|
| News | Policy initiatives | Acidification & Eutrophication | Air quality | Climate Change| Publications | Events | Links | The Secretariat |
 |
|
|
No. 2, June 2005
Cover illustration © Lars-Erik Håkansson. » Download Acid News 2/05 in pdf format Main articles in brief Levels far to high in many European cities Thanks to an EU directive adopted in 1999 the severe health problems associated with particulates in the air have come to public attention in many European countries this spring. Sulphur in marine oils
En-route charges for ships
Dirty kilowatts in the US Clean air – when and how? You must breathe to live. Every day you inhale some 10,000 litres of air, and you expect - or even presume - that air to be clean air. But it is not. Actually, breathing may kill you. A recent analysis for the Clean Air For Europe (CAFE) programme has shown that one type of air pollutant alone, namely fine particles, is responsible for nearly 350,000 premature deaths each year in the EU25. To this should be added a large number of morbidity effects that affect a much greater number of people. Fine particles are covered by EU air quality legislation, and as from this year the air quality limit values for maximum allowed concentrations of this pollutant are not to be exceeded on more than a limited number of days anywhere in the Union. In spite of the fact that this legislation was adopted by the member states six years ago and systems for pollutant monitoring have been in place for many years, it appears that many state and city officials are taken by surprise when their monitoring stations show frequently repeated exceedances. When faced with these exceedances, the gut reaction of city officials is to call for national measures and that of state officials to call for EU-wide measures - in other words to hand over the responsibility to someone else, while in fact the seriousness of the problem clearly demands that measures be taken at all three levels. It may however be of some interest to look at how this is being dealt with at EU level: Improving air quality is listed as one of the priorities in the EU's Sixth Environment Action Programme, and in article 2 it is stated that the programme aims at "contributing to a high level of quality of life and social well being for citizens by providing an environment where the level of pollution does not give rise to harmful effects on human health and the environment..." This aim is to be pursued by objectives and actions as outlined in article 7. Regarding air quality the stated objective is to achieve "levels of air quality that do not give rise to significant negative impacts on and risks to human health and the environment". Among the key measures listed are the development of a thematic strategy on air pollution, and the review and updating of air quality standards and national emission ceilings, with a view to achieving the long-term objective of not exceeding critical loads and levels. Article 4 makes clear that thematic strategies should include an identification of the proposals that are required to reach the objectives, and the procedures foreseen for their adoption. Apparently, the forthcoming thematic strategy on air pollution will be of significant importance as it is supposed to show not only what needs to be done, but also how, and by whom. It is therefore unfortunate and paradoxical that after four years of work, the CAFE analysis of emission abatement measures is still largely restricted to traditional "end-of-pipe" technical solutions. It is unfortunate because it hides the true potential for emission reductions, and results in gross overestimates of abatement costs. And it is paradoxical because we all know that our society's current addiction to fossil fuels is not sustainable. Consequently, measures leading to structural changes in the sectors of energy, transport and agriculture need to be an integral part of a coherent air pollution strategy. The gravity of the current air pollution situation - which apart from fine particles also includes several other pollutants and their impacts - calls for a strategy that establishes a very high level of ambition. It is not acceptable that even after 2020, air pollution will still cause several tens of thousands of premature deaths among EU citizens, and that millions of hectares of sensitive ecosystems will still be exposed to pollutant depositions in excess of their critical loads. Christer Ågren Levels far too high in many European cities Thanks to an EU directive adopted in 1999 the severe health problems associated with particulates in the air have come to public attention in many European countries this spring. On 1 January a new EU limit value came into force, setting a maximum average threshold of 50 micrograms of particulate matter (PM10) per cubic metre of air over a 24-hour period, which cannot be exceeded more than 35 days over the course of a year, as well as a limit value of 40 µg/m3 for the annual average concentration (Directive 1999/30/EC). By February several cities in northern Italy had already reached their 35th day of excessive levels, including Turin and Milan. On 12 March Budapest reached its 35th day. By the end of March the limit was reached in the German cities of Munich and Stuttgart, which were soon joined by Berlin and Düsseldorf, and more recently by Leipzig, Hanover, Braunschweig, Dortmund, Dresden and Augsburg. The cities of Cottbus, Halle and Borna are not far behind. In Sweden the limit was passed at the start of April in Stockholm and Gothenburg, and more cities are expected to experience problems later in the year. Exceedances are also reported at some stations in Belgium, for example Jemeppe and Engis, both in Wallonia. At present it is not clear how many cities have already exceeded the particulate limit set by the directive, but measurements from previous years suggest that the problem is widespread: - In Thessaloniki, Greece, the limit value was exceeded on 219 days during 2003. The situation was also bad in Heraclion (184 days), Patra (173), and Athens (165). - In the Czech Republic 25 measurement stations recorded more than 100 days of exceedances in 2003. In the cities of Cesky Tesin and Havirov, both close to the Slovakian/Polish border, limits were exceeded on 215 and 212 days respectively, even though only the background concentrations were measured. - In Portugal the threshold was exceeded on more than 100 days in 2003 at 14 measurement stations, with the highest figure in Lisbon, 189 days. - More than 100 days of exceedances were also recorded in 2003 in many other cities in Europe, including Krakow (224), Gliwice (191), Nicosia (176), Brussels (136), Vilnius (119), Riga (105), and Paris (103). - In Madrid the environmentalist organization Ecologistas en Acción reports that the 50µg/m3 limit was exceeded on 59 days last year. - In Austria a long list of cities experienced far too many days of exceedance in 2003, according to the country's environmental authority. The highest exceedances were measured in large cities, such as Graz, Linz and Vienna, but also in many smaller towns. The latter cases are said to be due to geographical circumstances that promote the build-up of high concentrations (inversion), particularly in winter. Austria has also recorded exceedances in rural regions in the north east of the country, reportedly due to transboundary transport of PM10 from neighbouring countries. - The Hungarian capital of Budapest suffers heavy traffic and high levels of PM10. According to the environmental organization Clean Air Action Group, data from 2004 shows extensive problems. At one measurement station the limit value was exceeded on 142 days. In 2004 the limit value was also exceeded on more than 100 days in the city of Miskolc. In Germany the exceedances have been first page news during the spring. Much of the debate has been about diesel vehicles and traffic regulation. Road transport is not the biggest source of particulate emissions at national level, but at the sites where exceedances have occurred, such as street canyons in bigger cities, the contribution is often considerable or even dominant. Several German cities have already or will soon introduce restrictions on trucks and diesel cars using local roads in an effort to combat rising air pollution. In Düsseldorf, for example, there are plans to ban trucks from certain streets, and, if the problem