synergies on data collection and reporting between emission … · 2016-11-03 · 2. emission...

Synergies on data collection and reporting between emission inventories and PRTR

UNECE Workshop

Juan Luis Martín Ortega

Minsk 19-21 September 2016

Contents 1. Introduction

2. Emission inventories

3. PRTR data

4. Comparison between emission inventories and PRTR

5. International context and experiences

6. Key issues/conclusion

1. Introduction – scope of the

presentation

– Focus on air quality emissions

– Emission inventories and PRTR had, in their foundation, different objectives (PRTR: Public information; Emission inventories: national policy making) and so their characteristics, methods and requirements are different in this presentation we are analysing these differences and the synergies between systems.

– International context and best practices.

Entrepreneurial associations

Energy balances

National statistics

Questionnaires

Questions for verification

Activity data

Emissions

Emission factors

Inventory Team: Inventory compilation

Reporting: CLRTAP, UNFCCC, NECD.

Production plants

Emission inventories PRTR

Production plants

Competent Authorities

Competent Authorities

Emissions

1 – Introduction – Comparison

Issue Emission Inventories

PRTR

Primary Purpose Policy making Public information

Who compile Compilers Facilities

Verification QA/QC & CLRTAP reviews

Competent authorities, Compliance Committe

Coverage National % National

Pollutants Different definition

Activities Different activities

1 – Introduction – Comparison

The main difference is the very principle of each system: • Emission inventories: based on estimates national total • PRTR: only facilities data % of national total

Inventories also use

facilities data on emissions!!!

National total: inventories

PRTR


What is an Emissions Inventory?

Definition:

• A collection of quantified emissions estimates, that specifies:

– Media

– Pollutants

– Source coverage

– Geographical coverage

– Time resolution & coverage

…………………………Emissions to Air

…………………GHGs & Air Quality pollutants

…………Usually everything!

…National, Regional, or Local

…Typically: annual, 1990-2014

Toxic Pollutants PM2.5 PM10 CO

(Black Carbon, TSP)

Acidifying Pollutants & Ozone Precursors

NOX SO2 NMVOC NH3

Persistent Organics 4 PAHs PCDD/F PCB

Pesticides (HCB, HCH)

“Heavy Metals” Pb Cd Hg

(As Cr Cu Ni Se Zn)

Pollutants:

Activity Data Fuel: Solid, Liquid, Gaseous, Biomass, Other

Greenhouse Gases CO2 CH4 N2O

HFC PFC SF6


What is an Emissions Inventory?


What is an Emissions Inventory? Drivers

Emission Inventories

International

Commitments &

Legislation

Public

Information Energy

Efficiency

Econometric

Studies &

Projections

Research

Programmes

National Policy

Formation &

Commitments

Point Sources

Emissions &

Nuisance

International

Negotiations

Dispersion

Modelling

Studies

Health Impact

Studies

Env. Impact

Assessments

Local

Government

Commitments

2. Emission inventories What is an Emissions Inventory? Sources

Sector Splits &“At Source” Inventories

• Different reporting formats - different detail;

• International reporting formats have ~100 sources;

• Developed national inventories might have 1000.

• Emission Inventories are typically “At Source”

– “Footprinting” is a different approach.

2. Emission inventories What is an Emissions Inventory? Geography & Time

Geographical Coverage: • National emissions inventory – straightforward?

Time Resolution & Coverage: • Annual resolution

• 1990 – 2014

• Typically runs 2 years behind current year

• Each year the whole time series is revised:

– To capture methodological improvements

– Ensure internal consistency

– Inventory versions can be confusing!

2. Emission inventories What is an Emissions Inventory? Sources

Source Types

• Point Sources

– Some sources can be individually estimated e.g. power stations, large industrial installations;

– “Bottom-up” approach.

• Line and Area Sources

– Smaller sources too numerous to consider individually e.g. domestic, road transport;

– “Top-down” approach.

2. Emission inventories– reporting requirements

Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) and its Protocols

(Protocols on NOx, VOCs, Sulphur, Heavy metals, POPs and the Gothenburg

Protocol)

Emission inventory reporting shall cover all years from 1990 to N-2 (2000 onwards

for PM). Projections should be reported for NOx, NMVOC, SOx, NH3 and BC (if

available). Deadlines:

Full time series of emissions (Annex I) annually by 15 February

IIRs (Annex II) annually by 15 March

Projection reports (Annex III) every four years by 15 March

Gridded data (Annex V) every four years by 1 May

LPS information (Annex VI) every four years by 1 May.

