The potential for further reductions of PM emissions in Europe M. Amann, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Contents • CAFE baseline emission projections • Scope for further technical and non-technical reductions of primary PM emissions • How do measures directed at PM10 affect PM2.5? • Cost-optimized reductions to reduce ambient PM2.5 concentrations in Europe
National inventory RAINS estimate RAINS PM emission estimates vs. national inventories, 2000 PM10 PM2.5
CAFE emission baseline With climate measures” baseline projection, EU-25
Projected PM emissions in Europe2000-2020 EU-15 EU-10 Non-EU
Contribution to primary PM2.5 emissions “With climate measures” scenario, EU-15 [kt]
Scope for non-technical measures • Local traffic restrictions • Difficult to model (with RAINS) • Accelerated phase-out of solid fuels in home heating • E.g., removal of subsidies for local coal heating, or EU structural funds for replacement of heating systems • General reduction of carbonaceous fuel consumption through a carbon tax • CAFE analysis: illustrative scenario with 90 €/t CO2 carbon price (compared to 20 €/t CO2 in baseline)
Scope for non-technical measuresEffect of a 90 €/to CO2 carbon tax, according to PRIMES calculations With maximum technically reductions With current legislation
PM10 vs. PM2.5 How do measures directed at PM10 affect PM2.5?
Removal efficiencies of control measures[Efficiency for PM10 / efficiency for PM2.5]
Cost-optimized emission reductions to reduce health-relevant PM2.5 concentrations in Europe Based on WHO advice of assuming equal potency of all anthropogenic PM components
Sectoral emission reductions of PM2.5for the CAFE Case B policy scenario, beyond CLE, EU-25
Sectoral emission reductions of PM2.5for the CAFE Case “B” policy scenario
Conclusions • In EU-25, primary PM emissions will decline by approx. 40% between 2000 and 2020 because of CLE (as are NOx and VOC emissions). No significant changes in non-EU countries. • In EU-25, equal amount could be reduced in addition with currently available technical measures. • Largest potentials for further reductions in domestic sector and for industrial processes. • Co-benefits of PM2.5 reduction on PM10 depend on sector and measure chosen (and vice versa). • Cost-effective approaches to reduce health-relevant PM concentrations involve other precursor emissions. Majority of costs occur for controlling other pollutants than for PM. • In a cost-effective approach, largest reduction of primary PM should come from small sources and from industrial processes.