Justin Goodwin

Task 1 – Review Instruments (EUMM, NECD, EUETS, E-PRTR, RECASE, F-Gases, CO2 Cars)

Task 2 – Investigated the progress MS had made with streamlining their reporting of emissions

Task 3 - Developed options for the revision of the MM and its implementing provisions

Task 4 - proposed an action plan/roadmap to harmonise reporting more widely

The Task 5 workshops were held in May 2008 and January 2009

National Emissions EUMM Monitoring Mechanism (MM) Decision No 280/2004/EC & Implementing Provision

NECD National Emission Ceiling Directive (NECD) Directive 2001/81/EC

UNFCCC Reporting under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

CLRTAP Reporting under the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution

Facility level emissions EU-ETS EU Emissions Trading Scheme Directive 2003/87/EC

RECAST Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions. To incorporate: Integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) Directive 96/61/EC, Large combustion plant (LCPD) Directive 2001/80/EC, Waste Incineration Directive 94/67/EC (WID) and VOC Solvents Directive 1999/13/EC.

E‑PRTR European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register Regulation No. 166/2006

F-Gases Fluorinated gases: Regulation 842/2006

Non facility emissions control Instruments

CO2 Cars CO2 from new cars: Decision No 1753/2000/EC

Fuel Quality Fuel quality directive 98/70/EC, petrol and diesel fuels

Fuel S Content Sulphur content of fuels, Directive 1999/32/EC

Information Aarhus EU Directives adopting Aarhus Convention’s requirements: 2003/4/EC, 2003/35/EC.

SEIS Shared Environmental Information System for Europe

INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community, established under Directive 2007/2/EC

Option MM NECD EU ETS E-PRTR RECAST SEIS F-Gases Fuel Quality & Content

CO2 Cars

Step 1: Streamlining options for National Inventories

Option 1: MM only A R R R R R R R R

Option 2: Streamlining MM and NECD A A R R R R R R R

Step 2: Streamlining options for Industrial Installation reporting

Option 3a: EU ETS Data Flows for National GHG Inventories

A -- A -- -- -- -- -- --

Option 3b: Streamlining Industrial Installation reporting

R R A R R R R -- --

Step 3: Further long-term streamlining is presented in the alternative options below. Options for consolidating...

Option 4: Consolidated national inventory and facility/installation reporting

A A A R R A R R R

Key: Option/Instrument annotations: A = Actions require changes to the Instrument Specific proposals are made in the relevant  part of annex A. R = Proposals have relevance to the instrument but no changes are required.

Roadmap

Ensure Data quality and resolution supports policies to reduce emissions of GHGs and APs;◦ Including TCCCA

Minimise the burden (Commission, the MS, and industry);◦ providing transparent, harmonised simplified, procedures for reporting, ◦ Addressing known problems

Assisting MS adopt inventory good practice;◦ Tools,◦ Guidance, ◦ develop national systems

Safeguarding MS existing systems; Encourage greater transparency in the reporting of

industrial emissions; ◦ protection for the confidential data needed for national inventories and

verification.

Diffuse

Regulated

National National Reporting

Projections &

PA

Ms

Activity D

ata

Trends in E

missions

National R

eport

Diffuse &

Regulated

Facility/Installation Emissions Facility

Reporting

Diffuse Reporting

INSPIREd

MM:Good Reporting Framework and Templates for Historic

Emissions of GHGs & Activity dataBenefits from UNFCCC Review activities.Projections and PAMs reporting is less structured.

NECD:Reporting linked to UNECE reports.Less well defined reporting framework...

Timeseries Activity Data Projections and PAMs

Limited requirements/instructions on compilation or reporting.Less mature review systems and more limited datasets with

which to review.

Limited mandate for MS to use reported Facility level data.

EUETS Elaborate & Detailed installation reports (AERs) Independent verification Lack of transparency with other operator reporting (LCPD & E-PRTR) and

installation regulation (IPPC) AERs not universally used by all MS ad source material for national

inventories. E-PRTR

Large scope of releases (Air (GHG, APs, HMs, POPs) & Water Aggregated emissions reporting (Lack of transparency about important

processes) Very limited QA/QC/Review.. Lacking supplementary data (Activity data) Lack of transparency with other operator reporting (LCPD & EUETS) and

installation regulation (IPPC) RECAST

Large net (regulates 50,000 processes). No unified reporting requirements (Left to CAs) Lack of transparency with operator reporting (LCPD, E-PRTR & EUETS).

