of agricultural waste burned

RAINS database

A global emission factor is used. Masui et al. (2001) Ban on open burning of agricultural or residential waste (100% removal efficiency). This is already included in the RAINS VOC module.

Also causes emissions of PM, NOX and VOCs.

Final Report 12


May 2005

13636

Figure 4 RAINS estimated emissions and projections (after Klaassen et al., 2004)

Figure 5 Comparison of emissions reductions projected to 2020 under current legislation and that under IIASA’s MTFR scenario (after Klaassen et al., 2004)

Final Report 13


May 2005

13636

2.2.3 Global emissions projections The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2001) has estimated global anthropogenic emissions and atmospheric concentrations of methane under a number of different scenarios projected from 2000 to 2100. It is evident from Figure 6 that emissions of methane are expected to increase to 2020 under all scenarios. Beyond 2020, most scenarios predict that this trend will continue. These emissions impact upon atmospheric concentrations as shown in Figure 7, with concentrations increasing to 2020 and then predicted to increase further under all but one scenario16 (the detail of the IPCC scenarios is provided in Appendix A).

Figure 6 Anthropogenic methane emissions (Tg(CH4)/yr) estimated for six SRES Marker-Illustrative scenarios – See Appendix A (after IPCC, 2001)

Figure 7 Atmospheric composition using six SRES Marker-Illustrative scenarios for anthropogenic emissions. Abundances prior to year 2000 are taken from observations, and the IS92a scenario computed with current methodology is shown for reference. All SRES A1-type scenarios have the same emissions for HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 (appearing a A1B), but the HFC-134a abundances vary because the tropospheric OH values differ affecting its lifetime. The IS92a scenario did not include emissions of PFCs and SF6. (IPCC, 2001)

Under current legislation, IIASA estimates that EU25 methane emissions will be approximately 20,000 kt/a in the 2020 (Figure 4). This represents between 4-6% of the projected global anthropogenic emissions in 2020 (IPCC estimates between 350,000 and 450,000 kt in 2020 – Figure 6). If the IIASA MTFR scenario could be achieved in 2020, the EU25 contribution would be reduced to between 3-4%.

IIASA has produced estimates of global anthropogenic emissions of air pollutants and methane up to 2030 (Cofala et al., 2005). Figure 8 depicts projections of global methane emissions under the RAINS current legislation scenario, compared against two IPCC scenarios (SRES A2 and B2) and the global MTFR scenario. Under current legislation, the RAINS model predicts that

16 This is the B1 scenario, which describes a convergent world with the same global population that peaks in mid-century and declines thereafter, with rapid change in economic structures toward a service and information economy, with reductions in material intensity and the introduction of clean and resource-efficient technologies. The emphasis is on global solutions to economic, social and environmental sustainability, including improved equity, but without additional climate initiatives.

Final Report 14


May 2005

13636

emissions in 2030 will be 35% higher than in 2000. However, under the MTFR scenario, global emissions of methane in 2030 would stabilise at around 2000 levels.

Figure 8 Projected development of CH4 emissions by world region (million tons CH4) (Cofala et al., 2005)

2.3 Summary The key points developed in this section are listed below.

• The major emission sources for methane in the EU are enteric fermentation, manure management and solid waste disposal on land.

• Emissions from the energy sector have decreased substantially from 1990 to 2001, whereas emissions from most other sectors have remained unchanged.

• The uncertainty associated with methane emissions estimates made by Member States appears to be ‘considerable’.

• Projections to 2010 indicate that reductions will be made in: fossil fuel extraction, as a result of decreasing coal production; agriculture, through reducing animal numbers as a result of changes in productivity and changes in agricultural policy; and waste, through changes brought about under the Landfill Directive.

• Under current legislation, by 2020, emissions from the EU25 will decrease by approximately 20% from 1990 levels. The maximum ‘feasible’ reduction is indicated by Klaassen et al. (2004) to be 40%.

• Global emissions are projected to increase up to (and beyond) 2020, with corresponding increases in global atmospheric concentrations.

Final Report 15


May 2005

13636

• In 2020, the contribution of the EU25 to these emissions is small (between 4-6% under current legislation and between 3-4% under the maximum technically feasible reduction scenario for Europe).

• Under a global MTFR scenario for methane, emissions in 2030 are predicted to stabilise at 2000 levels.

Final Report 16


May 2005

13636

3. Potential ‘Added Value’ of an Emissions Ceiling for Methane

3.1 The Environmental Impacts of Methane Methane emissions contribute to the following environmental impacts.

3.1.1 Methane as a greenhouse gas Methane (CH4) is an important greenhouse gas (GHG), second only to carbon dioxide (CO2) in tonnes of global anthropogenic emissions per annum (Figure 9). CH4 is also considered a potent GHG because, kilogram for kilogram, CH4 has a global warming potential of between 21 and 23 times that of CO2 over a 100-year time period (US EPA, 2004; EC, 1998).

Figure 9 Proportion of global GHG emissions by species in 2000 (US EPA, 2004)

3.1.2 Role in the formation of tropospheric ozone Depending on the presence of NO and NO2, which act as catalysts, tropospheric ozone can be produced through a series of reactions with methane of which the net result is as follows:

CH4 + 8O2 + 5h� � CO + 4O3 + 2HO� + H2O

The carbon monoxide produced through the methane reaction chain can then itself interact with the hydroxyl radical in the presence of NOX, with the following next result:

CO + 2O2 + h� � CO2 + O3

3.1.3 Health and safety considerations Methane is flammable and may form mixtures with air that are flammable or explosive. It is also violently reactive with oxidizers, halogens, and some halogen compounds.

Final Report 17


May 2005

13636

3.2 Current Policies Affecting Methane Emissions Policies affecting methane emissions can be grouped into:

• climate change policies; and

• indirect policy interventions.