Entrepreneurial associations

Energy balances

National statistics

Questionnaires

Questions for verification

Activity data

Emissions

Emission factors

Inventory Team: Inventory compilation

Reporting: CLRTAP, UNFCCC, NECD.

Production plants

Emission inventories

Methodological choice Data gathering

Designing of questionnaires Processing and analysis of data

Estimating emissions

Guidelines: EMEP/EEA & IPCC

Compilation

2. Emission inventories – Methodology

Guidebooks provide guidance by source activity. Generally:

Tier 1: Activity data X Emission Factor (unabated)

Tier 2: Activity data X Emission Factor

Tier 3: Continuous Measurements

All sources, included diffuse sources!

http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-guidebook-2013









2. Emission inventories What is an Emissions Inventory? Compilation

TCCCA Criteria • Transparency

the submission shows clearly the methods, assumptions and data sources used for

the estimates

• Completeness

all anthropogenic sources of emission are included for which there are methods

provided in the Guidebooks

• Consistency (internal) emission estimates are compiled using similar and compatible methods across Parties and provided at a similar level of detail

• Comparability (external) the data provided by a party has consistent data and assumptions across years and pollutants reported (Time bounded)


TCCCA Criteria

• Accuracy Key Categories use higher tiered methods for more accurate estimates, QA/QC is undertaken to check for errors and bias and to support continuous improvement and uncertainties in emission estimates are minimised and uncertainty analysis forms the basis of prioritising future improvements by the Party


• The inventory team estimate emissions for all categories and pollutants for all years using data from production plants, companies and national sources.

• Compilers face scarcity of data in numerous ocasions.

• Emissions are based on estimates, e.g. AD x EF

• Is PRTR data used in the compilation of national inventories?

Annual Data

Flow

Checking

Procedures

Check 1

: Choosin

g

Check 2

: Usin

g

Check 4

: Pro

ducin

g

Check 5

: Reportin

g

Data Request: Raw Data:

Compilation: Dissemination: Emissions

Check 3

:

Apply

ing

UNFCCC

CRF

UNECE

NFR

-methodology

-alternatives

-check units, time series consistency

-vs last year -energy/mass balance

-data source quality

-suitability

-reality

-mass balance checks -time series consistency -pollutant expert check -energy check -activity check

- reality check

- sector aggregation

- formats

- inventory consistency


What is an Emissions Inventory? Quality


What is an Emissions Inventory? Quality

QC: quality control. The inventory team (or people involved in the elaboration of

the inventory) perform checks to ensure the quality of the estimates.

QA: quality assurance. Independent/external users assess the quality of the

inventory as a measure to facilitate continuous improvement of the inventory.

CLRTAP reviews: Stage 1, stage 2 and stage 3 reviews are performed to

ascertain the quality of national inventories.

Is PRTR data important for QA/QC and CLRTAP review

purposes?

2. Emission inventories What is an Emissions Inventory? Inventory Outputs

NOx (2010)Electricity Generation

Industrial Combustion

Domestic Combustion

Road Transport

Other Transport

Other

PM10 (2010) Stationary CombustionRoad Transport

Other Mobile

Processes

Agriculture, Waste and Other


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Emis

sio

ns

of P

b (k

ton

ne

s) Off-Road & Other

Production Processes

Iron & Steel

Other Stationary Combustion

Public Electricity

Road Transport

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

2010


0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

NO

XE

mis

sio

ns (

Gg

ram

mes)

Other

Other Transport & Mobile Sources

Heavy duty vehicles

Passenger cars

Combustion in Industry

Commercial & Residential Combustion

Public Electricity & Heat Production

NECD

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Fu

el I

np

ut (M

illi

on

to

nn

es o

f o

il e

qu

ivale

nt)

Other Nuclear Gas Oil Coal

The UK Inventory- Outputs


What is an Emissions Inventory? CLRTAP

Requirements

• National data – historical series

• Projections

• Large Point Sources data

• Gridded emissions data

Both inventory and PRTR data are geographically referenced!


What is an Emissions Inventory? Large point sources

Large Point Sources (LPS) • Dataset of emissions from large point sources is

required every 2 years (from 2016 onwards).

– Large point sources are those emitting above specified

thresholds.