persists, to make much of the city centre a no-drive zone for all vehicles without particle filters. The city of Berlin was taken to court by a student who lives on a high-emission street. His lawsuit was supported by the Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) in a bid to ensure that it respects the EU limits. Although Berlin has developed a plan to bring down particulate levels, the measures do not take effect until 2008. The lawsuit was an attempt to force Berlin to establish a ban on diesel-powered vehicles that are not fitted with filters by 2006. Late in April however an administrative court threw out the injunction. The proportion of diesel cars in Germany has risen sharply in recent years and these now account for roughly half of new car sales. German car manufacturers have been slow to introduce particle filters as standard equipment, and it has taken a long time to introduce planned tax incentives for particle filters. The legislation is now approved at the federal level, but needs to be confirmed by each state to enter into force. Under Italian law, city mayors can be held liable for health-threatening environmental damage. In at least a dozen cities, including Verona, Venedig, Padua and Treviso, driving bans have already been imposed on Sundays in order to reduce air pollution. In Padua and Bologna environmentalist NGOs have taken their city mayors to court for not taking sufficient action. At the end of March the Italian government presented a five-year plan aimed at improving the country's air quality, but this immediately received sharp criticism. The initiative changes the focus of the current law, which is based on sanctioning companies found polluting the air. Instead, the new law relies on the use of incentives aimed at encouraging polluters to invest in clean technologies. In the Swedish capital of Stockholm the measured levels of PM10 are high, among the highest in Europe, but exhaust fumes from traffic are less of problem here. The main problem is caused instead by somewhat larger particles that are abraded from the road surface by studded tyres during winter (primarily November-April). The high levels of particles have been known about for a long time, but neither the City of Stockholm nor the government has taken any action. Stockholm is hoping the government will pass legislation to impose charges for using studded tyres, but the government believes the city should start taking other measures, such as improving road sweeping and informing people about the drawbacks of studded tyres. In the Spanish capital of Madrid, the City Council is obliged to draw up an air quality improvement plan to reduce air pollution levels below the set limits, but has so far failed to do so. At present the focus is not on limiting traffic, in fact major investments are planned to extend the ring roads. Ecologistas en Acción is currently working on a legal complaint against the City Council of Madrid. Under the EU air-quality directive, the member states must draw up pollution-reduction plans for areas with high concentrations of particles to reduce the concentrations and to achieve the limit values by the set dates. These programmes must be made directly available to the public, and must also be sent to the Commission. According to the data from 2001, eleven member states should have submitted plans and programmes by 31 December 2003. On 8 July last year the Commission sent first written warnings to nine of them - Austria, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom - for failing to submit such plans. The extensive problems encountered in meeting EU standards for particulates have also sparked demands to revise the regulations. The Dutch environment minister, Pieter van Geel, has called for a change to the directive so that it does not apply to air pollution originating from foreign and non-anthropogenic sources. According to van Geel, a large proportion of the measured levels in the Netherlands comes from natural sources, such as salt and sand in ocean air, and from sources in Belgium and Germany. One side effect the directive has had in the Netherlands is to make it difficult to win approval for construction or infrastructure projects that could add to the level of particles in the air. In April the Council of State, the Netherlands' highest administrative court, ruled to block eleven large projects since September 2004 based on arguments that these would be detrimental to air quality. Similar legislation exists in Sweden. Nevertheless, the EU Commission has no plans to soften the limit values according to a statement from the industry commissioner, Günter Verheugen, on German television in March. Commissioner Verheugen did however promise that the Commission won't start talking about treaty breaches straight away. "We'll look at the experience of the first year and then we'll have to decide," he told German television. Action by the Commission is therefore unlikely until there has been an assessment of the overall situation in the member states. By now the Commission has received plans and programmes for the years 2001 and 2002, which it will start evaluating this year. Legally speaking, the member states only have to inform the Commission of this year's exceedances by September next year, and report on the reasons for each recorded exceedance. However, the Commission has to act if citizens or environmental organizations made complaints. In those cases where individual citizens or NGOs lodge complaints with the Commission, the steps set out in infringement procedures can be initiated immediately against the member state in question. In many countries citizens and environmental organizations have announced they will take the relevant administrations to the national courts. Such court cases have been announced or are on the way in the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Austria, Spain and Hungary. As the debate rages, many are now looking to London, which introduced a congestion charge in 2003. The charging system has reduced traffic by around 15 per cent and has been judged a success. A similar system will be trialled in Stockholm from 3 January 2006. Per Elvingson Sources: T&E Bulletin, April 2005. Environment Daily, 21 February, 26 and 28 April 2005. Car Lines 2005-2. Planet Ark, 14 February, 1 April 2005. Financial Times, 2 April 2005. Der Spiegel, 4 and 6 April 2005. Clean Air Action Group, Hungary, www.levego.hu. Ecologistas en Acción, Spain, www.ecologistasenaccion.org. Umweltbundesamt Austria, www.umweltbundesamt.at. Figures for exceedances 2003 have been taken from AirBase, http://air-climate.eionet.eu.int/databases/airbase/airview. The Commission's review of directive 1999/30/EC, issued in January 2005: COM(2004) 845 final. See the Commission's website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/air/ambient.htm.
Cleaner air increases your life expectancy If agreed legislation is implemented it should increase average life expectancy in the EU - and save billions of euro each year. AIR POLLUTION in the form of particulate matter (PM) claims an average of 8.6 months from the life of every person in the EU. The Germans lose even more: 10.2 months of life in the year 2000. This is according to a report presented by the WHO Regional Office for Europe at a press conference in Berlin on 14 April. An EU directive sets down limit values for PM10 of 50 µg/m3 for the 24-hour average and 40 µg/m3 for the annual average. With effect from 2005 the 24-hour average value should not be exceeded more than 35 times a year, a limit that had already been exceeded in many European cities by spring this year (see front page article). By 2010 the reduction in health damage through implementation of current emission reduction legislation in the EU is expected to save 2.3 months of life for the EU population and 2.7 months of life for the population of Germany. This is the equivalent of preventing 80,000 premature deaths each year and saving over one million years of life in the EU, compared with the situation in 2000. Reducing long-term PM concentrations and exposure would also bring important financial savings. WHO puts the financial benefits of decreased mortality at between 58 and 161 billion euro per year, plus 29 billion euro for reduced diseases. The corresponding figures for Germany are 13-34 billion euro and 6 billion euro per year, respectively.
