use of emissions & other data reported within the lrtap convention in the iiasa gains model
DESCRIPTION
Use of emissions & other data reported within the LRTAP Convention in the IIASA GAINS model. Z.Klimont ( [email protected] ) Center for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM) Emission Inventory Compilers and Users Workshop 13 th May 2013, Istanbul, Turkey. Typical IIASA -GAINS model use. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Use of emissions & other data reported within the LRTAP Convention in the IIASA GAINS model
Z.Klimont ([email protected]) Center for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM)
Emission Inventory Compilers and Users Workshop13th May 2013, Istanbul, Turkey
Typical IIASA-GAINS model use
• Understanding/reproducing reported emissions,
• Projecting emissions, • Assessing mitigation potential,• Calculating control costs,• Assessing impacts and searching
for cost-optimal strategies considering constraints/targets
• In all elements listed above we benefit from your and other stakeholders’ work and collaborate with other EMEP centers
Emissions, costs
time
Baselineemissions
Mitigation potential
Controlcosts
PM (BC, OC)
SO2 NOx VOC NH3 CO CO2 CH4 N2OHFCsPFCsSF6
Health impacts: PM (Loss in life expectancy)
O3 (Premature mortality)
Vegetation damage: O3
Acidification
Eutrophication
Climate impacts: Long-term + + + +
Near-term forcing +/- - +/- + - +
Black carbon deposition +
The RAINS model(Regional Acidification Information and Simulation)The GAINS multi-pollutant/multi-effect framework (Greenhouse gas and Air pollution INteractions and Synergies)
Central question for policy makersExample: Revision of European air quality policy
To what level should the emissions of air pollutants be reduced in the year 2020?
– Where will emissions and effects be in 2020 without further policies?
– What reductions are technically feasible?– How much do they cost? – optimal/non-optimal– Who (which countries) pays?– How much are they willing to pay?– Who benefits?– Is it enough?– Is it fair?
Scope for further environmental improvements in the UNECE area: 4(6) effects
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
YOLLs O3 deaths Acidification,forest area
Acidification,AAE all
ecosystems
Eutrophication,ecosystems
area
Eutrophication,AAE all
ecosystems
Impa
ct in
dica
tor
in 2
020
rela
tive
to
2000
PRIMES MTFR Scope for measures National MTFR Scope for measures
Closing the gap
Expected achievements of current policy; relative to 2000
Scope
Results of GAINS analysis for TSAP (EU Thematic Strategy for Air Pollution):
Health impacts PM2.5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Base
line
MTF
R-EU
Base
line
MTF
R-EU
Base
line
MTF
R-EU
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2020 2025 2025 2030 2030M
illio
n YO
LLs
TSAP target for 2020: -47%
Baseline implies ~5 months shortening of statistical life expectancy after 2020
Additional MTFR measures could save ~55 million years of life ofEuropean population
2010
2020 CLE
2030 MCE
Years of life lost
Loss
in s
tatis
tical
life
exp
ecta
ncy
(mon
ths)
Results of GAINS analysis for TSAP (EU Thematic Strategy for Air Pollution):
Emission reductions in central scenario: NH3
-45%
-40%
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
GERM
CRO
A
SKRE
SPAI
FRAN
POLA
HUN
G
AUST
ITAL
PORT
CZRE
LITH
CYPR
ESTO
UN
KI
LUXE
BELG
ROM
A
SLO
V
LATV
GREE
MAL
T
SWED
BULG
FIN
L
DEN
M
IREL
NET
H
EU28
NH3
redu
ction
s rel
ative
to b
asel
ine
Other NH3 sourcesSheep and GoatsAgricultural Waste burningPoultryNon-Dairy CattleDairy CattlePigsUrea Fertilizer
Key measures:• Efficient (‘low emission’) application of urea fertilizer• Low nitrogen feed (pigs, dairy cows, poultry)• Low emission application of livestock manures; liquid and solid• Closed storage of manures and new low emission housing (pigs, poultry)
PM (BC, OC)
SO2 NOx VOC NH3 CO CO2 CH4 N2OHFCsPFCsSF6
Health impacts: PM (Loss in life expectancy)
O3 (Premature mortality)
Vegetation damage: O3
Acidification
Eutrophication
Climate impacts: Long-term + + + +
Near-term forcing +/- - +/- + - +
Black carbon deposition +
The GAINS multi-pollutant/multi-effect framework (Greenhouse gas and Air pollution INteractions and Synergies)
Co-control of GHGs and air pollutantsAnnex I parties of UNFCCC, 2020
Source: IIASA GAINS http://gains.iiasa.ac.at
Considering co-emission of pollutants at technology level results in different mixes (ratios) of pollutants depending on chosen strategyExample: Mitigation potentials in 2030 in in two scenarios developed in UNEP (2011) study
-100%
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
CH4 CO NOx VOC PM2.5 BC OC OtherPM2.5
SO2
Emis
sion
red
uctio
n re
lativ
e to
bas
elin
e in
203
0
Emission reductions fromthe chosen 16 measures all other 2000 measures
Source: IIASA GAINShttp://gains.iiasa.ac.at
BC emissions in the EU-27, baseline, relative change and thousand tons [total] Source: GAINS model
2005 2010 2020 20300%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
OtherTransportDomestic combustionTotal
FINN GFED
McCarty (Agr) McCarty (Crop)
Courtesy of Jessica McCarty, Michigan Tech Research Institute
Incomplete wish list… for discussion in the afternoon?
• National vs international databases: how to improve consistency, e.g, non-commercial fuelwood use,
• How to improve spatial allocation of some sources, e.g., inland navigation
• TFEIP repository of national, often not peer-reviewed, studies?
• More regular involvement of remote sensing and inverse modelling community,
• Strengthen collaboration with other regional and global inventory activities (developers and users), e.g. MACCity, GEIA, HTAP, etc.
More details and background available from:
• General GAINS policy portal:http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/research/researchPrograms/MitigationofAirPollutionandGreenhousegases/Overview.en.html – GAINS model: http://gains.iiasa.ac.at
• UNECE Gothenburg Protocol revision work– http://gains.iiasa.ac.at/index.php/policyapplications/gothenburg-protocol-
revision
• Review of the EU Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution (TSAP); towards revision of National Emission Ceiling Directive (NECD)– http://gains.iiasa.ac.at/index.php/policyapplications/tsap