– SO2, NOX, CO, NMVOCs, NH3, PM2.5, PM10, Pb, Cd, Hg,

PAHs x 4, PCDD/F, HCB, PCBs.

Stack height classes to be reported as well (<45m, 45-100m,

100-150m, 150-200m, >200m).


What is an Emissions Inventory? Gridded Data

Gridded Emissions Data • Reported every 2 years (from

2016 onwards).

• gridded national emissions for

“all” pollutants.

• 0.1°×0.1° latitude-longitude

projection

• By GNFR sector.

3. PRTR data

3. PRTR data European Topic Centre for Air and Climate Change

(ETC/ACM)

• The ETC perform reviews on the data reported: E-PRTR data is

compared with other data (e.g. under CLRTAP/NECD directive) on air (ETC/ACC), water (ECT/W), waste (ETC/SCP)

Objective: put E-PRTR data into wider context and highlight (potential) inconsistencies in reporting under different reporting obligations highlight potential errors in reporting

Stage 1 – Semi-automated checks (comparison of 2012/2011, top5,....)

Stage 2 Air – Comparison with other data reported by MS (CLRTAP, UNFCCC, EU

ETS,…)

*Following slides introduce the reviews and show some results

Countries 1,2

,3,4

,5,6

-

he

xach

loro

cycl

oh

exa

ne

(H

CH

)

Am

mo

nia

(N

H3

)

Ars

en

ic a

nd

co

mp

ou

nd

s (a

s

As)

Cad

miu

m a

nd

co

mp

ou

nd

s (a

s

Cd

)

Car

bo

n d

ioxi

de

(C

O2

)

Car

bo

n m

on

oxi

de

(C

O)

Ch

rom

ium

an

d c

om

po

un

ds

(as

Cr)

Co

pp

er

and

co

mp

ou

nd

s (a

s

Cu

)

He

xab

rom

ob

iph

en

yl

He

xach

loro

be

nze

ne

(H

CB

)

Hyd

ro-f

luo

roca

rbo

ns

(HFC

s)

Lead

an

d c

om

po

un

ds

(as

Pb

)

Me

rcu

ry a

nd

co

mp

ou

nd

s (a

s

Hg)

Me

than

e (

CH

4)

Mir

ex

Nic

kel a

nd

co

mp

ou

nd

s (a

s N

i)

Nit

roge

n o

xid

es

(NO

x/N

O2

)

Nit

rou

s o

xid

e (

N2

O)

No

n-m

eth

ane

vo

lati

le o

rgan

ic

com

po

un

ds

(NM

VO

C)

Par

ticu

late

mat

ter

(PM

10

)

PC

DD

+ P

CD

F (d

ioxi

ns

+ f

ura

ns)

(as

Teq

)

Pe

nta

chlo

rop

he

no

l (P

CP

)

Pe

rflu

oro

carb

on

s (P

FCs)

Po

lych

lori

nat

ed

bip

he

nyl

s

(PC

Bs)

Po

lycy

clic

aro

mat

ic

hyd

roca

rbo

ns

(PA

Hs)

Sulp

hu

r h

exa

flu

ori

de

(SF

6)

Sulp

hu

r o

xid

es

(SO

x/SO

2)

Zin

c an

d c

om

po

un

ds

(as

Zn)

Austria - 0% - - 21% 3% - - - - - - 11% 5% - - 6% 5% 1% 1% - - - - 1% - 17% EPRTR

Belgium - 5% 68% 76% 41% 50% 79% 20% - 58% 36% 92% 48% 3% - 32% 34% 31% 26% 12% 33% - 111% EPRTR 9% 3% 72% 88%

Bulgaria - 13% - 3% 63% 9% 10% - - - - 4% - 5% - 1% 41% 5% - 32% 4% - - - - - 98% 10%

Cyprus - 40% 49% 5% 64% - 48% 27% - - - 6% 22% 3% - 64% 53% 25% 2% 71% 9% - - - - - 93% 82%

Czech Republic- 12% 114% 38% 67% 33% 10% 12% - - - 91% 85% 0% - 77% 47% 8% 3% 19% 29% - - - 15% - 82% 54%

Denmark - 5% 29% - 46% 2% - - - - - - 21% 7% - 10% 23% 1% 14% 2% - - - EPRTR 229% - 63% 12%

Estonia - 3% 98% 89% 89% 9% 93% 55% - - - 91% 91% 5% - 88% 40% - 5% 39% 21% - - - - - 91% 91%