These are discussed below.

3.2.1 Climate change policies

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, 1992) The UNFCCC sets an overall framework for international efforts to address climate change. The text of the Convention was adopted and opened for signature in 1992, entering into force on 21 March 1994. In May 2004, the Convention had received 189 instruments of ratification. Those States that have not signed the Convention may accede to it at any time.

Under the Convention, governments:

• gather and share information on greenhouse gas emissions, national policies and best practices;

• launch national strategies for addressing greenhouse emissions and adapting to expected impacts, including the provision of financial and technological support to developing countries; and

• cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change.

Under the Convention, all Parties must report on the steps they are taking to implement the Convention (Articles 4.1 and 12). Most of the 40 Annex I Parties17 submitted their first ‘national communication’ in 1994 or 1995 and their second in 1997–1998. The third national communications were due on 30 November 2001. By 1 March 2004, UNFCCC secretariat had received 37 communications. The deadline for the next communication is 1 January 2006. Since 1996, Annex I Parties must also submit an annual inventory of their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the secretariat. Separate reporting and review procedures have been established for Annex I GHG inventories.

Kyoto Protocol The Kyoto Protocol was adopted by the UNFCCC in 1997. It shares the Convention’s objective, principles and institutions, but significantly strengthens the Convention by committing Annex I Parties to individual, legally-binding targets to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. Only Parties to the Convention that have also become Parties to the Protocol, however (that is, by ratifying, accepting, approving, or acceding to it), are bound by the Protocol’s commitments, once it comes into force on 16 February 200518. The individual targets for Annex I Parties add up to a total cut in GHG emissions of at least 5% from 1990 levels in the commitment period 17 Which includes the EU

18 Following the receipt of the Russian Federation’s instrument of ratification by the UN Secretary General on 18th November 2004 (UNFCCC, 2004).

Final Report 18


May 2005

13636

2008-2012. Methane is one of the ‘basket of six’ greenhouse gases covered under the Kyoto Protocol19. EU Member States have agreed to reduce GHG emissions overall by 8% from 1990 levels.

Annex I Parties may utilise the following three Kyoto mechanisms as they seek to reduce total GHG emissions:

(i) Joint Implementation (JI): emission reductions which arise from project investments in other Annex I countries;

(ii) Clean Development Mechanism (CDM): emission reductions arising from project investments in developing countries (non-Annex I countries); and

(iii) International Emissions Trading: portions of Annex I countries’ emission allowances can be bought and sold on an international carbon trading market.

These mechanisms are based on the premise that, as the benefit to the global environment is not related to the geographic location at which GHG emission reductions occur, it is better to reduce emissions where the cost is lowest.

The Protocol’s monitoring procedures are based on existing reporting and in-depth review procedures under the Convention, building on experience gained in the climate change process over the past decade. Articles 5, 7 and 8 of the Kyoto Protocol address reporting and review of information by Annex I Parties under the Protocol, as well as national systems and methodologies for the preparation of greenhouse gas inventories.

• Article 5 commits Annex I Parties to having in place, by no later than 2007, national systems for the estimation of greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks (Article 5.1). It also states that, where agreed methodologies (that is, the revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories) are not used to estimate emissions and removals, appropriate ‘adjustments’ should be applied (Article 5.2).

• Article 7 requires Annex I Parties to submit annual greenhouse gas inventories, as well as national communications under the UNFCCC, at regular intervals, both of which should include supplementary information to demonstrate compliance with the Protocol.

• Article 8 establishes that expert review teams will review the inventories, and national communications will be submitted by Annex I Parties.

The greenhouse gas monitoring mechanism Member States have a series of reporting requirements set down in Decision No 280/2004/EC of 11 February 2004 concerning a mechanism for monitoring Community greenhouse gas emissions and for implementing the Kyoto Protocol. This has replaced Council Decision 93/389/EEC as amended by Decision 99/296/EC.

19 The ‘basket’ also includes carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons, (HFCs) perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

Final Report 19


May 2005

13636

Article 2 of Decision 99/296/EC –now replaced by Article 3 Paragraph 2 of Decision No 280/2004/EC - requires Member States to produce, implement and periodically update national programmes for limiting and/or reducing their anthropogenic emissions by sources and enhancing removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol. Both include specific requirements for the reporting of all policies and measures, emissions projections and the assumptions and methodologies used.

3.2.2 Indirect policy interventions The Kyoto Protocol is the only direct policy driver for reducing emissions of methane. Even so, the Protocol requirements are for reductions in the ‘basket of six’ GHG emissions, rather than for methane specifically. However, some policies to reduce emissions of other pollutants can have an impact on methane emissions from common source sectors.

Existing NECD requirements The existing NECD covers emissions of ammonia in Member States. The major source sectors of ammonia are very similar to those for methane, with agriculture accounting for a large proportion of total emissions. As such, it has been noted that a number of the measures proposed as cost-effective abatement techniques for ammonia can have associated impacts on methane emissions (Table 5).

Table 5 Impact of agricultural abatement techniques for ammonia on other emissions (Brink et al., 2002)

Measure Description Impact on ammonia emissions

Impact on methane emissions

Impact on nitrous oxide20 emissions

Livestock housing adaptations

Quick removal of manure from the stable floor to a closed storage system

Decrease of up to 80%


Increase emissions

Covering outdoor storage of manure

Prevents the escape of ammonia during storage. However, depending on the manure type, this could change storage conditions from aerobic to anaerobic which could increase methane emissions


Increase of approximately 10%

Decrease by approximately 10%

Third air quality daughter directive In 1996, the Air Quality Framework Directive (96/62/EC) was adopted. It covers the revision of previously existing legislation and the introduction of new air quality standards for previously unregulated air pollutants, and sets the timetable for the development of ‘daughter directives’ on a range of pollutants (EC, 2004).

