230 likes | 337 Vues
This document discusses improvements made to the Netherlands' greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, focusing on the uncertainty analyses for emissions from 1990 to 2003. It explores recalculations mandated by IPCC requirements, emphasizing transparency, completeness, and consistency. Advanced TIER 1 and TIER 2 methodologies were applied to assess uncertainties, revealing that overall uncertainties have not decreased following recalculations. The workshop outcomes indicate that these uncertainty assessments serve as essential tools for targeting necessary improvements in the GHG inventory while contemplating future methodological changes.
E N D
Improvements of the Netherlands’ Greenhouse Gas Inventory & resulting (lower) uncertainties ? Uncertainty Workshop, Helsinki 5-6 September 2005 H.H.J. Vreuls, SenterNovem
Dutch GHG emissions Recalculations of GHG emissions Uncertainty analysis TIER 1 uncertainty assessment TIER 2 uncertainty assessment Conclusions Outline
GHG Emissions Netherlands 1990: 211,7 Tg 2003: 214,8 Tg
Reasons for recalculation 2005 • IPCC reporting requirements • Transparency • Completeness • Consistency in time series • Compliance with the IPCC guidelines • Accuracy • Results from improvement programme • Input from uncertainty analysis
Recalculations and emission data in the base year 1990 CO2: - 2,6 Tg (excluding LUCF) + 1,7 Tg (including LUCF) CH4: - 1,5 Tg CO2-eq N20: + 3,8 Tg CO2-eq F-gases – 0,04 Tg CO2-eq (1995)
Differences between NIR 2004 and NIR 2005 for the emission trends 1990-2002 1) Excluding LUCF
All individual emissions sources are independent from each other The emission probability shows normal (Gaussian) distributions Uncertainties are smaller than + 60% TIER 1 Methodology uncertainties; assumptions
Uncertainty in annual total national greenhouse gas emissions
No decrease of uncertainties after recalculations • Application of new methods • Uncertainties of newly identified key sources • CO2 emissions from LUCF • Indirect N2O emissions from agricultural soils • For F-gases higher quality activity data and more accurate emission data
Tier 2 uncertainty analysis • Correlations between emission sources • Specific probability density functions Conducted in the Netherlands using 1990 and 1999 data • Using Monte Carlo method • Also qualitative uncertainty
Qualitative uncertainty:Typology of uncertainties • Uncertainty due to variability • Natural randomness • Value diversity • Behavioral variability • Social randomness • Technological surprise • Uncertainty due to limited knowledge • Measurable uncertainty • Structural uncertainty
Uncertainty due to limited knowledge • Measurable uncertainty • Inexactness • Lack of observation/measurements • Practical immeasurable • Conflicting information • Structural uncertainty • Reducible ignorance • Indeterminacy • Irreducible ignorance
Elements in the update TIER 2; about to start October 2005 • Updated and new information on expert judgment • Key areas of interest for research • Sensibility analysis using min/max values from EU member states • Research on PDF and sources of uncertainty for selected areas • TIER 2 uncertainty analysis 1990-2003
Conclusions • Uncertainty assessments (TIER1 and 2) are used as a tool to prioritise improvements for GHG emission inventory • More complex uncertainty assessments (TIER2) did not result in surprising, other insights • Changes in methods resulting in recalculation did not result in ‘ better’ uncertainty values
Conclusions (continue) • Possible impact of methodological changes seems not to be included in uncertainty assessments • Update TIER 2 based on recalculated data and to justify no follow up of new TIER 2 for the next five years