Health risks could be underestimated The calculated number of deaths caused by particulate matter (PM) in the air could be greatly underestimated, according to a group of Swedish researchers. In the case of Sweden they took commonly used risk coefficients for PM10 and PM2.5 and calculated that current concentrations of long-range transported anthropogenic particles give rise to around 3,500 premature deaths each year, with a reduction in average life expectancy of around seven months. The significance of local sources is more difficult to estimate, according to the researchers, partly due to large variations in concentrations and exposure. Nevertheless, their estimates indicate that about 1,800 deaths are brought forward each year, with a life-span reduction of about two to three months. When considering these figures it should, however, be remembered that parts of the population are probably exposed to much higher levels of the particles that several studies have shown to cause the most harm, namely those from combustion processes. This applies, for instance, to people who live near busy roads. The researchers report that current models indicate that long-range transported sulphate-rich particles are the main reason for the harmful health effects of particles in most countries, which means that abatement strategies tend to focus primarily on these. But at the same time recent studies indicate that engine exhaust particles may have a stronger health effect than anticipated when using the common risk coefficients for PM. Further reading: Comparative Health Impact Assessment of Local and Regional Particulate Air Pollutants in Scandinavia. Bertil Forsberg et al. Ambio Vol. 34, No.1, 2005, pp. 11-19. Internet: www.ambio.kva.se Note: For comparison, recent analysis for the Clean Air For Europe programme estimated the number of premature deaths in Sweden due to anthropogenic PM2.5 to be about 3,300 for the year 2000, and the loss in statistical life expectancy to be 3.5 months. Diesel fumes shorten the lives of 20,000 Americans More than 20,000 Americans die prematurely each year from breathing toxic diesel fumes, according to a study presented by the US-based NGO Clean Air Task Force. The study finds that diesel exhaust fumes pose a cancer risk that, on a national basis, is 350 times higher than the Environmental Protection Agency's acceptable risk level and 7.5 times greater than the combined total cancer risk from all other air toxics. The study also finds that diesel pollution causes some 27,000 non-fatal heart attacks and 410,000 cases of asthma each year - and health damages from diesel fumes will total around $139 billion by 2010. The calculations take into account recent EPA regulations, which will require dramatic reductions in emissions from new diesel vehicles starting in 2007. The rules lower the sulphur content of diesel fuel by around 99 per cent and force new engines to meet much stricter pollution standards. But the regulations do not cover existing diesel engines and only call for voluntary retrofit programmes. The report says this means some 13 million diesel engines currently in use will not be required to cut pollution - it estimates the lifespan of a typical diesel engine is 30 years. The study finds that up to 90 per cent of the premature deaths could be avoided by applying currently available control technologies. The Clean Air Task Force recommends faster and more widespread retrofitting, cleaner fuel strategies and early retirement of engines that cannot be fitted with emission controls. Further information: www.catf.us/goto/dieselhealth. Here you can find the study, Diesel and Health in America: The Lingering Threat. The website also provides data on the health impacts of diesel classified by metropolitan area, county and state. Traffic fumes greatly increase risk of heart attack Swedish researchers can now show a direct link between air pollution and acute cardiac failure. A study carried out in Stockholm shows that a person who has lived by a busy street for 30 years has a 50 per cent higher risk of dying from an acute myocardial infarction than someone who has lived in the countryside. The link has been highlighted by correlating air pollution levels at every address in the city with the home addresses of a group of Stockholm residents who died as a result of myocardial infarction. Tom Bellander, associate professor at Stockholm County Council's unit for occupational and environmental medicine, has two theories for the existence of the link. The first is that air pollution contributes to low-level lung irritation, which in turn causes circulatory problems. The second is that air pollutants irritate nerve endings in the airways, which leads directly to heart arrhythmia. The study is part of a doctoral thesis by Mats Rosenlund at the Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm. It is based on a study of 2,246 people who suffered myocardial infarctions and a control group of 3,206 people. Source: Dagens Nyheter 19 April 2005. An abstract of the thesis "Environmental factors in cardiovascular disease" (which also considers aircraft noise) can be found at http://diss.kib.ki.se/2005/91-7140-292-6/ Agreement on new directive Compromise deal seen as a first step towards tighter requirements in the future. An agreement on a compromise deal on new marine fuel quality legislation was reached by the European Parliament and the Council in early April, and was confirmed by the Parliament in a plenary vote held on 13 April. Although failing to secure the Parliament's main demands, i.e. to extend the 1.5-per-cent sulphur limit to cover all EU sea areas, and to establish a second phase lowering of the sulphur limit to 0.5 per cent, the agreement contains commitments that these issues will be dealt with in the context of a review foreseen for 2008. The parliament's rapporteur, Finnish Green Satu Hassi said: "As a part of the agreement, the Commission publicly declared its commitment to examine proposals to further reduce the sulphur content of marine fuels to 0.5 per cent, as well as to extend sulphur control areas to other EU seas. The Parliament intends to hold Commissioner Dimas to this promise." The European Commission welcomed the second-reading vote by the Parliament, and Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said: "I am very pleased with this agreement. But I do believe that EU countries can and must do more to build on today's success. We really need to work globally to reduce pollution from international shipping - but 17 EU countries have still not ratified the 1997 International Maritime Organization (IMO) Convention on Air Pollution." According to the Commission, the new measures will have significant human health benefits. They will reduce the incidence of asthma, bronchitis and heart failure, and lead to annual benefits of at least 2,000 fewer life years lost through long-term exposure, 750 fewer deaths from short-term exposure, and 300 fewer hospital admissions for respiratory illness in the EU in year 2006. They will also help reduce acidification, which continues to damage forest and freshwater ecosystems in northern Europe. The main provisions of the agreement are:
The first provision - the 1.5 per cent sulphur limit for the Baltic and the North Sea - is in effect a confirmation of already agreed commitments under the IMO's MARPOL Annex VI, which entered into force on 19 May 2005 (see box below). The Parliament has also tightened requirements on the availability of low-sulphur fuel and the use of abatement technology, and introduced an incentive for ships in port to plug in to clean shore-side electricity. Environmental organizations however expressed disappointment: "This is a wasted chance for cleaner air in Europe," said Kerstin Meyer, air pollution policy officer at EEB, the European Environmental Bureau. "Ship emissions could be reduced much further at very low cost. It is irresponsible that member states' governments and the Commission blocked initiatives towards a more ambitious directive. Currently there are discussions in many member states about how to meet the EU limit values for air quality. But at the same time member states' governments obstructed further measures, when there was a real chance to improve air quality." The Parliament's rapporteur, Satu Hassi, concluded: "This directive is a first step. Even after its implementation, the SO2 emissions from shipping in European seas are set to exceed all EU25 land-based SO2 emissions." The new directive is expected to enter into force within a few months, and will have to be transposed into national law one year later. Christer Ågren
Policy scenarios for air quality New "multi-effect" scenarios reflecting various levels of ambition have been produced for the forthcoming EU Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution.
Emissions in EU25 in the base year 2000 and five scenarios for 2020: CLE is based on full implementation of current EU legislation; scenarios A, B and C are policy scenarios reflecting various level of ambition; and MTFR illustrates implementation of so-called maximum technically feasible reductions (MTFR).
At a meeting with the member states and other stakeholders in mid-April, the Commission's consultant IIASA presented its draft final report1 for the forthcoming thematic strategy on air pollution. The date for the Commission's adoption of the strategy, which was earlier announced for presentation in May, is now scheduled for end of June. As part of the EU's Clean Air For Europe (CAFE) programme2, various scenarios for future emissions and their environmental impacts have been investigated. For this purpose CAFE employed the RAINS computer model for integrated assessment, developed by IIASA. Most recently, IIASA has investigated three so-called multi-effect scenarios, all of which aim to achieve interim environmental targets - set at various levels of ambition - at the least cost for the EU25 as a whole. The term "multi-effect" comes from the fact that several environmental end points are being simultaneously addressed, namely: - health impacts of fine particles (PM2.5); - eutrophication (excess nitrogen deposition); - acidification (excess acid deposition); and, - ozone damage to health and vegetation. The three final policy scenarios were arrived at through a series of model iterations. In the first step, the RAINS model was used to identify the cost implications of gradually increased levels of ambition for environmental protection. This was done independently for each of the end points. For practical reasons, the analysis was limited to the range of emission levels that exists between the "current legislation" scenario, CLE (also called the baseline scenario), and the "maximum technically feasible reductions" scenario, MTFR. Three "target levels", reflecting various levels of ambition, were chosen for each of the environmental end points. Then three so-called joint optimization runs were performed, in which the three target levels for each of the four environmental end points were combined. These scenarios can be said to reflect a lower (A), a medium (B), and a higher (C) overall level of ambition. In all three cases, a choice was made to allocate most resources to reduce the damage to human health from fine particles. The outcomes of the three multi-effect scenarios could be compared to those of the main baseline scenario (CLE), which includes full implementation of current EU air quality legislation, and to those of the so-called maximum technically feasible reductions (MTFR) scenario, in which full implementation of currently available technical emission control measures is assumed. (These were presented in Acid News 4/04 and 1/05.) Besides providing country-by-country figures on the resulting emission levels of the five air pollutants (SO2, NOx, VOCs, NH3, and PM2.5) under the three policy scenarios, the report from IIASA also include estimates of the resulting health and environmental impacts in each member state, as well as estimates of the costs associated with the additional emission reductions. For the EU as a whole, the additional annual costs range between 4 and 13 billion euro for the year 2020 (see Table). This is in addition to the cost of new emission standards for road vehicles, which are estimated at about 1.9 billion euro. When the costs for additional measures for stationary and mobile sources are combined it gives total costs for the three scenarios of around 13, 24, and 33 euro per person in 2020. Estimated incremental costs for emission control, i.e. costs on top of those already committed to under existing air quality legislation (billion euro/year).