The third Daughter Directive (2002/3/EC) was adopted on 12 February 2002 and relates to ozone. The directive sets long-term objectives and target values for ozone in ambient air to be

20 Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a greenhouse gas

Final Report 20


May 2005

13636

attained where possible by 2010. Non-compliance requires Member States to work out reduction plans and programmes to be reported to the Commission and to be made available to the public. In the event of non-compliance, Member States would seek to target ozone precursors, which alongside methane include nitrogen oxides (NOX), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs) and carbon monoxide (CO).

Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform The reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was agreed by the EU Council of Agriculture Ministers on 26 June 2003. The agreement is based on the EC’s proposals set out in January 200321. The CAP reform agreement includes a number of key elements, impacting upon agricultural practice and economic sustainability. The environmental impacts of the proposals have been assessed for the UK (Defra, 2003), so the conclusions may not apply across the EU. This report indicated that the proposals would generally reduce emissions of methane and other GHGs, due to associated reductions in livestock numbers, improvements in manure management and handling, reduced ploughing of grasslands, arable reversion, the planting of energy crops and the planting or natural regeneration of woodland or scrub. However, it did note that the possible intensification and specialisation of livestock production, particularly in the dairy sector, could cause localised increases in GHG emissions.

Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive In essence, the IPPC Directive (96/61/EC) is a means of minimising pollution from various point sources throughout the European Union. All installations covered by Annex I of the Directive are required to obtain an operating permit from the competent authorities in Member States. The permits themselves are based on the concept of Best Available Techniques (BAT), which is defined in Article 2 of the Directive. Methane is one of the emissions to air considered in the issuing of permits.

Waste management legislation The waste sector is a major source of methane. Legislation to reduce land-filling and recover landfill gas will reduce emissions from the sector as a whole, for example:

• Landfill Directive (99/31/EC) aims to reduce the amount of waste to landfills and promotes the recovery of landfill gas;

• Directive on Waste Packaging (94/62/EC) aims to increase recovery rates for waste packaging;

• Directive on End-of-Life Vehicles (2000/53/EC) mandates the acceptance of used vehicles and recovery by their producers;

• Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) (2002/96/EC) legislates on the recovery of WEEE; and

• revision of Sewage Sludge Directive (86/278/EEC) to legislate on the use of sewage sludge.

21 http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/capreform/index_en.htm

Final Report 21


May 2005

13636

Health and safety legislation Regulation of methane emissions with regard to the potential for explosion in the oil and gas industry is contained in Directive 96/82/EC on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (COMAH Directive).

3.3 Potential ‘added value’ of NECs In addition to its impacts on human health and the environment, tropospheric ozone is also a direct greenhouse gas (IPCC, 2001). The main precursors reported to contribute to tropospheric ozone formation are NOX, NMVOCs, CO and CH4 (EEA, 2003a). Emissions of NOX and NMVOCs are already covered by both the existing NECD and the Gothenburg Protocol under the United Nations Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) (UN ECE, 1999). Whilst there are no specific emissions targets for CO, concentrations are regulated under the second air quality daughter Directive (2000/69/EC) under the Air Quality Framework Directive (96/62/EC).

Whilst concentrations of tropospheric ozone are projected to reduce by 2020, many areas are expected to remain above critical levels for human health and the environment (Amann et al., 2004a). As such, further measures are under review. Whilst methane is included in the ‘basket of six’ GHGs under Kyoto, and is also classed as an ozone precursor in relation to targets for ambient ozone concentrations under the third air quality daughter Directive (92/72/EC), there is currently no European Legislation that directly limits the emissions or concentrations of methane alone. As such, this report investigates the feasibility of including methane within the NECD.

3.4 Summary The key points raised in this section are listed below.

• Methane is a greenhouse gas and a precursor for the formation of tropospheric ozone.

• As one of the ‘basket of six’ greenhouse gases, methane emissions are already covered under the Kyoto Protocol.

• Member States must report their emissions to the UNFCCC and to the EC under the greenhouse gas monitoring mechanism.

• A number of indirect policy interventions may already impact upon methane emissions, e.g. NECD, Air Quality Framework Directive, CAP reform, etc.

• An emissions ceiling could provide ‘added value’, if implemented with the primary objective of reducing ground level ozone as emissions of methane are not directly controlled under EU legislation, unlike the other ozone precursors of NOX, VOCs and CO.

Final Report 22


May 2005

13636

4. Geographical Scales for Control

As presented in Section 3.1, the main environmental impacts of methane are its contributions to global warming and the formation of tropospheric ozone. The relevance of geographical scale is therefore explored for each of these impacts separately.

4.1 Combating Climate Change With regard to global warming, international policy measures are founded on the premise that the geographical location at which emissions reductions are made is not important to the overall environmental impact, because the problem is ‘global’22. As such, a national emissions ceiling for methane that was introduced primarily to combat climate change would be sufficiently geographically focussed to maximise environmental impacts, whilst providing Member States with the flexibility of introducing abatement measures in the most cost-effective manner.

4.2 Reducing the Formation of Ozone The formation of ozone occurs on various temporal and spatial scales: on the local scale as in urban areas, on the regional scale as is demonstrated by the photochemical episodes in Central and Northwest Europe and on the hemispheric/global scale. Whereas highly reactive VOCs are important ozone precursors on the local scale and NOX has a more regional impact, methane, although less reactive, is relatively long-lived in the atmosphere and therefore contributes more to ozone formation on the regional/ hemispheric/global scale, contributing to the ‘background’ level of ozone formation upon which episodes formed by more reactive VOCs are superimposed (Keating, 2004; Fiore et al., 2002; EEA, 1999; Rabl and Eyre, 1998).

