NO 2 exceedances , projections , measures – conclusions from „time extension “

1. NO2exceedances, projections, measures – conclusionsfrom „time extension“

2. Conclusionsfromthenotificationsfor „time extension“ (AQD Art. 22) for NO2 The notifications represent a sub-set of NO2exceedances in Europe. Advantage: The notifications provide combined information about • NO2 levels in 2010 • Exceedance areas • Projections for 2015 • Reasons for non-compliance in 2010 • Measures to achieve compliance by 2015 2

3. Data usedforthisoverview Information provided by the notification is quite heterogeneous. • Some MSs (DE, IT, UK) submitted notifications for all exceedances (even if non-compliance is projected for 2015) • Quantitative information for 2015 not available for all MSs (e.g. FR, NL) • Details on measures and AQ Plans differ largely This overview uses information from AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, FI, IT, and UK. 3

4. Example: Italy Notifications submitted for all 44 exceedance situations. A: Time Extension accepted 2015 B: Time Extension accepted 2013 C: Time Extension rejected. NO2 level in 2015 projected above 40µg/m³ D: Time extension rejected, compliance achieved in 2010 E: Time Extension rejected. Notification states compliance by 2015, but insufficient documentation of measures 4

5. Source apportionment The predominant source sector for all notified exceedances is (local) road traffic. Industry and domestic heating in some cases contribute up to 20%. Regional background contributes up to 25% (absolute levels 10 – 15 µg/m³). 5

6. Exceedance areas (NO2annualmeanvalues >40µg/m³) - Methods Exceedance areas are given in most cases as length of road in kilometres. Exceedance areas are identified by • Modelling (most reliable method) • Assessment of emissions • Street sections for with monitoring sites are considered representative 6

7. Exceedance areas 7

8. Exceedance areas - Conclusions The geographic distribution of NO2exceedances and the different extent of exceedance areas reveal some weaknesses in NO2 assessment: • The monitoring networks strongly focus on large towns and therefore NO2 LV exceedances are reported mainly in large towns. • Small towns and the neighbourhood of rural motorways are insufficiently covered by NO2 monitoring networks. • Measurements started in recent years in Germany, especially in the Federal States Baden-Württemberg, Nordrhein-Westfalen und Thüringen observe numerous exceedances in small and medium towns (>6000 inh.). • NO2 LV exceedances are likely much more widespread than most monitoring networks suggest. • Modelling (in combination with measurement) is essential to identify the extent of exceedance areas. 8

9. Reasonsfor non-compliance in 2010 A broad majority of notifications states as reasons for non-compliance in 2010: • Vehicle emission factors did not decrease as expected (the Commission was broadly blamed for the “failure” of the EURO 4/IV real-world emissions) • Increase in Diesel passenger cars caused increase of primary NO2 emissions • Increase in traffic volume • Delay in the implementation of measures (mainly construction of bypass roads and public transport facilities) 9

10. Compliance gaps 2010 – 2015 (annualmean) 10

11. Change in NO2levels 2005 – 2010 – 2015 Annual change in µg/m³2005 – 2010 observed2010 – 2015 projected 11

12. Measurestoachievecomplianceby 2015 In most exceedance situations, a combination of different measures is applied to reduce NOx emissions from road traffic: • Low emission zone • Improvement of public transport • Relocation of road traffic to new road tunnels, new motorway junctions or bypass roads • Promotion of cycling • Management of traffic flow and parking facilities in city centres • Low emission vehicles for public transport • Speed limit • Less congestion and stop&go 12

13. Most effectivemeasures The most effective measures – which reduce NO2 levels by more than 10% each - are • Low emission zones (LEZ), which ban old vehicles with high emission factors from city centres – to be later extended to “newer” vehicles (frequently implemented in DE, less strict in IT, quite rare in other MSs) • Relocation of traffic to new roads – it should be kept in mind that this kind of measure likely increases the total traffic volume and the total urban NOx emissions) • EURO vehicle emission standards are considered a key element to achieve compliance by 2015 • The re-location of a monitoring site can be a very effective “measure”, but is not accepted by the Commission in the TX 13

14. Delay ofimplementationofmeasures Delay of implementation frequently affects infrastructure measures – new underground or railway tracks, new roads, tunnels, or motorway junctions – due to • Planning difficulties • Budgetary difficulties • Objections by environmental initiatives against new roads in their neighbourhood 14

15. Possiblemeasureswhichare not considered Measures suitable to reduce traffic volume (and NOx emissions) which are almost not considered are: • Road charge (inner-city charge, congestion charge) – despite some quite “successful” implementations (Stockholm, Oslo, London) • Spatial planning targeted at compact settlement structures, avoiding long distances to shopping centres and work places. • A decrease of the total road traffic volume is not considered at all. 15

16. Contact & Information Wolfgang Spangl Tel. Nr.: +43 (0)1-31304/5861 E-Mail: wolfgang.spangl@umweltbundesamt.at Umweltbundesamtwww.umweltbundesamt.at EEA EIONET WorkshopMadrid■ 26.10.2012