1 / 9

Importance of Data Checking for RAINS vs Nationally Reported Emissions

This article discusses the significance of data checking in comparing RAINS emissions data with nationally reported data. It explores the challenges and potential solutions for harmonizing the two systems and suggests ways to improve and simplify the comparison. The article also highlights the consequences of discrepancies in emission estimates and calls for countries to share their checking experiences.

dlula
Télécharger la présentation

Importance of Data Checking for RAINS vs Nationally Reported Emissions

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Some words on the importance of data checking …. Data checking is made for the SE EPA Gun Lövblad 2005-12-08

  2. Data checking: RAINS emission data vs nationally reported The match between RAINS data and nationally reported is of importance - to find the reduction potential, possible measures and to estimate the relevant costs for the coming negotiations. Better for the optimization process…. And: More important the closer to MTFR we come. However, no easy task

  3. First problem experienced • Different systems for emission estimates - even if based originally on the same set of data • RAINS is based on originally national energy statistics run through the PRIMES energy model. • National reporting is based on the NFR reporting format, to a large extent based on the same energy statistics. • However, the aggregation of pollution sources is made in a completely different way. Also, certain definitions differ – e.g. process emissions vs energy emissions.

  4. What can be done to simplify a comparison? National emissions data can be disaggregated, national statistics can be adjusted; Recommend improvements in the national dataset for the next comparison. But is it possible to disaggregate the RAINS data, for example for the industrial combustion?

  5. What can be done to simplify a comparison? Are the two systems of estimating emissions possible to harmonise further? – And/Or is it possible to have some better guidance on what is included in different RAINS activity/sectors? A more detailed separation of sources could be advantageous: Control measures are not identical in different industrial sectors even if the same fuel is used

  6. Further problems…. For SE the present uncorrected RAINS emissions are larger than the nationally reported (+15 - 20%?) The industrial emissions seem to be overestimated, at least those possible to check: Refineries, pulp&paper + municipal waste combustion (OS2 fuel), cement production. When RAINS data are adjusted – activities, emission factors – the new set of emission data is even smaller than the nationally reported….

  7. Questions asked… The consequence is that suggested control measures do not seem possible to install and not possible at a reasonable cost A number of interesting questions? Could control go beyond what is defined as BAT in an industrial sector in one country?? What about competetiveness between industries in different countries? Has this been discussed?

  8. Requests and recommendations • Countries are encouraged to report on their checking experiences so far? • Report on methodology used? • Consider the possibility of harmonising emission estimates • Consider to come up with a “checking guide”?

  9. Thank you …

More Related