Although both VOCs and NOX are currently covered under the NECD, modelling predicts that tropospheric ozone will remain a problem for human health and the environment beyond 2020 (Amann et al., 2004a). This is partly due to the increasing levels of ‘background ozone’ which are projected to increase in significance as regional precursor emissions are reduced (Figure 10).

22 Hence the promotion in the Kyoto Protocol of JIs and CDMs in locations other than the original Annex 1 country.

Final Report 23


May 2005

13636

Figure 10 Increase in background ozone ‘Current legislation’ scenario, 2000-2030 (ppbv) (Amann et al., 2004b)

Recent modelling results suggest that the global background of tropospheric ozone can be best reduced through the control of emissions of methane, in addition to control of NOX (Fiore et al., 2002). As such, in order to reduce ozone concentrations in Europe, Member States may have to reduce their contributions to the hemispherical background concentrations.

However, it is important to note the relatively low projected contributions of EU25 emissions to total global emissions of methane, as highlighted in Sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3. The importance of multi-national collaboration is stressed by Keating et al. (2004) in stating that “[i]n some cases, the emissions to control abroad may be different than the relevant domestic emissions – for ozone, it is most important to reduce domestic emissions of VOC or NOX, while controlling foreign emissions of methane may be more important. If it is shown that the cost-effectiveness, expressed as cost per unit reduction in domestic concentration, is comparable for domestic and international controls, then the motivation for investment in international controls will increase substantially.”

West and Fiore (2005: 3) estimated that a 50% reduction in anthropogenic methane emissions would decrease surface ozone by 1-6 ppb globally (Figure 11). Over land, typical ozone reductions were predicted to be 3-4 ppb, “with the largest reductions often in populated regions of the northern mid-lattitudes”. However, as West and Fiore (2005) note, methane controls will

Final Report 24


May 2005

13636

achieve the ozone reductions in Figure 11 gradually due to the perturbation lifetime of methane, with 60% of estimated reductions being realised in 10 years and around 80% in 20 years23.

Figure 11 Global change in mean summer (June-July-August) afternoon (1300 to 1700 local time) surface ozone (ppb) ultimately achieved when anthropogenic methane emissions are decreased by 50% in the GEOS-CHEM tropospheric chemistry model (driven by assimilated meteorology from NASA GEOS-1 at 4°x5° horizontal resolution) (West and Fiore, 2005).

A report by Dentener et al. (2004) considers the impacts on ozone formation and radiative forcing of implementing the global MTFR scenario for methane emissions (emissions are depicted in Figure 8). The results, presented in Figure 11, predict that the MTFR-methane scenario would result in a uniform ozone reduction of around 1-2 ppbv throughout most of the northern and southern hemispheres. This accounts for around one third of the total ozone reductions associated with the MTFR scenario for all pollutants.

23 This is in contrast to NOX and NMVOC controls that reduce ozone rapidly, with benefits largely concentrated near to the emission reductions (West and Fiore, 2005).

Final Report 25


May 2005

13636

Figure 12 Decadal annual averaged ozone volume mixing ratio differences (ppbv). Illustrates the impact on background ozone concentrations following MTFR methane emission reductions compared to the current legislation scenario, during the 2020s (Dentener et al., 2004).

Dentener et al. (2004) also found that under the MTFR scenario, in 2030, radiative forcing would reduce by 0.235-0.311 Wm-2 compared to the current legislation case as a result of reduced methane concentrations and the associated lower ozone burden. For comparison, the radiative forcing from increased CO2 emissions alone corresponding to the IPCC SRES scenarios (Section 2.2.3) is estimated to be 0.8-1.1 Wm-2 for the period 2000-2030.

Given the results of this modelling, Dentener et al. (2004) conclude that the cost-effectiveness of hemispheric or global methane controls should be further analysed. Particularly given the dual benefits of reduced ozone formation and reduced radiative forcing.

4.3 Modelling the Impacts and Calculating Ceilings Preliminary investigations have found that whilst methane is currently included in the EMEP ozone model, it is not possible to determine the impact on ozone concentrations of reducing methane emissions beyond the climate change targets without running additional model scenarios.

Furthermore, there may be some limitations of current models with regards to practically developing emission ceilings for methane within the format of the RAINS model. This reflects the fact that methane has an atmospheric lifetime of 12 years, whereas the RAINS model source data in based on annual meteorologies.

Further investigations will be required by EMEP and IIASA to understand the implications of modelling methane within the integrated assessment modelling framework. IIASA has already begun to look at this issue through the extension of the RAINS model to include greenhouse gases (Klaassen et al., 2004).

4.4 Summary The key points developed in this section are listed below.

Final Report 26


May 2005

13636

• Methane, although less reactive, is relatively long-lived in the atmosphere and therefore leads to ozone formation on the regional/ hemispheric/global scale, contributing to the ‘background’ level of ozone formation upon which episodes formed by more reactive VOCs are superimposed.

• This preliminary assessment indicates that the influence of methane on both the climate change and the formation of tropospheric ozone are at a hemispheric or global scale. This indicates that the geographical location of emissions reductions within any given Member State would not have an impact on the potential environmental benefits.

• Modelling predicts that the MTFR-methane scenario would result in a uniform ozone reduction of around 1-2 ppbv throughout most of the northern and southern hemispheres. This would account for around one third of the total ozone reductions associated with the MTFR scenario for all pollutants. Furthermore, under the MTFR scenario in 2030, radiative forcing would reduce by 0.235-0.311 Wm-2 compared to the current legislation case as a result of reduced methane concentrations and the associated lower ozone burden.

• Given the dual benefits of reduced ozone formation and reduced radiative forcing, the cost-effectiveness of hemispheric or global methane controls should be further analysed.

