This chapter summarises the overall emission trends in the Member States, problems encountered in the compiling inventory submissions and suggestions for improvements. The recommendations are directed towards improving the quality and
transparency of national inventories and projections reported under the NECD. They also aim to ensure better harmonisation between submitted NECD national programmes and inventories. The objectives to be achieved are:
• higher quality emission inventories and projections enabling an accurate monitoring of progress towards the ceilings and an earlier and more accurate definition of any further emission reduction policies and measures, thus facilitating potentially lower costs for compliance solutions;
• greater harmonisation of international reporting requirements, thereby reducing the administrative burden for Member States and facilitating greater consistency in assumptions and relevant parameters.
5.1 Trends and projected emissions Emissions of the four NECD pollutants have decreased since 1990 in most EU Member States.
Several countries have already succeeded in reducing emissions below their 2010 emission ceilings in line with the requirements of NECD or are projected to do so before 2010 (see projections in Figures 3.3, 3.7, 3.11 and 3.15).
• NOX emissions continue to pose the greatest challenge, with 12 Member States predicting they will miss their national ceilings. Projected emissions for the EU‑27 are 6 % above the aggregated ceiling calculated as the sum of individual Member States' Annex I ceilings (and 16 % above the EU-27 Annex II NECD ceiling).
Only 15 Member States (compared to 13 Member States in 2007) estimate that they will reach their emission ceilings by 2010. The shortfall to reach the NECD ceilings in absolute values is largest for Spain (298 Gg), France (295 Gg) and the United Kingdom (84 Gg), and in relative terms for Ireland 58 % (whose 2007 NOX emissions are 75 % above the national ceiling), Austria
(50 %) and Belgium (43 %). Germany reports to be able to reach the NOX emission ceiling by implementing additional measures.
• Progress in reducing NMVOC emissions seems to have been more successful. Even if four Member States, according to their submitted projections, will not meet the ceilings in 2010, NMVOC projections for the EU-27 are 10 % below the aggregate ceiling, although 5 % above the Annex II ceiling. The largest shortfall in both relative and absolute values is 99 Gg (15 %) for Spain, 147 Gg (18 %) for Poland, and 19 Gg (8 %) for Portugal (whose 2007 NMVOC emissions lie 61 % above the ceiling). France's WM projections are only 1 % above the ceiling and by implementing additional measures France expects to comply with the NMVOC ceiling.
• Only the Netherlands does not expect to meet its SO2 ceiling in 2010 according to WM projections, although it may reach that emissions ceiling by implementing additional measures. The EU‑27 as a whole is projected to be 31 % below the aggregate ceiling. The Annex II ceiling for SO2 should also be achieved (projected emissions are 27 % below). A comparison of the emissions reported for 2007 with projections for 2010 identifies several national SO2 WM projections require significant emission reductions to be made between 2007 and 2010: Spain (64 %), Bulgaria (56 %), Malta (52 %), Ireland (45 %), Belgium (29 %), Portugal (28 %) and the United Kingdom (23 %). From the limited information available under NECD reporting it is not clear whether such significant reductions will be feasible.
• The NH3 projections for the EU‑27 are 7 % under the aggregate emission ceiling of Annex I of NECD. Twenty two Member States have already reduced ammonia emissions to below their ceilings and all other countries' WM projections foresee emissions reaching their respective ceilings by 2010 except for Germany (which expects to exceed the ceiling by 11 %) and Spain (10 %). However, Germany plans to implement additional measures to reduce NH3 emissions.
Conclusions
Based on the WM projection data, it is clear that only 14 Member States (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Romania and Slovakia) forecast that they will meet their ceilings for all pollutants. However, the WM projections data reported by a number of Member States (Bulgaria, Finland, Denmark, Greece, and Lithuania) are identical to the respective NECD ceilings for at least one of the four NECD pollutants.