Finland - 6% 23% 17% 59% 30% 51% 21% - 69% 0% 13% 56% 19% - 33% 38% 109% 8% 15% 14% - - - 2% - 63% 11%

France - 2% 61% 83% 34% 5% 52% 11% - - 5% 56% 44% 5% - 39% 19% 10% 8% 1% 159% - 64% - 98% 14% 73% 79%

Germany - 2% 76% 31% 55% 24% 60% 1% - - 7% 64% 189% 15% - 16% 28% 13% 3% 8% 77% - 40% 28% 20% 5% 55% 5%

Greece - 0% - - 62% 7% - - - - - - - 7% - - 46% 7% 3% - - - 100% - - - 77% -

Hungary - 14% 2% 2% 39% 7% - 26% - - - 2% 5% - - 1% 12% 9% 0% 8% 10% - - - - - 17% 4%

Iceland - - - - 36% - - - - - - - - 5% - - - - - - - - 2% - - - - -

Ireland - 1% 4% 4% 23% 4% 8% 2% - - 1% 2% 6% 7% - 5% 29% 1% 3% 14% - - 97% - - 28% 61% 7%

Italy - 3% 1% 6% 25% 15% 10% 2% - - 1% 6% 3% 171% EPRTR 16% 24% 13% 2% 2% 37% - 63% 3717% 0% 25% 76% 7%

Latvia - 1% - - 7% - - - - - 0% - - - - - 11% 0% - 15% - - - - - - 30% -

Lithuania - 9% - 3% 35% 4% - - - - - - - 5% - - 11% 63% 12% 6% - - - - - - 44% 6%

Luxembourg - - EPRTR EPRTR 13% EPRTR - - - - - - EPRTR 5% - - 32% - 6% EPRTR EPRTR - - EPRTR EPRTR - 83% EPRTR

Malta - - 34% 5% 77% - - - - - - - - 36% - 29% 48% - - 67% - - - - - - 68% 279%

Netherlands EPRTR 2% 64% 75% 52% 27% 55% 2% - - 6% 81% 92% 5% - 82% 23% 32% 11% 7% 11% - 57% - 0% - 86% 42%

Norway - 3% 37% 18% 26% 1% 14% 9% - - - 54% 23% 3% - EPRTR 9% 31% 9% 11% - - - - - - 56% EPRTR

Poland - 2% 8% 2% 60% 12% 16% 10% - - 0% 8% 24% 30% - 3% 38% 20% 2% 16% 279% - 53% - 78% - 70% 7%

Portugal - 13% 37% 20% 48% 5% 35% 22% - - - 5% 23% 10% - 31% 39% 17% 5% 4% 5% - - - 85% - 68% 76%

Romania - 14% 2% 10% 60% 11% 5% 2% - - - 18% 60% 12% - 6% 40% 6% 6% 46% 43% - 6% - 2% - 67% 63%

Slovakia - 3% 26% 17% 52% 49% 20% 16% - - - 81% 34% 1% - 6% 40% 0% 6% - 14% - - - - - 90% 8%

Slovenia - 4% 3% 3% 83% 21% 23% 3% - - 0% 5% 2% 21% - 22% 33% 2% 7% 26% 80% - 103% - - - 66% 5%

Spain - 7% 30% 17% 43% 15% 41% 8% EPRTR - 4% 19% 40% 10% - 31% 35% 6% 8% 17% 40478% - 60% EPRTR 6% - 84% 29%

Sweden - 6% 65% 22% 90% 5% 85% 6% - - 1% 28% 25% 3% - 16% 17% 7% 14% 16% 10% - 99% - 34% 55% 47% 17%

United Kingdom- 5% 10% 18% 49% 22% 32% 14% EPRTR - EPRTR 55% 54% 26% - 29% 36% 15% 17% 15% 69% 0% 232% 1% 35% 16% 81% 15%

NRF08 POPs HMs GHGs Main and PM

Legend - No data reported under EPRTR. 25% Share of EPRTR between 0% and <50%.

EPRTR Data reported under EPRTR only. 75% Share of EPRTR between >= 50% and <=100%.

101% Share of EPRTR > 100%.

