Transcript Preparations for the revision of the Gothenburg Protocol

Markus Amann
Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM)
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Preparations for the revision of the
Gothenburg Protocol
27th Session of the Executive Body of the
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
Geneva, December 14-18, 2009
Contents
• State of baseline scenario
• Targets for vegetation damage from ozone
Availability of national energy scenarios
as of December 2009
New national
scenarios received
IEA World Energy
Outlook 2008
PRIMES 2008 Climate & Energy package
(NEC report #6)
Czech Republic
Belarus
Austria
Latvia
Denmark
Bosnia-H.
Belgium
Lithuania
Finland
Croatia
Bulgaria
Luxembourg
Greece
Moldova
Cyprus
Malta
Ireland
Russia
Estonia
Poland
Italy
Serbia
France
Romania
Netherlands
Ukraine
Germany
Slovakia
Norway
TFYROM
Hungary
Slovenia
Portugal
Turkey
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
UK
Comparison of assumed GDP growth
between 2005 and 2020
200%
GDP in 2020 relative to 2005
150%
100%
50%
0%
CZ
DK
FI
GR
IE
IT
C&E package 2008
NL
NO
PRIMES 2009
PT
ES
SE
National projections
CH
UK
Comparison of oil prices assumed in national
scenarios for 2020
Oil price assumed for 2020 (US-$/barrel)
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
CZ
DK
FI
GR
IE
IT
NL
NO
PT
ES
SE
CH
UK
Comparison of carbon prices assumed for 2020
National scenarios vs. PRIMES C&E package
50
Carbon price (€/t CO2)
40
30
20
10
0
CZ
DK
FI
GR
IE
IT
NL
National scenario
NO
PT
ES
PRIMES C&E package
SE
CH
UK
Consultation on national baselines
http://gains.iiasa.ac.at/Goth_data
Consultation on national baselines
• Information sent out to national experts
Excel sheets on
–
–
–
–
macro-economic drivers,
activity data,
emission factors,
emissions.
• Feedbacks to CIAM invited before end January 2010
• Presentation at final baseline at TIAM37, Feb 22-23, 2010
Vegetation damage from ozone
• Flux calculations suggest different spatial pattern of
damage than AOT40
• While flux quantifications are not yet available for the
relevant tree species,
– would targets based on fluxes lead to different emission
reduction requirements in Europe?
Ozone damage indicators: AOT40 and AFst1.6
AOT40
AFSt(Y=1.6) for beech
Source: Simpson et al., Env. Poll. (2007)
Contributions of NOx and VOC emissions to AFst1.6
EMEP calculations for GAINS 2020 emissions
Contribution of NOx to AFst1.6
Contribution of VOC to AFst1.6
Conclusions
• Feedbacks to draft national baseline projections invited
before end of January 2010.
• The use of targets based on O3 fluxes instead of AOT40 would call
for even higher NOx reductions in central Europe, on top what is
already implied by the targets for health impacts from PM and O3,
eutrophication and acidification.
• There is a need for robust science and convincing communication
to the public about the urgency of vegetation damage from ozone.