Using the pollution levels for the year 2000, it is estimated that anthropogenic PM2.5 will result in an average shortening of life expectancy by more than eight months. As a result of current legislation, this figure comes down to about 5.5 months by 2020. The three policy scenarios would further reduce this figure: A to 4.4, B to 4.1, and C to 4.0 months. There is however a significant variation between member states, and under current legislation even by 2020 some countries (notably Belgium and the Netherlands) will still have life expectancy losses of between eight and nine months. The analysis of environmental impact includes ozone damage to vegetation, and acidification and eutrophication of various types of sensitive ecosystems. As regards the latter, the share of ecosystems exposed to excess nitrogen depositions was 57 per cent in 2000. By 2020, current legislation is expected to bring this down to 46 per cent, while the three policy scenarios would result in a further lowering to 33, 29, and 27 per cent, respectively. Following the analysis of the various CAFE scenarios, the Commission will adopt and present its Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution, which is expected to list a number of specific proposals for further action to improve air quality in the EU. A proposal to revise the air quality framework directive and the three so-called daughter directives containing minimum requirements for air quality is expected to be presented in parallel with the strategy. Christer Ågren 1 The report "A final set of scenarios for the Clean Air For Europe (CAFE) programme" (April 2005), as well as previous CAFE reports by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), are available at www.iiasa.ac.at/rains/index.html 2 More information on the CAFE programme can be found at http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/air/cafe/index.htm New figures on benefits from emission reductions The cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of the CAFE baseline emission scenarios was finalised in April, and figures for the estimated health damage costs of air pollution turned out to be higher than the preliminary estimates which were reported in AN 1/05.
Christer Ågren
Implementing current EU legislation: Health damage due to air pollution in 2000 and in 2020 in EU25 (billion euro).
Note: The results are based on 1997 meteorological data, and are comparable with the preliminary RAINS baseline scenario results. For acute mortality (O3), two alternative values are presented, based on a range reflecting the median and mean values. For chronic mortality (PM), two alternative values are presented, based on value of life years lost (VOLY) and numbers of premature deaths, the latter using the mean value of a statistical life (VSL) value. A call for binding national targets A declaration by more than 40 organizations from 19 member states calls for a directive that sets an overall EU target of 25 per cent renewable heating and cooling by 2020. The law must also include legally binding national targets, it says. Nearly half of European energy consumption is used for heating, but there is not yet one piece of legislation in place at European level that aims to increase the proportion of heating and cooling generated from renewable sources, state the organizations behind the declaration. They believe that the promotion of renewable heating and cooling is not only necessary to fulfil the EU targets in the renewable energy sector, but will also significantly contribute to the reduction of EU dependence on energy imports, to the reduction of greenhouse gases and to the creation of sustainable jobs. The overall EU target of 25 per cent renewable heating and cooling should be broken down into different mandatory targets for the member states. The proposed measures within the directive include the setting of framework conditions for promotion mechanisms in the member states, the removal of administrative barriers, common statistical procedures and the raising of awareness. Further information: European Renewable Energy Council, www.erec-renewables.org. Low level of ambition in many countries The EU will not meet its target that two per cent of all road vehicle fuel sold in the member states this year should be biofuels. A spokesman for the Commission’s directorate for energy and transport estimates that the actual figure will be around 1.5 per cent, compared with 0.2 per cent in 2000 and around 0.6 per cent registered in 2003. Two indicative target levels – of 2.0 per cent by 2005 and 5.75 percent by 2010 – were laid down in a directive that was adopted two years ago (2003/30/EC). The directive compels member states to set their own targets and report them to the Commission. The countries may however adopt lower targets than indicated in cases where there is little potential for producing biofuel, or if it is already being used for other purposes. In March the Commission sent letters of formal notice to nine member states that had not communicated their target for the share of biofuels in 2005. Among those countries that have reported their targets, half chose a level lower than two per cent. Denmark is the most striking, with a target of zero per cent. But Ireland comes close behind with 0.06 per cent, followed by Finland at 0.1 and the UK at 0.3 per cent. The Commission has started to examine whether they have given adequate reasons for the lower targets. Most environmental organizations in Europe have shown low interest in the use of biofuels in the EU transport sector. The umbrella organization T&E, the European Federation for Transport and Environment, takes the stance that the directive is primarily about agricultural policy – if the goal is to reduce vehicle emissions of greenhouse gases then it is much more effective to legislate on fuel consumption standards for vehicles. Sources: Press release from the Commission 16 March 2005. Planet Ark (Reuters), 3 March 2005. 24 out of 25 NAPs approved by Commission But trading in CO2 emission rights is still modest. The Italian national allocation plan (NAP) for carbon dioxide emission rights was approved by the European Commission on 25 May, but only on condition that the allocated emission rights for the period 2005–07 are first reduced by 23 million tonnes (9 per cent), and that further plants are included in the system. The Czech Republic’s NAP was approved on 12 April, but also on condition that the allocated emission rights for the period 2005–07 are first reduced, in the Czech case by 9.4 per cent. Poland’s NAP was approved on 10 March, in this case with the proviso that the number of emission rights is reduced by 16.5 percent, which is equivalent to just over 140 million tonnes of CO2 for the period 2005–07. In absolute terms this is the largest reduction the Commission has so far required before approving a plan. In April the Commission also confirmed its belief that a UK request to increase the 2005–07 allocation from 736 to 756 million tonnes is inadmissible under the emissions trading directive. In March the UK announced it would take legal action against the stance, but decided in the meantime to distribute allowances based on the lower allocation. This will allow UK companies to start participating fully in emissions trading. The approval of the Italian NAP brings to 24 the number of plans approved by the Commission; that of Greece is still being scrutinized by officials. The trade in emission rights has so been modest so far, but is growing steadily. The price has risen from around seven euro per emission right at the start of the year, to nearly 20 euro today (end of May). The EU emissions trading system is not expected to result in any major investments in cleaner processes and plants over the next three years. This is due to the relatively generous levels of free allowances being given out by governments for the first period. Stronger caps are however needed for the period 2008 to 2012, when the trading system runs in parallel with the Kyoto Protocol. Several proposals have been submitted for extending the trading system in the second phase of the programme. The UK wants to see the aviation sector included. Others want to see the chemicals and aluminium sectors fully integrated, and to discuss the inclusion of other gases in addition to carbon dioxide. Any major change to the Directive will however take time to proceed through the EU institutions and is highly unlikely to be implemented for the next trading period. Per Elvingson Further information: European Commission emission trading scheme: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/emission.htm The NAP website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/emission_plans.htm Climate Action Network Europe: www.climnet.org