Share of E-PRTR on UNFCCC/CLRTAP national total emissions 2007

Country NH

3

As

Cd

CO

2

CO

Cr

Cu

HC

B

Pb

Hg

CH

4

Ni

NO

x/N

O

N2

O

NM

VO

C

PM

10

PC

DD

+

PC

DF

PC

Bs

PA

Hs

SOx/

SO2

Zn

Austria 0.1% - - 37% 16% - - - 7% 37% 3% EPRTR 8% 0% 3% 3% 6% - 2% 38% EPRTR

Belgium 4.8% 23% 11% 43% 39% 45% 5% - 59% 65% 1% 45% 20% 19% 15% 4% 12% 95% 10% 62% 40%

Bulgaria 28.2% 2% 4% 73% 7% - 1% - 3% 2% 19% - 35% 4% 1% 5% - - - 69% 0%

Cyprus 7.2% 9% 3% 37% 2% - - - - 5% - - 18% 16% 1% 3% 587% - 1% 51% 13%

Croatia 26.7% 87% 68% 65% 18% - 6% - - 87% 2% 100% 54% 1% - 26% - - - 94% 56%

Czech Republic 8.5% 64% 54% 64% 30% 5% 5% - 63% 78% 0% 52% 45% 4% 2% 9% 55% 3% 4% 83% 9%

Denmark 1.5% 18% - 38% 1% - - - - 448% 6% - 9% 1% 10% 1% 2% 6% - 35% -

Estonia 5.1% 98% 69% 80% 20% 90% 46% - 93% 91% 8% 92% 31% - 1% 35% - - - 76% 80%

Finland 6.4% 19% 5% 103% 2% 46% 4% 54% 7% 49% 16% 33% 38% 9% 7% 4% 369% 3% 2% 70% 14%

France 2.2% 12% 36% 30% 10% 18% 5% 211% 23% 60% 5% 64% 15% 3% 8% 1% 72% - 7% 75% 19%

Germany 2.3% 42% 16% 58% 30% 9% 1% 316% 17% 75% 7% 7% 26% 6% 4% 5% 27% 1% 1% 62% 3%

Greece - - - 67% - - - - - - 5% - - 2% - - - - - - -

Hungary 14.1% - - 44% 7% - 1% - 9% 19% 1% - 16% 1% 2% 1% - - 1% 41% 8%

Iceland 3.3% - - 51% 53% - - - - - 24% - - - - 38% 21% - 79% 21% -

Ireland 1.7% 4% - 41% 2% 14% - - - 8% 7% 14% 18% 1% - 1% - - 0% 42% -

Italy 7.8% 1% 16% 40% 7% 7% 2% - 2% 11% 6% 20% 33% 3% 4% 1% 190% 4% - 52% 4%

Latvia 5.2% - - 26% 2% - - - - - 0% - 10% 0% 1% 1% - - - 4% -

Lithuania 8.3% - - 46% 3% 28% 17% - - - 2% - 9% 13% 13% 4% - - - 57% 9%

Luxembourg - - - 18% 20% - - - - 57% 5% - 12% - - - 40% 39% - 56% -

Malta 1.0% 8468% 169% 67% - - - - - - 54% 1063% 43% - - 31% - - - 98% 68%

Netherlands 1.3% 85% 53% 53% 13% 18% 1% - 58% 55% 4% 47% 18% 19% 11% 8% 2749% - 1% 85% 51%

Norway 2.5% 34% - - 1% 4% 10% - 10% 4% - EPRTR 45% - 43% 10% 7% 5% - 59% EPRTR

Poland 3.1% 7% 6% 66% 11% 22% 8% - 8% 41% 31% 4% 35% 8% 1% 8% 81% - 14% 45% 6%

Portugal 14.6% 116% 30% 71% 8% 10% 5% - 29% 20% 17% 43% 28% 8% 6% 6% 198% - 1% 66% 9%

Romania 12.0% 8% 3% 53% 8% 4% 1% - 9% 10% 6% 13% 25% 9% 2% 6% 10% 31% 6% 79% 7%

Serbia 11.8% - - - - - - - - - - - 43% - 2% 22% - - - 100% -

Slovakia 2.1% 1% 7% 59% 63% 9% 2% - 38% 18% 2% 6% 27% - 5% - 1% - - 92% 8%

Slovenia 2.4% - 2% 41% 7% EPRTR - - 9% 26% 25% EPRTR 19% 3% 3% 1% - - - 51% -

Spain 13.2% 17% 17% 42% 16% 29% 4% - 9% 31% 12% 39% 33% 4% 9% 8% 70% 41% 2% 74% 27%

Sweden 6.5% 45% 15% 134% 9% 22% 3% - 30% 21% 9% 20% 20% 7% 13% 9% 20% - 3% 43% 14%

Switzerland 0.6% - - - 5% - - - 9% 41% - EPRTR 8% - 2% - - EPRTR 3% 31% EPRTR

United Kingdom 3.8% 7% 23% 44% 21% 20% 13% - 65% 40% 16% 7% 31% 6% 10% 10% 10% 0% 4% 63% 7%

E-PRTR / CLRTAP for 2014

- No data reported under EPRTR

EPRTR Data reported under EPRTR only.

