The effectiveness of the un ece clrtap heavy metals protocol emissions reduction and costs
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 17

The effectiveness of the UN-ECE CLRTAP Heavy Metals Protocol emissions reduction (and costs) PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 74 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

The effectiveness of the UN-ECE CLRTAP Heavy Metals Protocol emissions reduction (and costs). Based on a study by: Hugo Denier van der Gon, Maarten van het Bolscher & Antoon Visschedijk TNO Built Environment and Geosciences Presented by: Maarten van het Bolscher ,

Download Presentation

The effectiveness of the UN-ECE CLRTAP Heavy Metals Protocol emissions reduction (and costs)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


The effectiveness of the un ece clrtap heavy metals protocol emissions reduction and costs

The effectiveness of the UN-ECE CLRTAP Heavy Metals Protocol emissions reduction (and costs)

Based on a study by:

Hugo Denier van der Gon, Maarten van het Bolscher & Antoon Visschedijk

TNO Built Environment and Geosciences

Presented by:

Maarten van het Bolscher,

Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Contents

Contents

  • Aims

  • Structure and scope of the study

  • Methodology

  • Results

    • Inventory / projections

    • Scenarios and Contribution of source sectors

    • Country specific data

  • Conclusions

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Aims of the study

Aims of the study

  • Increase quality of emission inventories and projections (in countries);

  • Evaluate the emission reductions achieved by the protocols;

  • Identify the (relative) importance of sources for a second step in reducing the release of Heavy Metals into the environment;

  • Provide input for predictive modeling of environmental distribution, exposure of ecosystems, source–receptor relationships

    Choices and/or Limitations of this study:

  • no re-emissions or illegal emissions -> underestimation of “real” emissions

  • No in-depth review of emission factors

  • Official emissions “overrule” expert emissions

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Structure of the study

Structure of the study

  • Phase I

  • For 3 priority HM (Cd, Pb, Hg) + 6 HM

  • Emission inventory for 2000 and projections for 2010, 2015 and 2020

  • Emission reduction due to implementation of the HM Protocols

  • Indicate key sources to select options for measures + reductions

  • Phase II

  • Assess emission reduction and costs of options for a second step in the HM/POP Protocols

Finalized in 2006

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Scope

Scope

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


The effectiveness of the un ece clrtap heavy metals protocol emissions reduction and costs

Scope

Sectors

1_PHP

Public heat and power

2_RCO

Residential, commercial and other;

3_IND

Industry; Includes both combustion and process emission;

4_SPU

Solvent and product use;

5_ROT

Road transport

6_NRT

Non-Road transport

7_WAS

Waste disposal

8_AGR

Agriculture;

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Methodology

Methodology

  • Compile an emission inventory for the year 2000 based on:

    • Official EMEP data and if not available calculated TNO estimates have been used

  • Combine year 2000 inventory with scenario’s (e.g. IIASA CAFÉ scenario) to generate projected emissions (2010-2015-2020)

  • Distribute emissions over grid to make emission maps for modelling

  • Key source analysis of remaining emissions upon full implementation of protocols

  • List possible measures to reduce remaining emissions

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


The effectiveness of the un ece clrtap heavy metals protocol emissions reduction and costs

Results: UNECE-Europe Year 2000 emission inventory of 9 HM and projected emissions following two scenarios

a) 1990 data taken from Berdowski et al. (1997a) for indicative comparison. Countries not covered by Berdowski et al. are represented by their year 2000 emissions; b) NA = Not Available.

  • Based on officially submitted country emissions and TNO estimates to achieve completeness of countries and substances by sector.

  • BL_CLE_CRHM (Current Legislation and Current Ratification of HM protocol)

  • BL_CLE_FIHM (Current Legislation and Full Implementation of HM protocol)

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Relative change projected hm emissions for unece europe compared to year 2000 for two scenarios

Relative change projected HM emissions for UNECE-Europe compared to year 2000 for two scenarios

Current Legislation & ratification (CRHM), all emissions will decline except for Cr. The increase in Cr emissions is due to a projected activity increase for Nickel production in countries that have not ratified the HM protocol.

Full Implementation (FIHM) the projected emissions of all HM decline sharply except for Hg because most measures implemented are based on limit values for dust emissions and Hg emissions are largely gaseous

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


The effectiveness of the un ece clrtap heavy metals protocol emissions reduction and costs

Relative contribution of source sectors to remaining HM emissions upon full implementation of the HM protocol by all UNECE-Europe countries 2020.

The key source analysis allows a more detailed break down of the remaining contribution by species

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


The effectiveness of the un ece clrtap heavy metals protocol emissions reduction and costs

Preliminary assessment of measures to further reduce HM emissions after FIHM based on key source analysis

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


The effectiveness of the un ece clrtap heavy metals protocol emissions reduction and costs

Source sector contributions to cadmium emissions in the year 2000 and projected year 2020 contribution assuming full implementation in UNECE-Europe.

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Remaining contributions to cd emissions in unece europe 2020 full implementation of hm protocol

Remaining contributions to Cd emissions in UNECE Europe 2020, full implementation of HM Protocol.

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


See excel sheet

See Excel sheet

Country (Group) Results:

  • Emissions increase going from 2000 to 2020

  • Full Implementation -> major emission (~50%) reductions are achieved

  • Country specific inventory data

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Conclusions phase i

Conclusions Phase I

  • Industrial combustion & processes followed by Public heat and power generation are the most important sectors for HM emissions to air;

  • There are regional differences in the relative importance of source sector contributions;

  • Upon full implementation of the HM protocol the emissions of all HM are considerably reduced (20-60%) compared to the year 2000 except for Hg;

  • EU legislation covers regulations in HM Protocol;

  • Hg is mostly emitted in the gaseous phase and is poorly mitigated by the currently proposed measures that focus on particulate / dust emissions -> needs specific attention!

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Side effect pm emission reduction due to full implementation hm protocol

Side effect: PM emission reduction due to full implementation HM Protocol

Compared to 1995 total European PM emissions (CEPMEIP) full implementation may result in the estimated reductions of;

  • TSP ~ 3.7 Mt or ~ 25% of total TSP

  • PM10 1.2 Mt or 16% of total PM10

  • PM2.5 0.28 Mt or 6% of total PM2.5

  • The largest reduction is achieved in the power generation sector.

  • Note:First autonomous measures are implemented (e.g. IPPC directive for the EC25) and than the additional PM reduction is quantified. If the procedure would be first HM protocol, than (other) autonomous measures the side effect of the HM Protocol on PM reduction is much larger.

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


Thanks for your attention

Thanks for your attention

  • More detailed country data available

  • Report available on www.tno.nl/HM_POP

    ? Questions ?

Workshop to Promote the Ratification of the UN-ECE CLRTAP HM Protocol. 14-16 May 2008, Yerevan, Armenia.


  • Login