• Additionally, the frameworks for modelling of methane should be further investigated with EMEP and IIASA, in order to understand the potential for the practical development of emission ceilings for methane.

Final Report 27


May 2005

13636

5. A NEC for Methane in the Context of Current and Future Reporting Requirements

5.1 Current Reporting Requirements As highlighted in Section 3.2, the reporting of methane emissions is currently required under the EC’s greenhouse gas monitoring mechanism, as well as annual submissions to the UNFCCC and within the Kyoto Protocol as one of the ‘basket of six’. The following sections outline these requirements.

5.1.1 The EC’s greenhouse gas monitoring mechanism24 Under the mechanism for monitoring Community greenhouse gas emission and for implementing the Kyoto Protocol, Member States annually report anthropogenic emissions by source of the ‘basket of six’ greenhouse gases for the year before last. They must also provide information on the removals of carbon dioxide by sinks resulting from land-use, land-use change and forestry.

For the assessment of year on year progress, they must also report any changes to this information and the national inventory system. They must also include:

• information with regard to the accounting of emissions and removals from land-use, land-use change and forestry, for the years between 1990 and the year before last

• a description of the methodologies and data sources used;

• quality assurance/quality control plans;

• an evaluation of uncertainty; and

• an assessment of completeness and information on recalculations performed.

For the assessment of projected progress, national policies and measures which limit greenhouse gas emissions by sources should be presented on a sectoral basis, including information on:

• the objective of the policies and measures

• the type of policy instrument

• the status of implementation of the policy or measure

• indicators to monitor and evaluate progress with policies and measures over time

24 EC DECISION No 280/2004/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 February 2004 concerning a mechanism for monitoring Community greenhouse gas emissions and for implementing the Kyoto Protocol

Final Report 28


May 2005

13636

• the quantitative estimates of the effect of policies or measures on emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases between the base year and subsequent years, including their economic impacts to the extent feasible

• the extent to which domestic action actually constitutes a significant element of the efforts undertaken at national level as well as the extent to which the use of joint implementation and the clean development mechanism and international emissions trading is actually supplemental to domestic actions.

National projections of emissions organised by sector, for at least the years 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020 should be reported, including ‘with measures’ and ‘with additional measures’ projections. The policies and measures included in the projections should be clearly identified, a sensitivity analysis performed, and a clear description of methodologies, models, assumptions and key input and output parameters incorporated. Compliance and enforcement procedures implemented or arranged should be described

5.1.2 Annual submissions to the UNFCCC25 The UNFCCC reporting guidelines on annual inventories cover the estimation and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions. Annex I Parties should use the IPCC Guidelines to estimate and report anthropogenic emissions, disaggregated emissions and potential emissions, clearly indicating key sources and their cumulative percentage contributions.

An annual inventory submission shall consist of a national inventory report (NIR) and the common report format (CRF) tables Emissions should also be expressed in terms of CO2 equivalents using the methods provided in the IPCC good practice guidance. Annex I Parties should use their own national emission factors and activity data, where available, provided that they are developed in a manner consistent with the IPCC good practice guidance, are considered to be more accurate, and reported transparently. The updated default activity data or emission factors provided in the IPCC good practice guidance should be used, where available, if Annex I Parties choose to use default factors or data due to lack of country specific information.

The year 1990 should be the base year for the estimation and reporting of inventories, with the exception of some countries that are undergoing the process of transition to a market economy are allowed to use a base year or a period of years other than 1990. In accordance with the IPCC Guidelines, international aviation and marine bunker fuel emissions should not be included in national totals but should be reported separately.

The national inventory report should include information on methodologies, assumptions, uncertainties, emission factors and activity data, as well as the rationale for their selection. Background data used to estimate emissions from the land-use change and forestry sector should be provided. Information on any recalculations relating to previously submitted inventory data should be reported including a description of any changes in methodologies, sources and assumptions, clearly indicating the reason for the changes. Information on quality assurance/quality control should be reported, and where methodological or data gaps in inventories exist, information on these gaps should be presented. 25 UNFCCC REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMITMENTS AND OF OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE CONVENTION NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS: GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES FROM PARTIES INCLUDED IN ANNEX I TO THE CONVENTION: UNFCCC guidelines on reporting and review

Final Report 29


May 2005

13636

5.1.3 Further Reporting Requirements to Implement a NEC for Methane Given the substantial reporting requirements already in place for methane under the UNFCCC and the EC’s GHG monitoring mechanism, no further requirements are perceived to be necessary to implement a NEC for methane.

5.2 Future Developments Whilst the current phase of the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) considers only CO2, the Commission has the opportunity to expand the scope of the scheme during the second phase (after 2007) to include other greenhouse gases, such as methane.

5.3 Summary The fact that methane is an important contributor to both climate change and the formation of tropospheric ozone cannot be overlooked as policies are developed in the future. Incentives to reduce methane emissions are already in place within climate change policies with the potential to increase their scope in the future. Any further policy measures implemented to reduce the formation of tropospheric ozone, such as the inclusion of methane within the NECD, would need to take account of the projected reductions under current and planned climate change policies.

The IIASA projections for the EU25 (Figure 4 and Figure 5), coupled with global projections from the IPCC (Figure 6) suggest that by 2020, current legislation will reduce emissions of methane to 20,000 kt, around 5% of projected global methane emissions. If IIASA’s maximum technically feasible reduction could be achieved, this percentage would drop to 3-4%. This indicates that action is required at a global level, in order to have a significant impact on methane emissions and the subsequent impacts on both climate change and tropospheric ozone formation.

