Workshop on Inventories and Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Waste under WG 1 and 2 of the Climate Change Committee Estimation methods for emissions from landfill sites used for the EPER- reporting Anke Herold, ETC-ACC 3 May 2005

2 Source of information Draft supporting document for the determination of diffuse CH4 emissions from landfill sites for the EPER Summarizes estimation methods for CH4 from landfills used in MS as provided in individual papers by MS Unclear how methods described by MS relate to the methods used by individual facilities

3 Consistent methods Austria and Belgium use the same methodological approach for CH 4 from landfills for EPER and UNFCCC reporting

4 Methodological differences Germany EPER Tier 1 approach with some national parameters, some rough assumptions: Factor of 0.4 for sites with gas collection Factor of 0.9 for sites without gas collection Factor of 0.1 for sites with gas collection, complete coverage of landfill, no open deposition Coverage: 301 EPER landfill facilities in 2003 UNFCCC Tier 2 approach CH4 recovery from survey Coverage: all wastes landfilled, in total more than 1800 landfills

5 Methodological differences France EPER: different cases with different methods described, one case is IPCC Tier 2 method with different k values depending on fast or slow degrading wastes defaults for gas capture efficiency depending on landfill types and management practices UNFCCC IPCC Tier 2 used for UNFCCC data

6 Methodological differences Netherlands EPER: Two different models available TNO – First order decay model Afvalzorg –a number of fractions are distinguished, in which LFG formation is described separately. Different k values for typical fractions of slow, moderate and fast degradables. UNFCCC IPCC Tier 2 used for UNFCCC data without differentiation of k values

7 Methodological differences Portugal EPER: First order decay model LandGem Model US EPA CH4 recovery ? UNFCCC IPCC Tier 2 used for UNFCCC data differentiation of two k values depending on moisture content Effciency of 75% for gas capture assumed

8 Thank you for your attention