25% Share of EPRTR between 0% and <50%.

75% Share of EPRTR between >= 50% and <=100%.

101% Share of EPRTR > 100%.

GHGs

main pollutants

heavy metals

PM

POPs

How they compare if emissions are not comparable??

3. PRTR data. Sectoral comparisons Energy

E-PRTR with CLRTAP/UNFCCC

Challenges differences between PRTR and inventories so we need

to aggregate/disaggregate data.

Example of Mapping used for sectoral comparison within energy sector

E-PRTR = Energy + manufacturing industries + waste

incineration

CLRTAP = 1A1 (Public electricity and heat production, Petroleum

refining , Manufacture of solid fuel ) + 1A2 (Stationary combustion)

+ 1A3e (Pipeline compressors) + 1B (Fugitive emissions) + 2

(Industrial processes) + 3 (Solvent use and production) + 6C

(Waste incineration)

What can be concluded from these comparisons?

Sector A Energy,

manufacturing

industries and

waste

incineration

3. PRTR data - Main findings of ETC reviews

• Number of countries reported higher emissions under E-PRTR than their national totals

reported under CLRTAP. In a number of cases the difference is bigger than 200%:

• CH4 – Italy; N2O – Finland, PFCs – Belgium, Greece, Slovenia, UK; HM – Czech Republic, Malta, Germany;

• PCDD/F – France, Poland, Spain; PCBs – Italy, PAHs –Denmark

• SO2 and CO2 E-PRTR emissions account for more than 50% (up to 90%) of the national total emissions in most of the countries, E-PRTR facilities contribute significantly to national total emissions of all pollutants reported under CLRTAP/UNFCCC.

• Detailed comparisons on the sectoral level showed that sometimes releases were reported for an E-PRTR activity (e.g. Energy and heat production) but no emissions were reported under the corresponding CLRTAP category (in this case 1A1a).

• A few outliers can influence the credibility of the whole dataset!

• PRTR does not inform on abatament technologies.

3. PRTR data - Challenges on comparability

- Categories: PRTR activities vs CRF/NFR - Pollutants: Different definitions - Coverage: thresholds vs national total - Time series homogeneity

* We are analyzing these differences further in the next section of the presentation

Coffe Break: questions

• In case of your country, how do you think the reporting under the Air

Convention could help in developing/maintaining PRTRs, and vice versa?

• Ideally, the process of data collection for reporting under the Air Convention, the Protocol on PRTRs and under UNFCCC should be harmonized at the country level. Is it the same institution or its unit responsible in your country for reporting under the mentioned international agreements? Does it/do they get regular funding to perform this task? What are the main challenges on the way to this type of harmonization, and, in your opinion, what are the possible solutions?

• What is the place of EMEP and urban air quality monitoring in the environmental monitoring system in your country?

4. PRTR vs National Inventories

Issue Emission Inventories

PRTR

Primary Purpose Policy making Public information

Who compile Compilers Facilities

Verification QA/QC & CLRTAP reviews

Competent authorities, Compliance Committe

Coverage National % National

Pollutants Different definition

Activities Different activities

4.1. PRTR vs Inventories

Categories

In PRTR, facilities provide information on the main emission category and are also encouraged to provide information on their secondary categories. All emissions of facilities are encompassed within the main emission category. In emission inventories, the emissions are included in categories depending on the nature of the emission.

4.1. PRTR vs Inventories

Categories

Example: cement production. Emissions from the combustion of fuels and from decarbonasation of lime (Clinker). How is this information reported: Combustion Installations with < 50MW are not covered by PRTR

Complex homogenization both ways of reporting need to be maintain

Inventories PRTR

1A2f Stationary Combustion in manufacturing industries and construction

2A1 Cement production 3c. Installations for the production of: Cement clinker in (…) rotary kilns or in other furnaces

4.2. Common pollutants

Polyciclic aromatic hidrocarbons (PAHs):

in inventories 4 different PAH species need to be reported and also the total PAH.