EU leaders back 2020 greenhouse gas target EU heads of state have for the first time set a target for In February, the European Commission said in a strategy paper that it considered it “premature” to set targets now for lowering emissions after 2012. Instead it wanted to focus on bringing the United States and some developing nations to the negotiating table (see AN 1/05). At their meeting in Brussels in March however, the EU environment ministers said in a statement that developed nations ought to aim for cuts “in the order of 15–30 per cent by 2020 and 60–80 per cent by 2050, compared to the baseline envisaged in the Kyoto Protocol”. The ministers did not set targets for the EU itself, speaking instead of developed nations in general. At their meeting on 22–23 March the EU Heads of State (European Council) backed the environment council’s calls to aim for a 15–30 per cent reduction in emissions from industrialized countries by 2020. The environment ministers’ target of a 60–80 per cent cut by 2050 was however dropped; various sources claim because of pressure from Germany and Austria. The Heads of State also endorsed – for the first time – the goal of keeping global temperature rise below 2 degrees C over pre-industrial levels. “Despite the recent rejection of greenhouse gas reduction targets by former climate champions Germany and Austria, and the continued sabotage efforts of Italy, the EU has stood strong and sent a clear political signal that it will push for further action. Much more is urgently needed, but this is a good start,” commented Mahi Sideridou, EU climate policy director at Greenpeace. “The EU now has to speedily implement policies and measures to not (only) fully comply with Kyoto targets, but also to comply with this longer term objective of 2020,” said Stephan Singer, climate change expert at environmental group WWF. Jan Kowalzig, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, was more critical: “The target agreed on by the Heads of State is both weak and ambiguous. There is a world of difference between 15 and 30 per cent, and only the higher target reflects what industrialized countries must achieve to prevent catastrophic climate change.” Per Elvingson New EU agreement on kilometre taxes The EU member states should soon be able to introduce kilometre taxes for heavy vehicles, a move that will make it possible to set strong incentives to reduce environmental impact from the transport sector. It was at a meeting on 21 April, after almost two years of discussions and three failed attempts, that EU Ministers of Transport finally succeeded in agreeing on a revision to the Eurovignette directive (1999/62/EC). One important change is that the tax can be imposed on all vehicles over 3.5 tonnes (the current limit is 12 tonnes) and that it can be applied throughout the road network, not just on motorways. The level of the tax may be set country by country and can be adjusted depending on the size, weight and environmental performance of the vehicle. One of the points at issue between the states was what should be done with the revenues from taxes. The ministers' agreement recommends that revenues be ploughed back into transport networks but does not make this compulsory, in recognition of the principle of subsidiarity. The decision not to earmark the revenues was not popular with several of the member states on the periphery of the EU. Malta, Estonia and Portugal opposed the proposal on concerns that higher transport costs would raise prices. Belgium also voted against, while Greece and Finland abstained. The agreement is however welcomed by most countries that are more centrally located - which have to bear the brunt of transit transport costs in the form of road wear, noise, accidents, etc. - and by more environmentally aware countries. The European Parliament must still approve the new legislation. The differences in opinion are not dramatic, however, and the UK, which takes over chairmanship in July, expects that an agreement will be reached before the year is out. The European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E) called on the Parliament to ensure EU states could factor the costs of environmental and health damage into taxes and criticised ministers' failure to include this in the bill. According to the ministers' decision, kilometre taxes may only be charged at a level that will cover the direct costs incurred by each country for its road transport system. The costs that can be included are not set out in detail, however. Per Elvingson
Climate change and air pollution most worrying - environmentalist organizations most trusted For Europeans, a healthy environment is as important to their quality of life as the state of the economy and social factors, according to a Eurobarometer survey published in May. The four outstanding environmental issues that citizens worry most about are water pollution (47 per cent), man-made disasters such as oil spills and industrial accidents (46 per cent), climate change and air pollution (both at 45 per cent). There are however some significant differences between the former EU-15 and the ten new member states (EU-10). Climate change is the number one issue in the EU-15 but only ranks seventh place in the EU-10. Air pollution on the other hand is the second highest concern in the EU-10 (52 per cent), while the issue scores 43 per cent in the EU-15. When it comes to sources of environmental information, citizens most trust environmental associations (42 per cent), followed by scientists (32) and television (27 per cent). Compared with the last survey in 2002, confidence in the media has increased significantly. Trust in the EU itself is not too high (12 per cent), although slightly higher than in national governments (11 per cent). Further information: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/barometer/index.htm EU could be totally renewable by 2050 The 25 EU states could phase out both nuclear energy and 98 per cent of fossil fuels by 2050, according to a vision presented by the NGO network Inforse Europe. Continued growth of renewable energy is important in order to realize this vision. The proposed renewable energy development follows general forecasts published by the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC) for the period until 2020. A substantial increase in energy efficiency is equally important for the vision. In general it is possible to increase efficiency by a factor of four in most sectors. This fourfold increase in efficiency is expected to be realized in electricity consumption, industrial production and road transport. A smaller increase in efficiency is expected for space heating because of the slower turnover of houses. The energy efficiency measures proposed are cost-effective today or will become cost-effective if used on a large scale as proposed in the vision, according to Inforse. The renewable energy technologies will become cost-effective if used on a large scale. A major economic benefit of the vision is that it will reduce dependency on imported fuels, not least the ever more expensive oil. Further information: www.inforse.dk/europe/Vision2050.htm Growing support for stricter requirements Concern about the effect of particles on human health is leading to changes in consumer behaviour. According to a report in the Welt am Sonntag newspaper, a significant number of German customers are deciding to wait to buy a new car until particle filters are fitted as standard, or they are buying cars with filters from non-German makers such as Peugeot or Citroën. Such consumer response and the speed with which the tolerance threshold for excessive days is being reached may add to pressure to take a stricter line on fine particles in the coming emission standards for new diesel cars. The Commission has suggested that the so-called Euro 5 limit for particles will be no lower than 2.5 mg/km, but T&E, the European Federation for Transport and Environment, says 1 mg is not unrealistic. Europe's top environmental science committee, Scher, has supported the call for 2.5 mg, even though it says research into the impact of particles on health is still inconclusive. The Euro 5 proposals have however been delayed and will not be published before the Commission's summer break. Source: T&E Bulletin, April 2005. CARS 21
Voluntary targets soon out of reach