While the assessments against the NECD ceilings have been conducted by referring to Member State WM projections, it is recognised that thirteen (24) Member States (Belgium, Bulgaria, France,
Germany, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia) are considering implementing 'additional' measures to further reduce their emissions before 2010 (i.e. additional to the measures already included in their WM projections).
A comparison of projections (WM) submitted in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 (Figures 3.5, 3.9, 3.13, and 3.17) shows that most Member States have made considerable changes to the projections data reported in these years. As Member States are not required to explain changes under NECD, the reasons for the past changes in the projections is generally not known.
5.2 Data reporting issues 5.2.1 Timeliness and completeness
The timeliness of Member State reporting has again improved in comparison to the previous NECD reporting cycle. This reporting round was the first instance since reporting began under NECD that all Member States submitted at least some of the information required. Twenty‑two Member States provided inventories by the required deadline, compared to 18 in the previous cycle. All Member States except France submitted 2010 projections in the 2008 reporting round.
5.2.2 Consistency and comparability
Twenty Member States submitted inventories in a comparable and consistent format, using a standard spreadsheet template. The remaining seven Member States (compared to 18 Member States in 2007) submitted data using a mixture of formats.
While this represents a good improvement, several countries still deliver data in non‑standard formats.
(e.g. modified spreadsheet files). Such approaches create processing problems when compiling submissions and in checking the consistency and completeness of data.
5.2.3 Transparency of submitted information It is also not always clear from the submitted inventories how various Member States estimate emissions from combustion of fossil fuels (25)
(e.g. whether the road transport estimates are based on fuel used or fuel sold). Additional information is therefore required from the Member States to determine the basis on which road transport emissions have been calculated. Such information could be included in an Informative Inventory Report if this were to become a mandatory part of reporting.
Only six Member States (Austria, Finland, Poland, Romania, Sweden and Slovakia) submitted an inventory report (26) together with the inventories.
Finland, the Netherlands and Spain provided some limited explanatory information. Similarly, only a few Member States (Finland, Latvia, the Netherlands, Portugal and United Kingdom) reported key socio-economic assumptions used in the preparation of their projections, despite this being a formal requirement of the NECD. Sweden referred to the socio‑economic information reported under the EU‑MM.
5.2.4 Recalculations
The magnitude of reported recalculations is in general lower than in the 2007 submissions. Most of the recalculations occurred for NMVOC and NOX data. Relatively major NOX recalculations
(24) WAM projections submitted by Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Portugal, Slovakia and Slovenia seem to be identical with WM projections.
(25) Member States have flexibility in selecting whether to report their transport emissions on the basis of fuel used or fuel sold.
See Table 1.4 with the summary of reporting obligations.
(26) Provision of inventory reports is not mandatory under NECD.
Conclusions
of trends occurred in Austria, France, Germany, Greece and Portugal. NMVOC emission trends were recalculated in Austria, Belgium, France, Greece, Ireland, Slovakia, Sweden and partly the United Kingdom. The other countries, in general, reported either no recalculations or only minor ones. It was not possible to present an overall estimate of the recalculation for EU‑27, as data for several Member States were missing both in the 2008 and the 2007 submissions.
5.3 Suggested future improvements To help improve the transparency of the reported NECD data, part of the inventory reporting by the Member States could, in the future, involve submitting a short informative report. Such a report should include the explanatory information concerning the reported inventory, for example:
• whether countries report on the basis of fuel used or sold (to prevent double‑counting or omissions when compiling the EU‑27 inventory);
• all countries should clearly describe how the NECD national totals reflect the requirements of Article 4 as related to maritime traffic and aircraft emissions (landing and take-off (LTO) cycle or cruise);
• Member States such as France, Portugal and Spain should confirm which territory is covered in their submitted inventory (27);
• Member States are invited to provide updated information on their 1990 and 2000 emissions (national totals as a minimum) so as to enable better evaluation of trends. Similarly an overview of recalculations could be made (particularly with regard to the previous year's submission) including quantitative information and brief explanations for any recalculations performed.