In PRTR only the total is reported (as a sum).

Different ways of reporting that raise issues of comparability.

Particulate matter:

In inventories, different diameters: TSP, PM10, PM2.5

In PRTR, only PM10

4.2. Common pollutants

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): Different congener nomenclature, different

measurement, comparability issues.

Best practice: same definition for both PRTR and the Inventory.

4.3. Thresholds

PRTR facilities above the thesholds provide information on emissions. Countries could establish lower thresholds than those defined in PRTR and use the information for both the inventory and PRTR. How to define these thresholds? Ideally: The threshold needed to capture most part of national emissions with only a few facilities. *Note that the inventory needs to estimate the 100% of the national total.

4.4. Timeseries

Facilities inform PRTR if they are above a certain threshold (emissions/capacity). Doubt: What happen if a company is above a threshold one year but the following is not? Does the facility report information? Is the information comparable among years? Best practice: there should be a way of monitoring these facilities.

5. International experiences - context

• Many international and European obligations in the environmental field (see next

slide)

• A variety of monitoring and reporting duties for the Member States (that so far have

not been harmonised at international and European level)

• Members seek to devise efficient systems that facilitate the compliance with the

various monitoring and reporting duties

• Different experiences of integration/use of data from different data frameworks have

been carried out.

• Ideal the integration of PRTR and inventories in one system

• Most common use of PRTR data for:

• Estimating national activity data/emissions

• Deriving national emission factors

• QA/QC purposes

National Emissions EUMM Monitoring Mechanism (MM) Decision No 280/2004/EC & Implementing Provision

NECD National Emission Ceiling Directive (NECD) Directive 2001/81/EC

UNFCCC Reporting under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

CLRTAP Reporting under the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution

Facility level emissions EU-ETS EU Emissions Trading Scheme Directive 2003/87/EC

RECAST Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial

emissions. To incorporate: Integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC)

Directive 96/61/EC, Large combustion plant (LCPD) Directive 2001/80/EC, Waste

Incineration Directive 94/67/EC (WID) and VOC Solvents Directive 1999/13/EC.

E-PRTR European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register Regulation No. 166/2006

F-Gases Fluorinated gases: Regulation 842/2006

Non facility emissions

control Instruments

CO2 Cars CO2 from new cars: Decision No 1753/2000/EC

Fuel Quality Fuel quality directive 98/70/EC, petrol and diesel fuels

Fuel S Content Sulphur content of fuels, Directive 1999/32/EC

Information Aarhus EU Directives adopting Aarhus Convention’s requirements: 2003/4/EC, 2003/35/EC.

SEIS Shared Environmental Information System for Europe

INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community, established under

Directive 2007/2/EC

Utopia

Diffuse

Regulated

National National

Reporting

Pro

jectio

ns &

PA

Ms

Activ

ity D

ata

Tre

nd

s in

Em

issio

ns

Na

tion

al R

ep

ort

Diffu

se

& R

eg

ula

ted

Facility/Installation

Emissions Facility

Reporting

Diffuse

Reporting

INSPIREd

Case study - Belgium

• Successful experience of integration of different reporting

frameworks within one information system.

• This experience was developed at regional level (Wallonia) as

the competence for environmental policy is placed at regional

level in the country.

• Objective: simplification by lowering the burdens for companies

and administration in the field of environmental data collection

and reporting.

• REGINE: Referential Environment: integrated Management of

enterprises* *Information on REGINE extracted from http://bilan.environnement.wallonie.be/documents/presentations/doc/BEST%20120505%20va%20DGRNE.pps

http://bilan.environnement.wallonie.be/documents/presentations/doc/BEST 120505 va DGRNE.pps



Case study – Belgium

REGINE: Referential Environment: integrated Management of enterprises

• Companies are asked only once a year through an integrated survey and only for relevant specific data due to a personalisation and pre-filling of the questionnaires according to the company profile and the regulatory requirements.

• Administrators will benefit from a single and centralized information and will reduce the data encoding work save time and money

Thresholds and companies

• Thresholds for emissions and the companies to sent the questionnaires have to be

selected by aiming the most representative part of the universe (ideally a few facilities

covering >80% of production and emissions)

PRTR is founded in the same principle!