En-route charges possible for vessels in the Baltic Sea The feasibility of introducing a scheme for charging for emissions of sulphur and nitrogen oxides from sea vessels in the Baltic Sea looks promising, but needs further investigation, according to environmental consultant Per Kågeson. At the conference "Greening Motorways of the Sea", held in Stockholm on 21-22 April, environmental consultant Per Kågeson presented the idea of applying environmentally differentiated en-route charges for ships. Such a scheme could be modelled on the successful Swedish emission charge on nitrogen oxides (NOx) from land-based larger combustion plants, where the money is returned to the owners based on the plants' annual net production of useful energy. However, in the case of shipping, a better ground for recycling money might be, according to Kågeson, to divide the total annual revenue from the scheme by the number of gross registered tonne-kilometres of shipping in the designated sea area belonging to each ship owner. Another possibility would be to use the revenue for funding grants to ships that invest in air pollutant abatement techniques. There might be additional options for returning the money in ways that do not interfere with the effectiveness of the charge. Provided that the level of the charge is accurately set, this programme would provide a correct marginal incentive without causing the average ship to pay more than it will receive. However, ship owners who invest in emission abatement techniques would receive more than they pay, and owners of heavily polluting ships would pay more than they get back. For the industry as such it would be a zero sum game. The Baltic Sea has some of the busiest shipping routes in the world, with around 2,000 sizeable ships normally at sea at any time, and these shipping activities contribute significantly to air pollution problems in the region. Moreover, shipping in the Baltic Sea is expected to grow 70-100 per cent between 2005 and 2015. Efficient, low-cost techniques for considerably reducing the emissions of air pollutants from shipping are available - the real challenge is therefore legal and political rather than technical. Against this background, Per Kågeson has made some initial exploration of the feasibility of introducing an emissions charging scheme for maritime transport in the Baltic Sea. A longer-term objective may be to develop a regime that internalizes the social costs of sea transport in a similar way to that proposed for road transport. Some of the potential practical and legal obstacles were addressed by Kågeson, and his preliminary conclusions in relation to these are summarized below: Is it possible to effectively measure and control emissions covered by the charge? Measuring emissions and/or registering the specific emissions from different vessels appear not to be a technical problem. The Automatic Identification System (AIS) system makes it possible to identify all ships and to measure the distance that each ship travels in the sea area. Would the scheme conflict with the right of innocent passage as expressed in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)? One way for Baltic Sea states to avoid a conflict with the right of innocent passage would be to make clear that the charge is relevant only to ships calling at ports in states that have chosen to participate in the scheme. This means that no ship is charged for crossing the Baltic Sea on its way to a port that is not participating. This would, for instance, be the case for trips to Russian ports, if the coastal states belonging to the European Union choose to participate but Russia decided not to. The fact that the fee would correspond to emissions emitted from the point of entry into Baltic Sea waters or since departure from another Baltic port, would not imply a violation of the right of innocent passage. The ship owner or his customers could alternatively choose a port that is not part of the programme - a risk that those creating and adopting the scheme must be aware of. Would emissions charging conflict with the rules of UNCLOS Article 26, which declares that no charge may be levied upon foreign ships by reason only of their passage through the territorial sea, and that charges may be levied upon a foreign ship passing through the territorial sea as payment only for specific services rendered to the ship? In the case of a revenue-neutral charge there will be no net payment levied upon foreign ships and the right of passage would not be violated. Would the introduction of kilometre charging require an amendment to the MARPOL 73/78 Convention in order to avoid conflict with harmonized international regulations? Coastal states may introduce more stringent emission standards not only in territorial waters but also in their respective economic zones for the protection not only of sensitive sea areas but also for the protection of human health, vulnerable terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems, materials and cultural heritage, etc. The potential conflict between such standards and the right of innocent passage diminishes if the coastal states use flexible policy instruments such as non-revenue raising charges instead of enforcing mandatory technical standards. The potential conflict ceases to exist in the case where the policy instrument is used only in connection with calls at ports belonging to the participating states. When designed in this manner, the introduction of a distance-related en-route charge is neither conditional on amendments to MARPOL nor on any decision by the International Maritime Organization. Would a decision on kilometre charging in European sea areas require a unanimous vote in the EU Council of Ministers? Programmes that may be considered as tax regimes would be difficult to introduce in the EU as they require a unanimous vote in the European Council. However, distance-related en-route charges that apply to calls at ports in some member states do not require a vote by the Council at all. According to the Treaty's principle of subsidiarity, member states are free to act in areas that do not require common legislation, provided that the measures taken are non-discriminatory and proportional to the objective pursued. If member states bordering the Baltic Sea feel that they need to protect their environment from airborne pollutants from ships, other member states have no reason to object so long as ships or cargo owners registered in their countries are not discriminated against. Alternatively, if the European Commission thinks that the Baltic scheme is of such importance that it should be introduced by common law, a decision on a possible EU directive can be taken by qualified majority as it does not set any tax rates. It is rather a framework of much the same character as the existing directive on road charging. Kågeson's study represents the first step towards an investigation of the feasibility of creating a scheme for kilometre charging of sea vessels in the Baltic Sea. He underlines that, besides the legal aspects, it is necessary to conduct an in-depth analysis of the size of the charges and of how the revenue would be returned to the shipping sector. The possibility of combining the administration of the en-route charge with other tasks based on the AIS system would also require further elaboration. Christer Ågren Reducing Emissions from Ships in the Baltic Sea Area: The feasibility of introducing a distance-related en-route charge. By Per Kågeson, Nature Associates, April 2005. To be published by the European Federation for Transport and Environment, www.t-e.nu. E-mail contact: kageson (at) comhem.se Emission control is cost-effective There is no apparent reason for the continued lax regulation of shipping emissions. Air pollution from shipping is a problem that is drawing increased attention, internationally as well as nationally, especially in Europe and the US. The impact of shipping emissions on health and the environment include premature death, various illnesses and lung complaints, as well as acidification, eutrophication of terrestrial and coastal ecosystems, and climate change. According to a recent report1 there are, however, feasible and cost-effective methods for substantially reducing air emissions from ships. Produced by a coalition of environmental organizations (NGOs), this report has been submitted to the forthcoming meeting of the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (see box below). Until recently, air pollution from ships went largely unregulated, with regulatory and advocacy focus on more visible land-based sources. As a result, emissions from shipping have come to represent an increasingly large share of air pollution. Given the increasing pace of shipping activity, without stringent controls, shipping emissions are likely to become an even larger environmental problem in the coming years. The authors of the report note that the permitted rates of SO2, NOx and PM emissions from marine engines are much greater than from almost any other category of mobile sources. The US Environmental Protection Agency's current regulations permit diesel marine engines fitted to new coastal and harbour craft to emit NOx and PM at rates between 2 and 27 times higher than new non-road, land-based heavy-duty diesels. Furthermore, emission rates for larger ocean-going ships are higher still, up to 43 times higher for NOx, and infinitely higher for PM, as there are no PM standards at all for these large marine diesels. According to the NGOs, there is no justification for the continuation of such large disparities between diesel emissions at sea and on land. On the contrary, the cost-effectiveness of measures to reduce marine emissions of air pollutants compares very favourably with further measures for land-based sources. In other words, it is less expensive - in some cases, dramatically less expensive - to obtain the necessary reductions from marine engines rather than additional reductions from land-based sources. Like power plants, large marine engines can have very long lives (20-30 years or more), so it will take a long time for the effect of emission standards for new marine engines to be fully realized throughout the fleet. Therefore, in order to reduce the environmental impact from shipping, it will be necessary to reduce