The importance of providing inventories in standardised formats has been repeatedly stressed by the European Commission and the EEA in their communications with Member States (e.g. through the Eionet). The need each year for ETC/ACC to transfer reported data from some countries into standardised formats before it can be analysed is both time‑consuming and a potential source of errors. NECD itself does not explicitly define a required reporting format for national inventories.
A definition of inventory reporting formats should be considered for including in the revised NECD.
(27) In the 2008 only Spain confirmed that Ceuta and Melilla are included, along with the Peninsula and Balearic Islands, while the Canary Islands are excluded in accordance with Article 2 c.
References
References
AEA Technology, 2007. Evaluation of national plans submitted in 2006 under the National Emission Ceilings Directive 2001/81/EC. AEA Group report to the European Commission (DG Environment), service contract, 070501/2006/453041/MAR/C5, AEA/
ED05435, September 2007. Available at: http://
ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/nec_report.pdf [Accessed 6 July 2009].
CAFE, 2006. Recommendations on developing and reporting national programmes under the National Emission Ceilings Directive. Working Group on the Implementation of the Clean Air For Europe (CAFE) programme, 3 April 2006. Available at: http://
ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/recom_nec.pdf [Accessed 6 July 2009].
CEIP/EEA, 2009. Inventory Review 2009: 'Emission data reported to LRTAP and NEC Directive, Stage 1 and 2 Review: Status of gridded data and LPS data'; Mareckova, K.; Wankmueller, R.;
Anderl, M.; Muik, B.; Poupa, S.; Wiesser, M., CEIP Technical Report, No 1, 2009, http://webdab1.
umweltbundesamt.at/download/Inventory_
Review_2009.pdf [Accessed 6 July 2009].
EEA, 2008. NEC Directive status report 2007.
European Environment Agency, EEA Technical report No 9/2008. Available at: www.eea.europa.
eu/publications/technical_report_2008_9 [Accessed 6 July 2009].
EEA, 2009. European Community emission inventory report 1990–2007 under the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP).
European Environment Agency, Technical report No 8/2009. Available at: www.eea.europa.
eu/publications/lrtap‑emission‑inventory‑
report‑1990‑2007 [Accessed 15 September 2009].
EMEP/EEA, 2007. EMEP/CORINAIR Atmospheric Emission Inventory Guidebook. Available at: www.
eea.europa.eu/publications/EMEPCORINAIR5.
[Accessed 6 July 2009].
UNECE, 2003. Emission Reporting Guidelines. Air Pollution studies No. 15. Guidelines for Estimating and Reporting Emission Data under the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution. ECE/
EB.AIR/80. United Nations, New York and Geneva.
Units and abbreviations
Units and abbreviations
kg 1 kilogram = 103 g
t 1 tonne (metric) = 1 megagram (Mg) = 106 g Mg 1 megagram =106 g = 1 tonne (t)
Gg 1 gigagram =109 g = 1 kilotonne (kt) BAU (projections) business as usual
cap capita
CEIP EMEP Centre on Emission Inventories and Projections CDR Eionet central data repository
CH4 methane
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CLRTAP LRTAP Convention
CLS current legislation projections CRP current reduction projections
CRF common reporting format
EC European Community
EEA European Environment Agency
Eionet European environmental information and observation network of the EEA EMEP Cooperative programme for monitoring and evaluation of the long-range
transmissions of air pollutants in Europe
ETC/ACC European Topic Centre on Air and Climate Change
EU European Union
GDP gross domestic product
LRTAP Convention UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution IEO interim environmental objective
LTO aircraft landing and take-off cycle NECD National Emission Ceilings Directive NFR nomenclature for reporting
NH3 ammonia
NMVOC non-methane volatile organic compounds
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOx nitrogen oxides
PM particulate matter
QA/QC quality assurance/quality control
SO2 sulphur dioxide
SOx sulphur oxides
TSP total suspended particulate matter
UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VOCs volatile organic compounds (non-methane)
WAM (projections) with additional measures WM (projections) with measures
WOM (projections) without measures