• The questionnaire was designed to cover all reporting obligations – not all companies

are asked to fill the same part of the survey.

Targeted companies

Survey structure

Groups of pollutants and the number covered by the different environmental

requirements of the region for which data is collected with the survey. File

“methodo_enq_int_env_062009”, pp 58

Obligation

Groupe et nombre de polluants visés

Nombre de polluants

par obligation

Gaz à effet d

e serre (G

ES)

Sub

st. destru

ctrices de la

cou

che d

’ozo

ne

Précu

rseurs d

e l’O

zon

e ho

rs NO

x

Gaz acid

ifiants

Métau

x lou

rds

Matières p

articulaires

Au

tres com

po

sés o

rganiq

ues

Au

tres com

po

sés in

organ

iqu

es

Directive 2001/0245 « emissions trading »

1

1

Règlement E-PRTR et Convention UNECE d’Aarhus/Protocole PRTR

6

3

2

3

8

1

25

2

50

Directive 2001/80/CE sur les grandes installations de combustion (LCP - GIC).

2

1

3

Convention de Genève (1979) sur la Pollution Atmosphérique Transfrontière à Longue Distance (CLRTAP) pour Large Point Sources (LPS)

2

3

9

3

7

24

Convention-cadre des Nations Unies de 1992 sur les changements climatiques – UNFCCC

3

3

Total collecté par type de pollutant 6 3 2 3 9 3 25 2 53

Pollutant

PRTR

threshold (kg/year)

CLRTAP by LPS UNFCCC

Emissions trading LCP

Dioxyde de carbone

100.000.000 en CO2

Quantité émise

Quantité émise

Méthane

100.000 en CH4

Quantité émise

Protoxyde d’azote

10.000 en N2O

Quantité émise

Hydrofluorocarbones

100 en HFCs Quantité émise (Fait au niveau

national)

Perfluorocarbones

100 en PFCs Quantité émise (Fait au niveau

national)

Hexafluorure de soufre

50 en SF6

Quantité émise (Fait au niveau national)

Hydrochlorofluorocarbones

1 en HCFCs

Chlorofluorocarbone

1 en CFCs

Halons

1

Monoxyde de carbone

500.000 en CO

Quantité émise

Quantité émise

Composés organiques volatiles non méthaniques 100.000 en NMVOC

Quantité émise

Quantité émise

Oxydes de soufre (SOx)

150.000 en SO2

Quantité émise

Quantité émise

Quantité émise

Oxydes d’azote (NOx)

100.000 en NO2

Quantité émise

Quantité émise

Quantité émise

Ammoniac

10.000 en NH3

Quantité émise

Arsenic et composés de As

20 en As

Quantité émise

Cadmium et composés de Cd

10. en Cd

Quantité émise

Data requirement by provision

Information System Structure

Conclusions of the experience from the Wallon administration

The questionnaire and the overall Project were built in view of:

• Consolidating overlapping regulations

• Updating and anticipating regulations

• Solving contradictory issues (series of PCB, HAP, etc)

• Concentrating efforts by targeting the most pertinent companies (see slide thresholds above)

• Saving time for companies and public authorities (personalization, pre-filling and IT based solution)

Conclusions of the experience from the Wallon administration

The integrated and single survey allowed:

• Ensuring coherence between collected information for different administrative services and for Wallonia as a whole

• Improving quality of collected data • Reducing the administrative burden for

companies

Other cases

* Italian Informative Inventory Report:

Other cases

- Serbia and Sweden are examples of good practices: only one

questionnaire, common methodologies, etc.

- It is also important to learn from the errors of other experiences: existent

problems that other countries have can be avoided.

Key issues – What issues should I look into when implementing PRTR

- As similar information is needed for both provisions, the integration of information systems is desirable.

- Adapt the system to include all activities and pollutants. - The selection of low thresholds can help the inventory to capture higher

coverage and properly response to PRTR. - The knowledge from one system can feed the other. A unique working team is

desirable. - Even if the Information systems cannot be integrated…

How can PRTR help the inventory? Identifying sources of emissions, obtaining AD and or emissions, geographically referencing data, etc.

How can the inventory help PRTR? Methodologies, verification, diffuse emissions

PRTR Survey 2013 (UNECE)

Thanks for your attention!

Further Queries

Juan Luis Martín Ortega

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



synergies on data collection and reporting between emission … · 2016-11-03 · 2. emission...

Documents