1. IIASA M. Amann, J. Cofala, Z. Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Progress in developing the baseline scenario for CAFE

2. IIASA CAFE workplan 2003: Development of the baseline scenario(s) –May 27-28: Stakeholder consultation meeting –September-December: Bilateral consultations –October-November: Model reviews –January 2004: Draft baseline scenarios –March 2004: Final baseline scenarios 2004: Analysis of main policy alternatives 2005: Analysis of policy variants, policy decisions

3. IIASA Ingredients of the baseline scenario Energy and traffic projections Agricultural projections Emission inventories for 2000 National policies (NEC reports, UN/ECE policies and strategies) Database on emission control options and costs Critical loads and levels Quantification of health risks Atmospheric dispersion calculations, regional and urban scales Uncertainty information

4. IIASA Energy projections CAFE will use three variants: PRIMES scenario with Kyoto (incl. flexible mechanisms) and 1%/year escalation of carbon price beyond 2012 PRIMES scenario without Kyoto (Energy2030 Study of DG-TREN) National projections up to 2020, with national assumptions about implementation of the Kyoto agreement (to be submitted until June 30)

5. IIASA Concept of multiple baselines Emissions Time Baseline 1 Baseline 2 2010 2015 Policy target

6. IIASA Energy projections PRIMES scenarios EU-15 Accession countries

7. IIASA Transport baseline PRIMES energy projections contain traffic projections, to be refined by TREMOVE/SCENES model Issues: Emissions from Euro2/3 trucks SUV GDI Implications of Kyoto National scenarios to be submitted by June 30

8. IIASA Agricultural projections EU projections: Up to 2009: –EU-15: CAPRI model for DG-AGRI –Accession countries: DG-AGRI model –Fertilizer use: EFMA 2010-2020: –FAO projections National projections: to be submitted until June 30

9. IIASA EU projections of cattle DG-AGRI scenarios EU-15 Accession countries

10. IIASA Emission inventories for 2000 In-depth review of national submissions of 2000 inventories by IIASA and EEA/ETC EmissionsActivity RegionPastFuturePastFutureDocumentation EU (15)136733 Accession (12)107632 Other (13)136411 Total (36)36191776 Share in total72%53%47%19%17%

11. IIASA Preliminary observations from initial comparison Some important countries (Germany, Greece, Italy, Switzerland) report only SNAP1 emission data and no activity data Only 3 countries provide emission projections on sectoral level Only few activity projections, they often lack necessary detail, i.e., by fuel but not by sector. 20 countries submitted data on PM emissions, but only 13 provided size fraction distribution and only 8 sectoral data. No documentation. List of questions to countries

12. IIASA National policies Review of: NEC reports to EU UN/ECE Review of policies and strategies Bilateral consultations with national experts

13. IIASA Emission control options and costs EGTEI will provide detailed information on Emission control options and costs Application potentials in countries Uncertainty ranges For priority sectors (industrial processes, small combustion, off-road, chemical industry, solvent directive sectors) Potential for new technologies?

14. IIASA Critical loads and levels Acidification & eutrophication: CCE will call for updated critical loads data in 2003 Call for data for dynamic modelling, use response surface for integrated assessment modelling Final data in 2004 Ozone: Gothenburg workshop concluded: –AOT40(30) for forests and semi-natural vegetation –Ozone fluxes for potatoes and wheat –AOT40 for other crops Need for consistent land use maps!

15. IIASA Quantification of health impacts Advice from WHO: Effects of PM: –Mortality: Aim at life expectancy –Morbidity: Cooperation with RIVM Effects of O 3 : –WHO will advice on dose-response curves –For mortality, data are available in RAINS –For morbidity: more work/data necessary Are PM and O 3 effects additive?

16. IIASA Atmospheric dispersion calculations Regional scale source-receptor relationships: Awaiting results from EMEP Eulerian model Linearity needs to be clarified Model intercomparison could provide uncertainty ranges Urban background pollution: Starting from rural background concentrations, using findings from CityDelta (function of emission densities, titration, uncertainties, etc.)

17. IIASA Uncertainty information Alternative energy projections provide ranges EGTEI is expected to deliver quantified uncertainty ranges for emission control options Insight from the model intercomparison of regional dispersion models? CityDelta provides ranges of model responses Critical loads: Input from CCE Health impacts: CI of evidentiary studies and WHO review Possibility to model alternative health impact hypothesis (e.g., black carbon, PM10, etc.) How to derive robust conclusions?

18. IIASA Conclusions Workplan is tough Some elements are critical (model, data, review) First stakeholder meeting: May 27-28, 2003 Active cooperation with Parties is essential Uncertainty management could become essential