emissions from existing ships through a combination of cleaner fuel, engine modifications, add-on retrofits and other measures. At the same time, it is important to begin to reduce emissions from new engines as soon as possible. The report provides a survey of the most promising emission control measures for ships, which are summarized below: Lower sulphur content in fuel One of the most important initial actions that can be immediately taken to reduce shipping emissions is to lower the sulphur level in marine fuels. Because SO2 emissions are directly proportional to the sulphur content of the fuel burned, this will produce immediate reductions. For instance, reducing the sulphur level of marine heavy fuel oil (HFO) used by ocean-going ships from the current average of 2.7 to 0.5 per cent would reduce SO2 emissions from those ships by about 80 per cent. Lowering the fuel sulphur content will also reduce sulphate formation and therefore PM emissions. Moreover, large cuts in fuel sulphur content will permit additional reductions in NOx and PM from both new and existing engines using certain after-treatment devices that do not work as effectively in the presence of high sulphur concentrations. Other SO2 reduction measures Another possible means of reducing shipping emissions of SO2 is seawater scrubbing. This is essentially the marine equivalent of flue-gas desulphurization, a well-established, reliable and cost-effective control methodology used in power plants, for example. Trials using this technology indicate that it can achieve sustainable removal levels of about 74-80 per cent. Potential emission reductions of up to 95 per cent for SO2 and 80 per cent for PM have been claimed, but still remain to be verified in practical use. Widespread adoption of seawater scrubbing will likely be dependent upon satisfactory resolution of the issue of the impact of seawater scrubbing on water quality. The spent effluent from the scrubber contains particulates and other pollutants, as well as sulphur compounds. Although the effluent can be treated prior to discharge to remove many of the contaminants, the discharge will be more acidic than seawater. The potential impact of this discharge on water quality is presently under review. NOx reduction measures There are a larger variety of NOx reduction measures available, and these may be classified as engine modifications, pre-engine technologies and after-treatment technologies. Engine modifications such as engine de-rating, retarding injection timing, fuel injector upgrades, etc., have been reported to reduce NOx by about 15-20 per cent, but may have the disadvantage of increasing PM emissions and fuel consumption somewhat. More advanced combinations of internal engine modifications are under development, and these are projected to be able to reduce NOx emissions to levels that are at least 30-40 per cent below the MARPOL Annex VI standard. Pre-engine approaches generally involve the reduction of combustion temperature by the addition of water to the combustion process. Water can be injected into the combustion chamber, reducing NOx by almost 30 per cent, with higher reductions reported. A variation of this approach is the addition of water vapour to the combustion air (called "humid air motor" or HAM). The retrofitting of a Scandinavian ferry, the MS Mariella, for HAM in 1999 was reported to reduce NOx emissions by 80-85 per cent. Mixing water with the fuel to create a stable emulsion is an approach particularly suited for ships using residual fuel, which may contain emulsified water in any event (standard engine design permits about a 20-per-cent water mixture). This technology is reported to reduce NOx emissions by up to about 40 per cent or more, and PM by about 15 per cent or more. Large NOx reductions may be achieved with selective catalytic reduction (SCR), which involves treatment of the exhaust gases with ammonia or urea in the presence of a catalyst. SCR has been effectively used in both marine and land-based applications, producing mobile source emission reductions of NOx ranging from 65-99 per cent, with an average of about 80 per cent. PM reductions in the range of 30-40 per cent have also been reported. Because the size of SCR installations can be an issue in marine applications, a compact form of SCR has been developed for ships, and has been demonstrated to reduce NOx by 85-95 per cent from ocean-going ships burning fuel with sulphur contents up to one per cent. (Very high levels of sulphur in the fuel may reduce the efficiency of these compact marine SCR systems.) In addition to those NOx reduction measures available at present, other control measures are being developed but are not yet available commercially. One highly effective catalyst-based control technology projected by the US EPA to be available over the next decade is the NOx adsorber, which is capable of reducing emissions by over 90 per cent. This control technology will only be effective with engines that use ultra-low sulphur fuel (up to 15 ppm), which will be available in the US for coastal and inland marine diesel engines by 2012. PM reduction measures Advanced PM reduction techniques such as particulate filters and diesel oxidation catalysts have been used for years in many land-based diesel applications. Advanced diesel oxidation catalysts can reduce PM by between about 20 and 50 per cent, given low sulphur fuel. Catalyzed diesel particulate filters are much more effective, achieving removal efficiencies of up to 99 per cent, given ultra-low sulphur fuel. The US EPA has recently stated that "PM filters and NOx adsorbers can be applied to marine diesel engines for emission reductions of 90 per cent or more." These technologies are however not yet as fully developed for application to the largest marine diesel engines. Alternative power sources A different approach to reducing air pollution from shipping is to use a different fuel or power source for the ship's engines. Natural gas engines are commercially available and have been used on ships for more than a decade. Although emissions data for marine natural gas ships is not voluminous, emissions of NOx and PM from their land-based counterparts are extremely low. At present, cost and the lack of a marine fuelling infrastructure appear to be the primary barriers to the more widespread use of this approach. Ships powered by fuel cells are even cleaner. Although this technology is not yet commercially available, it has the potential in the future of powering a clean and efficient fleet of marine vessels. A further opportunity exists to reduce emissions from ships at berth. Ships at dock operate either their auxiliary or main engines to meet their electrical "hotel" power needs. These hotelling emissions can be substantial, even if they are produced by auxiliary engines running on cleaner distillate fuel (rather than HFO). For many ships, these emissions can be more or less eliminated through the use of shore-side electrical power, often called "cold ironing." Conclusions It is concluded that there is no apparent reason for the continued lax regulation of shipping emissions. This is especially true given the availability of feasible and cost-effective means of reducing those emissions. While different engine types and configurations will definitely result in a variety of appropriate control measures being applied, in general, the most promising appear to be: - For SO2 reduction, lower sulphur content in fuel, and once water quality issues can be resolved, seawater scrubbing; - For NOx reduction, internal engine modifications, water/fuel emulsions, water or water vapour introduced into the combustion process, and SCR; - For PM reduction, SO2 reduction measures, as well as advanced diesel oxidation catalysts and particulate filters. The environmental NGOs expect that a variety of new and efficient control technologies will become available in the future as air pollution from ships becomes an increasingly pressing issue. Experience from other sectors indicates that the tightening of emission limits is likely to spur on and hasten the development of these control technologies. Christer Ågren 1 Reducing Shipping Emissions of Air Pollution - Feasible and Cost-effective Options" (2005). Produced by Clean Air Task Force, Bluewater Network, European Environmental Bureau, European Federation for Transport and Environment, North Sea Foundation, Seas at Risk and the Swedish NGO Secretariat on Acid Rain. Available in pdf format here (pdf, 260 kB)
