Markus Amann Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM)

1. Baseline emission projections for the revision of the Gothenburg protocolAll calculations refer to Parties in the EMEP modelling domain Markus Amann Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM) International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

2. Baseline assumptions:Activity projections EU-27: • PRIMES energy projection that meets the targets of the EU Climate and Energy Package (as in NEC Report#6) • EU-wide target for ETS sector • Non-ETS targets will be met in each Member State • Full trading of renewable energy • CDM/JI for ETS and non-ETS <€ 30/t CO2 • National agricultural projections submitted to CIAM Other Parties: • Latest available projections available at CIAM • As documented in CIAM report 1/2008, no further information received since then

3. Baseline energy projections

4. Baseline CO2 emissions

5. Baseline assumptions:Emission control measures EU-27: • “Current policy” case, as in NEC Report #6: • Current national legislation • Commission proposals on Euro-VI and IPPC revision • Additional measures to meet 2010 NECs in 2020 • But NO measures for meeting legislation that cannot be reliably quantified (e.g., AQ directive, Nitrate Directive, etc.) Norway and Switzerland: • Current national legislation Other Parties: • Baseline case of CIAM Report 1/2008 • Controls only for PM from stationary sources

6. Baseline emissionsrelative to 2000

7. Environmental impacts Impact indicators: • Loss in statistical life expectancy attributable to PM2.5 • Ecosystems with nitrogen deposition in excess of critical loads (using ecosystem-specific deposition calculation) • Forest and catchment areas with acid deposition in excess of critical loads • Cases of premature deaths attributable to ozone Assumed boundary conditions: • Emission from ships: without recent MARPOL proposal • Hemispheric ozone: +2.4 ppb in 2020 • Five-years meteorological conditions

8. Baseline impact indicatorsrelative to 2000

9. Baseline impacts calculated for 2020 PM2.5: Loss in stat. life expectancy Eutrophication: Ecosystems area > CL Acidification: Forest area > CL Acidification: Freshwater catchment > CL

10. MRR case“Maximum reductions included in RAINS” MRR assumes: • Full implementation of all technical end-of-pipe emission controls that are considered in RAINS • Respecting natural turnover of capital stock, i.e., no pre-mature scrapping of existing installations MRR does not consider potentials from: • Energy efficiency improvements*) • Fuel substitution*) • Behavioural changes • Lower demand for energy services • Alternative paths of economic development*) these are considered in GAINS

11. Baseline and MRR emissionsrelative to 2000

12. Baseline and MRR impact indicatorsrelative to 2000

13. Uncertainties and sensitivities • Baseline projections are sensitive towards • Underlying activity pathways: Assumptions about employed activity pathways have received only limited review by Parties • Assumed implementation of national legislation: Conservative assumptions have been used for EECCA countries. • Assumptions on boundary conditions • Implementation of additional measures for ships could result in significant lower environmental impacts • If baseline projections should serve as starting point for analyses of further measures, above assumptions must be shared by negotiating Parties.

14. Conclusions • Baseline emissions and air quality impacts are expected to • decline in the EU countries, • show no clear trends in the other countries. • Further improvements are technically feasible. • Further cost-effectiveness analysis requires guidance from negotiating Parties about shared key assumptions on • Baseline activity pathways • Baseline emission control legislation • Impacts of policies in other areas (climate, agriculture, energy security, etc.) • Development of ship emissions.