“In principle countries in favour of streamlining” “technically feasible to move to more fully integrated EU

reporting systems over next10 years”. “Most MS have already made efforts to integrate their data

flows and data structures for compilation and reporting.“ Some devil in the detail.. Methods can not be too

standardised...

Box 1 – MS PracticeMost, if not all, MS already use national statistical data to ensure emissions reported under the MM are consistent with emissions reported under the NECD; ~50% store all GHG and AP emissions data within one system; ~60 % use non-emissions reporting instruments to generate (or improve the quality) of their data and ~65% use some industrial facility data in reporting under NECD and/or CLRTAP. More than 80% report principally the same emissions data under NECD and CLRTAP. Over 90% use emission data collected under the LCPD in reporting under other instruments and/or to verify other data in the NECD/CLRTAP inventories, approximately 40% use data collected under E-PRTR reporting in their national GHG (MM) and/or AP (NECD/CLRTAP) inventories; <40% are able to assign other facility level data to Common Reporting Format (CRF) and/or Nomenclature for Reporting (NFR) source categories.

MS integration of emission reporting instruments

Fran

ceAu

stria

Cyp

rus

Finl

and

Net

herla

nds

Belg

ium

Slov

enia

Portu

gal

Swed

enG

erm

any

Latv

iaPo

land

Uni

ted

King

dom

Luxe

mbu

rgSp

ain

Irela

ndEs

toni

a

Italy

Mal

taSl

ovak

Rep

ublic

Den

mar

kR

oman

iaH

unga

ryLi

thua

nia

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Sad=not integrated

Neutral=progressing tow ards integration of datasets across instruments

Happy=full integration of national datasets across instruments

MM: ◦ Explicitly refer to the EMEP/EEA Guidebook for methods and good practice for indirect

GHG;

NECD:◦ Strengthen TCCCA reporting for NECD pollutants including timeseries◦ Strengthen Review of NECD pollutants.

MM & NECD: ◦ guidelines for compilation and reporting of projections and PAMs ◦ Strengthen use of industrial facility/installation data(e.g. from EU

ETS/E-PRTR/LCPD/RECAST) for national inventories;◦ Strengthen use of national statistics and statistical techniques in inventory

compilation;◦ Use the same underlying activity data is used for MM and NECD reporting;◦ Harmonize the templates/tools and reporting/publishing systems to be used between

the NECD & EUMM

◦ Investigate once only reporting of indirect GHGs (SO2, NOx and NMVOC) – either under the CLRTAP or NECD.

◦ Single National Systems for Operator Reporting

What would that contain..? Facility definitions: (Tiered-connected) E-PRTR-IPPC-

EUETS. Owner.. Geo Referencing (INSPIRE Linked) Emission/Installation classifications: IPPC-IPCC-NACE Activity data Reporting Interoperable national systems for EU data collection

(SEIS)

Possible Guidance to Support MS in defining their systems

EUETS:◦ Improve the centralisation of non-confidential data from EU ETS Annual Emissions Reports◦ AER reports to include IPCC categorisation

E-PRTR:◦ Reporting of activity data for non EU ETS installations and links between E-PRTR and EUETS installations.◦ additional emissions activity in E-PRTR reporting to Cas.. E.g. process and fuel combustion emissions

according to IPCC.◦ handling of confidential data by the Statistical Agencies ◦ enable improved checking, verification and integration of E-PRTR data into national inventories.

RECAST:◦ Use permitting to collect annual emissions data for important installations and pollutants not included under

E-PRTR or EU ETS.◦ Improve flow installation monitoring data for country specific emissions factors and projections (e.g. details

of BAT and planned improvements to plant).

EUETS/E-PRTR/RECAST:◦ Harmonise operator reporting formats and tools between EU ETS, E-PRTR and RECAST◦ unique identification of installations so that they can be linked to other reporting and regulatory systems

(EUETS/IPPC/RECAST & E-PRTR)

Air and Climate Emissions. ◦ Methodologies: Minimum requirements for emission

estimation Installation – National level.◦ Reporting: Minimum requirements for Reporting for

installation – National level.

Meeting the needs of the EU and MS for policy development and reporting to the UN.

◦ Would not replace all of MM, NECD, EU ETS, E-PRTR or IPPC.

◦ Could cover data flows, data quality, temporal and spatial information, and allowing for maximum re-use of data. (Implementing SEIS for Emissions Data)

“Keep Streamlining alive”!!!