Cofala et al. (2005) predict that a global MTFR could stabilise methane concentrations in the atmosphere at 2000 levels (Figure 8). Follow-on modelling by Dentener et al. (2004) indicates that this global MTFR for methane emissions could result in a uniform ozone reduction of around 1-2 ppbv throughout most of the northern and southern hemispheres. This accounts for around one third of the total ozone reductions associated with the MTFR scenario for all pollutants. Furthermore, the modelling predicts that under the MTFR in 2030, radiative forcing would reduce by 0.235-0.311 Wm-2 compared to the current legislation case as a result of reduced methane concentrations and the associated lower ozone burden.

It is therefore clear that the dual benefits of reduced ozone formation and reduced radiative forcing should prompt further investigation into the cost-effectiveness of hemispheric or global methane controls26. From a European perspective, it would be prudent to further investigate the impact that methane emissions from Member States have on the formation of tropospheric

26 An initial analysis by West and Fiore (2005), which excludes ozone-induced premature mortality, indicates that by 2010, around 10% of global anthropogenic methane emissions can be reduced at a net cost saving (reflecting the value of recovered natural gas), which could reduce ozone by 0.4-0.7 ppb, with double that potential for less than €10 per tonne CO2 equivalent, which is defined by West and Fiore (2005) as the cost of a modest climate abatement strategy. See Appendix B for further information.

Final Report 30


May 2005

13636

ozone within the European area. As part of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Dentener et al. (2004) are planning to conduct a multi-modal experiment to further investigate the expected range of surface ozone concentrations under the MTFR scenarios. This research should therefore be followed closely.

The inclusion of methane within the NEC Directive would focus Member State attention on methane and could therefore be a means by which Europe can move towards the MTFR scenario. However, a decision for the inclusion of methane within the NECD should be made on the basis of further research, to understand the absolute and relative significance of European methane emissions to ozone formation, and also to allow for the development of modelling mechanisms through which ceilings can be calculated.

Final Report 31


May 2005

13636

6. Summary of Key Points

• Methane is a greenhouse gas and a precursor for the formation of tropospheric ozone. The major emissions sources for methane in the EU are enteric fermentation, manure management and solid waste disposal on land. Emissions from the energy sector have decreased substantially from 1990 to 2001, whereas emissions from most other sectors have remained unchanged. The uncertainty associated with methane emissions estimates made by Member States appears to be ‘considerable’.

• Projections to 2010 indicate that reductions will be made in: fossil fuel extraction, as a result of decreasing coal production; agriculture, through reducing animal numbers as a result of changes in productivity and changes in agricultural policy; and waste, through changes brought about under the Landfill Directive.

• Under current legislation, by 2020, emissions from the EU25 will decrease by approximately 20% from 1990 levels. The maximum ‘feasible’ reduction for the EU25 is indicated by Klaassen et al. (2004) to be 40%. At the same time, global emissions are projected to increase up to (and beyond) 2020, with corresponding increases in global atmospheric concentrations. By 2020, current legislation is expected to reduce EU25 emissions of methane to around 5% global methane emissions. If IIASA’s maximum technically feasible reduction could be achieved, this percentage would drop to 3-4%. However, under a global MTFR scenario for methane, emissions in 2030 could stabilise at 2000 levels.

• Methane, although less reactive, is relatively long-lived in the atmosphere and therefore leads to ozone formation on the regional/ hemispheric/global scale, contributing to the ‘background’ level of ozone formation upon which episodes formed by more reactive VOCs are superimposed. This background ozone concentration is projected to increase in importance in the future, as current legislation targets NOX and VOCs.

• This preliminary assessment indicates that the influence of methane on both climate change and the formation of tropospheric ozone are at a hemispheric or global scale. This indicates that the geographical location of emissions reductions within any given Member State would not have an impact on the potential environmental benefits.

• Modelling predicts that the MTFR-methane scenario would result in a uniform ozone reduction of around 1-2 ppbv throughout most of the northern and southern hemispheres. This would account for around one third of the total ozone reductions associated with the MTFR scenario for all pollutants. Furthermore, under the MTFR scenario in 2030, radiative forcing would reduce by 0.235-0.311 Wm-2 compared to the current legislation case as a result of reduced methane concentrations and the associated lower ozone burden.

• Given the dual benefits of reduced ozone formation and reduced radiative forcing, the cost-effectiveness of hemispheric or global methane controls should be further analysed. Additionally, the frameworks for modelling of methane should be further

Final Report 32


May 2005

13636

investigated with EMEP and IIASA, in order to understand the potential for the practical development of emission ceilings for methane.

• If emission ceilings were to be implemented, no further reporting requirements would be necessary, given the substantial reporting requirements already in place for methane under the UNFCCC and the EC’s GHG monitoring mechanism. However, further investigations will be required by EMEP and IIASA to understand the implications of modelling methane within the integrated assessment modelling framework, in order to establish cost-effective emission ceilings. Furthermore, the relatively small contribution made by Member States to the total global emissions of methane, coupled with the projected reductions under climate change policies, suggests that a global response is required.

• The Commission should closely follow progress in climate change policy, relating to methane, in order that impacts on tropospheric ozone formation may be considered during future policy development.

• The inclusion of methane within the NEC Directive would focus Member State attention on methane and could therefore be a means by which Europe can move towards the MTFR scenario. However, a decision for the inclusion of methane within the NECD should be made on the basis of further research, to understand the absolute and relative significance of European methane emissions to ozone formation, and also to allow for the development of modelling mechanisms through which ceilings can be calculated.

Final Report 33


May 2005

13636

7. References

Amann, M., Bertok, I., Cofala, J., Gyarfas, F., Heyes, C., Klimont, Z., Schöpp, W. and Winiwarter, W. (2004a) Baseline Scenarios for the Clean Air for Europe (CAFE) Programme. Final Report. October 2004. Available online at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/rains/CAFE_files/Cafe-Lot1_FINAL(Oct).pdf. Accessed January 2005.

