Navigation path

High level navigation

Page navigation

Additional tools

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Print version
  • Decrease text
  • Increase text

Integrated Assessment Modelling supporting the review of the NEC Directive

The International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) provides integrated modelling services in support of reviewing the National Emissions Ceilings Directive (NEC Directive). The latter will focus, inter alia, on adding ceilings for particulate matter for the period from 2020 onwards whilst updating the national emission for the other ceilings. The work is part of the comprehensive review of the EU Air Quality Strategy.

The following reports (in reversed order) are available:

  • newReport #8: Cost-effective Emission Reductions to Improve Air Quality in Europa in 2020

Updates the emission scenarios to reach environmental objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution based on the updated national and Primes scenarios used in the negotiations of the Gothenburg Protocol under the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution

  • Report #7: Baseline Emission Projections and Further Cost-effective Reductions of Air Pollution Impacts in Europe - A 2010 Perspective

This report updates the baselines for energy and agriculture and assesses cost-effective emission ceilings which can achieve the environmental objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution. The corresponding Cost-Benefit Analysis is described in a NEC CBA report 4 (under preparation).

  • Report#6: National Emission Ceilings for 2020 based on the 2008 Climate & Energy Package - July 2008

This report examines cost-effective emission ceilings which can achieve the environmental objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution based on energy projections that correspond to the Climate & Energy Package proposed by the European Commission and on national projections for agricultural activities. The report analyses also several sensitivity scenarios, like the influence of the degree of future trade of renewables, an alternative hypothesis about the health impact of fine particulate matter, the full implementation of the Nitrates Directive and a scenario which takes into account tighter controls of emissions from international maritime shipping. The corresponding Cost-Benefit Analysis is described in a NEC CBA report 3.

  • Report#5: Cost-effective emission reductions to address the objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution under different greenhouse gas constraints - June 2007

This report examines cost-effective emission ceilings that address the environmental interim targets of the TSAP on the basis of the two baselines described in report#4. Again it was analyzed that climate policies do not only influence the costs of additional measures beyond current legislation to meet given air quality objectives, they also constitute an important determinant of the costs for the implementation of the current legislation. In addition to report#3 three more sensitivity scenarios are described. The Cost-Benefit Analysis of the two baselines can be found in a seperate report.

  • Report#4: Updated baseline projections for the revision of the National Emission Ceilings Directive - June 2007

The updated NEC baseline projections that take into account recent national information confirm the earlier finding that the progressing implementation of the current EU legislation on air pollution control combined with ongoing structural changes in the energy and agricultural systems will lead to substantially lower emissions of air pollutants in the future. Additional analysis demonstrates that the exact level of future emissions will be crucially influenced by the assumptions on future climate policies. A comparison of the national activity projections with an illustrative "Coherent scenario" that comes close to the decisions of the March 2007 European Council on climate policy and renewable energy highlights significant implications of these policies on air pollution. The Cost-Benefit Analysis of both optimization scenarios can be found in a seperate report.

  • Report#3: Cost-optimized reductions of air pollutant emissions in the EU Member States to address the environmental objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution - April 2007

This report presents an initial cost-effectiveness analysis for the revision of the emission ceilings based on the updated GAINS model framework and input data. It appeared that the new model configuration in combination with direct application of the reduction targets of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution, result in a to a serious distortion in the balanced basket with six dependant objectives implied resource allocation compared to what was agreed in the Thematic Strategy. The report also shows a series of sensitivity analyses conducted to explore the impact of alternative exogenous assumptions and methodologies on the optimization results.

  • Report#2: Emission control scenarios that meet the objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution - December 2006

This report analyzes emission control scenarios that meet the environmental objectives of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution from three baselines onwards, but didn't take into account yet important aspects that are closely connected to the development of national emission ceilings, like the involvement of countries beyond the EU-25, the impacts of the inter-annual meteorological variability on robust emission ceilings, Euro-VI standards for heavy duty vehicles and updates of input data for countries that have not yet submitted national information.

  • Report#1: Baseline scenarios for the revision of the national Emission Ceilings directive - September 2006

An essential part in the services provided by IIASA is the development of baseline scenarios towards 2020. At the 'Conference on Air Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Projections for 2020' several baselines were presented and compared. One of the main conclusions of the conference was that an ambitious climate change policy brings considerable cost savings on the abatement of air pollution in the same order of magnitude than the extra costs of more stringent air pollution policy as proposed in the Thematic Strategy.