Effects of f-gases evaluated In an effort to protect the ozone layer around the Earth a long list of ozone-depleting substances have been replaced with other gases, which unfortunately contribute to global warming. A new report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in collaboration with an expert panel under the Montreal Protocol, identifies the danger to climate posed by the use of these ozone-friendly flourinated gases (f gases), and identifies ways to minimize their warming effect. The report is the result of two years of work by 145 experts from 35 countries. In the business-as-usual scenario, annual CFC and HCFC emissions are together decreasing from 2.1 to 1.2 billion tonnes CO2-equivalents from 2002 to 2015, and annual emissions of HFCs are increasing from 0.4 to 1.2 billion tonnes CO2-equivalents the same period. The contribution to global warming of flourinated gases can be halved, according to the report, by measures that reduce emissions, such as better containment to prevent leaks and evaporation, reducing the amounts of the chemicals needed in equipment, and improving end-of-life recovery, recycling and destruction of HFCs and PFCs. The use of alternative substances with a lower or zero global warming potential should be increased. The report gives specific emission reduction and cost estimates for applications that use flourinated gases, which include not only refrigeration and air conditioning but also foams, medical aerosols, solvents and fire protection. Further reading: IPCC/TEAP Special Report: Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons. A summary for policy makers can be downloaded from www.ipcc.ch. The full report will be published later this year by Cambridge University Press. Global emission trends Emissions of sulphur and nitrogen oxides are continuing to fall in Europe but rise in Asia, according to calculations based on individual countries' predictions of economic development. The upward trend is slower than in previous predictions, however. Emissions of sulphur dioxide have fallen since 1990, not just in Europe but around the world, and a continuing reduction can be expected in coming years. This is the conclusion of a new analysis by IIASA1, and contradicts many previous assumptions of a sharp rise in emissions in the future. The researchers at IIASA have supplemented the regional versions of the RAINS computer model that exists for Europe and Asia with country-specific data for North America, the countries of the former Soviet Union, Latin America, Africa and Australia.2 The critical factors in the forecasts of future emissions are expected economic activity (primarily energy use) and emission control requirements. In the RAINS model, emissions of pollutants are calculated as a product of activity level, uncontrolled emission factor, removal efficiency of control technology applied, and implementation level of that technology in a given emission scenario. The report presents two scenarios for the period 1990-2030. The "current legislation" scenario (CLE) reflects the current perspectives of individual countries on economic development and takes into account the anticipated effects of already agreed emission control legislation. The "maximum technically feasible reduction" scenario (MFR) outlines the scope for emission reduction offered by a full implementation of the best available emission control technologies. Compilation of national expectations for the development of energy demand within the next 30 years results in an increase of global energy-related annual emissions of carbon dioxide of about 4.4 billion tonnes of carbon in 2030 (current annual emissions are around 6 billion tonnes). Since the study concentrates on national emissions, the emissions from international shipping and aviation are not included. Sulphur dioxide According to the IIASA calculations, global SO2 emissions in 1990 were about 122 million tonnes. In 2000 the emissions were about 20 per cent lower, which was mainly due to strict controls implemented in Western Europe, but also due to economic restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe and in Russia and the Newly Independent States (see table 1 and figure 1).
Under the baseline assumptions (CLE), global emissions will decrease to about 97 million tonnes in 2010 and then increase again to 105 million tonnes by 2030, unless stricter controls are enforced in some world regions, particularly Southeast Asia. Implementation of the best available control technology (MFR) could reduce the emissions to about one fifth of the 1990 level by 2030. Future development of emissions is strongly region-dependent. In five regions - Pacific OECD, Russia and the Newly Independent States, Middle East and North Africa, Central and Eastern Europe, and Western Europe - emissions are forecast to decrease by 40 to more than 60 per cent. The decrease in North and Latin America is modest, at 5-14 per cent. The emissions from Centrally Planned Asia and China stabilize at a level close to year 2000 emissions. However, if policy targets from the recently announced pollution control plans in China materialize, the resulting emissions might significantly decrease. National projections anticipate a large increase in the consumption of coal in many countries in South and Pacific Asia. Since the legislation in those countries is rather liberal, the SO2 emissions are likely to increase. This could be particularly dramatic in South Asia, where the current policies might cause a factor of three increase over the current level. Nitrogen oxides The calculations show no change in global emissions between 1990 and 2000. From then on the CLE scenario predicts a slight reduction until 2010, followed by rising emissions (see figure 2 and table 2). The rise is however significantly lower than in previous estimates, mainly because many developing countries have enforced stricter control requirements for mobile sources in recent years.
The moderate increase in emissions from developing countries would be partly offset by the decline in European emissions, so that global anthropogenic emissions would grow by no more than 13 per cent up to the year 2030. Implementation of the best available control technology (the MFR scenario) could reduce these emissions to about one third of the 1990 level by 2030. As with SO2, the future development of NOx emissions is strongly region-dependent. The calculations suggest a strong decline in Europe and stabilization in North America due to present emission control legislation, despite the underlying economic growth and the corresponding increase in transport volumes. For Asia, current national expectations anticipate a growth in transport demand by a factor of four to five. However, under the assumption of full implementation of the recently decided pollution control legislation for vehicles, NOx emissions would not grow by more than 60 per cent from present levels until the year 2030. Latin American emissions are expected to stabilize due to recently imposed control requirements in the majority of countries in this region. Carbon monoxide Carbon monoxide is primarily of interest due to its contribution to the formation of ground-level ozone at the hemispheric scale. According to the CLE scenario, global emissions will fall by around 15 per cent between 2000 and 2030, despite increased economic activity. Most previous calculations have indicated a sharp increase. Once again there are regional differences. The highest decline, by 55 per cent, occurs in Latin America, mainly due to a switch from fuel wood to other energy sources in the residential sector. The only region with increasing emissions is Africa, with a rise of 10 per cent. This leads to a global decrease in the anthropogenic emissions of 16 per cent from 1990 to 2030 under the CLE scenario. Methane Like carbon monoxide, methane contributes to the formation of ground-level ozone at the hemispheric scale. Methane is also a greenhouse gas. The IIASA analysis suggests that "current legislation" (CLE) will result in a continued increase in global anthropogenic emissions, leading to 35 per cent higher emissions in 2030 than in 2000. Overall, emissions from all sectors are expected to grow due to increased economic activity and absence of widespread emission control measures. The calculated growth in emissions is close to other estimates, for example those used in the IPCC emission scenarios. Emission control Implementation of the best available control technology (MFR) would make it possible to further reduce the emissions of all these pollutants. Compared with 2000 levels, the achievable reductions are 77 per cent for SO2, 67 per cent for NOx, 53 per cent for CO, and 6 per cent for CH4. In this context it should be noted that the potential for emission reductions offered by structural changes, such as increased energy efficiency measures, fuel substitution, more efficient production techniques or reduced transport demand were not considered in this scenario. Earlier studies have shown that the emission reduction potential of such measures is considerable. Per Elvingson 1 Scenarios of World Anthropogenic Emissions of Air Pollutants and Methane up to 2030. By J. Cofala, M. Amann and R. Mechler. International Institute for Applied System Analysis, 2005. Available at www.iiasa.ac.at/rains/global_emiss/global_emiss.html 2 In total, estimates were prepared for 75 countries or country groups. Detailed emissions by scenario and country are available at the same address as above. Table 1. Emissions of sulphur dioxide by world regions: Current legislation (CLE) and maximum technically feasible reduction (MFR) scenarios. Million tonnes SO2. Emissions from biomass burning, international shipping and aircraft are not included.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