Amann, M., Bertok, I., Cofala, J., Gyarfas, F., Heyes, C., Klimont, Z., Kupianinen, K., Winiwarter, W. and Schöpp, W. (2004b) Baseline projections of European air quality up to 2020. Presented at the Workshop on Review and Assessment of European Air Pollution Policies. Gothenburg, 25-27 October 2004. Available online at: http://asta.ivl.se/WORKSHOP_OKTOBER_2004.htm. Accessed November 2004.

Bericht (2001) der Bundesrepublik Deutschland über ein System zur Beobachtung der Emissionen von CO2 und anderen Treibhausgasen entsprechend der Ratsentscheidung 1999/296/EG

Brink, C., van Ierland, E., Hordijk, L. and Kroeze, C. (2002) Cost-effective emission abatement in European agriculture in the presence of interrelations. Published online at: http://www.sls.wageningen-ur.nl/enr/staff/brink/Publications/C-Eff%20abatement%20ipo%20interrelations%20-%20Brink%202002.pdf. Accessed November 2004.

Cofala, J., Amann, M. and Mechler, R. (2005) Scenarios of World Anthropogenic Emissions of Air Pollutants and Methane up to 2030. Published online at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/rains/global_emiss/Global%20emissions%20of%20air%20pollutants%20.pdf. Accessed May 2005.

Dentener, F., Stevenson, D., Cofala, J., Mechler, R., Amann, M., Bergamaschi, P., Raes, F. and Derwent, D. (2004) The impacts of air pollutant and methane emission controls on tropospheric ozone and radiative forcing: CTM calculations for the period 1990-2030. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions, 4, 1-68. Accessed online at: http://www.copernicus.org/EGU/acp/acpd/4/8471/acpd-4-8471_p.pdf. May 2005.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) (2003) The potential impacts of the CAP reform agreement. Final Report for Defra, by GFA-RACE Partners Limited in association with IEEP. December 2003. Published online at: http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/reports/capreform3/finalrep.pdf. Accessed November 2004.

Environmental Protection Agency (2002). Ireland — National inventory report 2002. Greenhouse gas emissions 1990–2000 reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Wexford, Ireland

European Commission (EC) (2004) Ambient air quality – information available online at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/air/ambient.htm. Accessed November 2004.

European Commission (EC) (2001) Commission Staff Working Paper: Third Communication from the European Community under the UN Framework Convention On Climate Change. Brussels, 20.12.2001 SEC (2001) 2053. 30 November 2001.

Final Report 34


May 2005

13636

European Commission (EC) (1998) Options to reduce methane emissions. Final report produced for DGXI. November 1998.

European Environment Agency (EEA) (2003a) Fact sheet AP5b – EEA31 emissions of ozone precursors. Published online at: http://themes.eea.eu.int/Specific_media/air/indicators/ozone_precursors,2003/ap5b_emiss_TOFP_FnlDrft_2003.pdf. Accessed November 2004.

European Environment Agency (EEA) (2003b) Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990-2001 and inventory report 2003. Submission to the UNFCCC secretariat. Published online at: http://reports.eea.eu.int/technical_report_2003_95/en/tab_content_RLR. Accessed November 2004.

European Environment Agency (EEA) (1999) Air pollution by ozone in the Europe in 1997 and summer 1998 - Part I. Published online at: http://reports.eea.eu.int/C1I92-9167-123-1/en/page008.html. Accessed November 2004.

Federal Environment Agency — Austria (2001). Austria’s national inventory report 2001, Submission under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 2001. Vienna, July 2001

Fiore, A., Jacob, D. J. and Field, B. D. (2002) Linking ozone pollution and climate change: The case for controlling methane. Geophysical Research Letters, 29 (19): 25-1.

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) (2002). World Agriculture: towards 2015/2030. Summary report. Rome. Published online at: http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/docrep/004/y3557e/y3557e00.htm. Accessed November 2004.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2001) Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Available online at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/142.htm. Accessed January 2005.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2000). Good practice guidance and uncertainty management in national greenhouse gas inventories

Houghton, T., L.G. Meira Filho, B. Lim, K. Tréanton, I. Mamaty, Y. Bonduki, D.J. Griggs and B.A. Callander (eds.)(1997). Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Vol. 3: Greenhouse Gas Inventory Reference Manual. Paris, IPCC/OECD/IEA.

Keating, T. J., West, J. J. and Farrell, A. E. (2004) Prospects for international management of intercontinental air pollution transport. In A. Stohl (Ed.) (2004) Intercontinental Transport of Air Pollution (The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, vol. 4, Part G). Springer-Verlag, Berlin. p. 295-320.

Klaassen, G., Amann, M., Berglund, C., Cofala, J., Höglund-Isaksson, L., Heyes, C., Mechler, R., Tohka, A., Schöpp, W. and Winiwarter, W. (2004) The extension of the RAINS model to greenhouse gases. IIASA Interim Report IR-04-015. April 2004. Published online at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/rains/reports/ir-04-015.pdf. Accessed November 2004.

Masui, T., Y. Matsuoka and T. Morita (2001). Development of Land Use Model for IPCC New Emission Scenarios (SRES). Present and Future of Modeling Global Environmental Change: Toward Integrated Modeling. T. Matsuno and H. Kida, Terrapub: 441-448.

Final Report 35


May 2005

13636

Ministry of the Environment (2002). Finland’s national inventory report on greenhouse gases to the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change. Common reporting formats (CRF): 1990–2000. Summary. Helsinki, 22 March 2002

National Environmental Research Institute (2002). Denmark’s national inventory report. Submitted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 1990–2000. Ministry of the Environment and Energy, April 2002

National Environmental Technology Centre (2003). UK greenhouse gas inventory,1990 to 2001. Annual report for submission under the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Final draft, March 2003

Olivier, J.G.J., Brandes, L.J. and Coenen, P.W.H.G. (2002). Greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands 1990–2001: National inventory report 2003. EU summary report 1990–2001. RIVM report 773201 007, December 2002

Olivier, J.G.J., A.F. Bouwman, C.W.M. van der Maas, J.J.M. Berdowski, C. Veldt, J.P.J. Bloos, A.J.H. Visschedijk, P.Y.J. Zandveld and J.L. Haverlag (1996). Description of EDGAR Version 2.0: A set of global emission inventories of greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances for all anthropogenic and most natural sources on a per country basis and on 1ox1o grid. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) report no. 771060 002 / TNO-MEP report no. R96/119.

Rabl, A. and Eyre, N. (1998) An Estimate of Regional and Global O3 Damage from Precursor NOX and VOC Emissions. Environment International, 24(8), 835-850. Published online at: http://www-cenerg.ensmp.fr/francais/themes/impact/pdf/O3(Rabl&Eyre1998).pdf. Accessed November 2004.

Schöpp, W., Amann, M., Cofala, J., Heyes, Ch., Klimont, Z. (1999) Integrated assessment of European air pollution emission control strategies. Environmental Modelling & Software 14, 1-9.

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (2003). Sweden’s national inventory report 2003 — submitted under the United Nations Convention on Climate Change, April 2003

UN ECE (1999) Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution to abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone, United Nations, ECE/EB.AIR/72.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2004) Press release: Kyoto Protocol to enter into force 16 February 2005. Published online at: http://unfccc.int/files/press/news_room/press_releases_and_advisories/application/pdf/press041118_eng.pdf. Accessed November 2004.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (1992) Text of the convention.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (2005) Personal communication. 19th May 2005.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (2004) Fact sheet: The significance of methane and US activities to reduce methane emissions. Methane to Markets Partnership. Published online at: www.epa.gov/methanetomarkets. Accessed November 2004.

Final Report 36


May 2005

13636

West, J. J. and Fiore, A. M. (2005) Management of tropospheric ozone by reducing methane emissions. Environmental Science and Technology, In Press.

Wuebbles, D. J. and Hayhoe, K. (2001) Atmospheric methane and global change. Earth Science Reviews, 57: 177-210. Published online at: http://www.eng.fsu.edu/~abichou/Links/CH4%20Oxidation%20Lit/Atmospheric%20methane%20and%20global%20change.pdf. Accessed November 2004.

Final Report


May 2005

13636

Appendix A IPCC Scenarios 1 Page

Final Report


May 2005

13636

Final Report


May 2005

13636

The Emissions Scenarios of the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) (IPCC, 2001) A1. The A1 storyline and scenario family describes a future world of very rapid economic growth, global population that peaks in mid-century and declines thereafter, and the rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies. Major underlying themes are convergence among regions, capacity building and increased cultural and social interactions, with a substantial reduction in regional differences in per capita income. The A1 scenario family develops into three groups that describe alternative directions of technological change in the energy system. The three A1 groups are distinguished by their technological emphasis: fossil intensive (A1FI), non-fossil energy sources (A1T), or a balance across all sources (A1B) (where balanced is defined as not relying too heavily on one particular energy source, on the assumption that similar improvement rates apply to all energy supply and end-use technologies).

A2. The A2 storyline and scenario family describes a very heterogeneous world. The underlying theme is self-reliance and preservation of local identities. Fertility patterns across regions converge very slowly, which results in continuously increasing population. Economic development is primarily regionally oriented and per capita economic growth and technological change more fragmented and slower than other storylines.

B1. The B1 storyline and scenario family describes a convergent world with the same global population, that peaks in mid-century and declines thereafter, as in the A1 storyline, but with rapid change in economic structures toward a service and information economy, with reductions in material intensity and the introduction of clean and resource-efficient technologies. The emphasis is on global solutions to economic, social and environmental sustainability, including improved equity, but without additional climate initiatives.

B2. The B2 storyline and scenario family describes a world in which the emphasis is on local solutions to economic, social and environmental sustainability. It is a world with continuously increasing global population, at a rate lower than A2, intermediate levels of economic development, and less rapid and more diverse technological change than in the A1 and B1 storylines. While the scenario is also oriented towards environmental protection and social equity, it focuses on local and regional levels.

Reference Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2001) Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Available online at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/029.htm#storya1. Accessed January 2005.

Final Report


May 2005

13636

Final Report


May 2005

13636

Appendix B Methane emission reduction potential 1 Page

Final Report


May 2005

13636

Final Report


May 2005

13636

Figure B presents the methane emission reduction potential in 2010 in North America, Annex I of the UNFCCC and globally, estimated by the IEA (2003) and the US EPA (2003).

Figure B Methane emission reduction potential in 2010 in North America, Annex I of the UNFCCC and the World, estimated by IEA (2003 – top bar of each pair) and EPA (2003 – lower bar). The top axis and the numbers to the right of the bars show the resulting reductions in Northern Hemisphere summer surface ozone ultimately achieved if the available methane reductions are implemented. These reductions would be fully achieved after more than 20 years. (West and Fiore, 2005)

References International Energy Agency Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (2003) Building the cost curves for the industrial sources of non-CO2 greenhouse gases. Report No. PH4/25

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (2003) International analysis of methane and nitrous oxide abatement opportunities: Report to the Energy Modeling Forum, Working Group 21.

West, J. J. and Fiore, A. M. (2005) Management of tropospheric ozone by reducing methane emissions. Environmental Science and Technology, In Press.

european commission dg environment national emission...

Documents