NON-C02 GREENHOUSE GASES: SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING, CONTROL

AND IMPLEMENTATION

The Second International Symposium NON-C02 GREENHOUSE GASES: SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING, CONTROL AND IMPLEMENTATION

was organized by the Vereniging van Milieukundigen, the Netherlands Association of Environmental Professionals at the initiative of its Section for

Clean Air (VVM-CLAN). It was conducted under the auspices of the European Federation of Clean Air and Environmental Protection Associations and in cooperation with:

United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment in The Netherlands United States Environmental Protection Agency International Global Atmospheric Chemistry Panel of IGBP Eurotrac-2 Commission of the European Union United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization

Organizing Committee A.P.M. Baede, KNMI, De Bilt J. van Ham, coordinator, VVM-CLAN, Delft

E-t ::c: LJ g

L.A. Meyer, Ministry of Environment, The Hague L. Verbeek, VVM, Den Bosch VVM-sectie R. Ybema, ECN

Scientific Committee J. Berends, DSM, The Netherlands K. Blok, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands P. Borrell, P&PMB Consultants, Germany P.J. Crutzen, Max Planck Institute, Mainz, Germany;

Centre for Climate Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands; IGBP-IGAC L. Erda, Agrometeorology Institute, China D.J. Griggs, Technical Support Unit IPCC Working Group I, UK H. Kelder, KNMI, The Netherlands D. Kruger, US Environmental Protection Agency, United States M. McFarland, Dupont Fluoroproducts, United States P.M. Midgley, Eurotrac-2, Germany A.R. Mosier, USDA/ ARS, United States R.J. Swart, Technical Support Unit IPCC WG III, The Netherlands J. van Ham, TNO and VVM-CLAN, secretary

Vereniging van Milieukundigen

VVM- P.O. Box 2195- 5202 CD DEN BOSCH- THE NETHERLANDS Tel. +31-73-621 5985; Fax: +31-73-621 6985; E-mail: vvm@wxs.nl

NON-C02 GREENHOUSE GASES: SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING,

CONTROL AND IMPLEMENTATION Proceedings of the Second International Symposium, Noordwijkerhout,

The Netherlands, 8-10 September 1999

Edited by

J. VANHAM TNO Institute of Environmental Sciences, Energy Research and Process Innovation

Delft, The Netherlands

A.P.M. BAEDE Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

De Bilt, The Netherlands

L.A. MEYER Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment

The Hague, The Netherlands

R. YBEMA ECN Netherlands Energy Research Foundation

Petten, The Netherlands

Clean Air section in The Netherlands

E-t :::c: u g

WM-sectie Vereniging van Milieukundigen

Netherlands Association of Environmental Professionals

SPRINGER-SCIENCE+BUSINESS MEDIA, B.V.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

ISBN 978-90-481-5409-8 ISBN 978-94-015-9343-4 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-94-015-9343-4

Printed on acid-free paper

Cover picture ©Fotografie Leo van Breugel, Rotterdam

Ali Rights Reserved

© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht Originally published by Kluwer Academic Publishers in 2000

Softcover reprint ofthe hardcover lst edition 2000 No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or

utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and

retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner.

CONTENTS

Preface

Conference Report

Methane: emissions, reduction potential and policies D. Kruger, US Environmental Protection Agency, United States K Blok, Ecofys, Utrecht, The Netherlands,

Nitrous oxide: emission inventories, options for control and their Implementation and resulting scenarios

C. Kroeze, Wageningen University, The Netherlands A. Mosier, US Department of Agriculture, United States

Fluorine compounds: emissions inventories, options for control and their implementation and resulting scenarios

M McFarland, Dupont Fluoroproducts, United States R.J.M van Gerwen, TNO, The Netherlands

Linkages between Kyoto Protocol and Montreal Protocol R. Ybema, ECN Netherlands Energy Research Foundation

Opening session

XVII

XIX

XXIII

XXVII

XXXV

Welcome XLI J.K Mak, president of the Netherlands Association of Environmental Professionals (VVM)

Opening Address XLIII

J.C. Pronk, minister ofHousing, Spatial Planning and Environment in The Netherlands

Address on behalf of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change XL VII 0. Davidson and B. Metz, co-chairmen IPCC Working Group m

Address on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection XLIX

Agency D. Kruger, Climate Protection Division, US EPA

Opening Statement on behalf of the European Commission P. Rosenquist, Directorate General XI, Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection

LI

vi

Review papers

Atmospheric methane: trends and impacts 1 D.J. Wuebbles and K Hayhoe, University of Illinois, Urbana, United States

New estimates for emissions of nitrous oxide 45 C. Kroeze, Wageningen University, The Netherlands A.R. Mosier, US Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, United States

Application and emissions of fluorocarbon gases 65 Mack McFarland, Dupont Fluoroproducts, Wilmington (De), United States

Emissions and sinks of Kyoto gases: methane

Quantification of methane emissions from latrines, septic tanks and 83 stagnant, open sewers in the world

M Doorn and D. Liles, Arcadis Geraghty & Miller, Research Triangle Park, NC and S. Thorneloe, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA

Influence ofland use on long-term CH4 uptake 89 A. Goossens, A. de Visscher, P. Boeckx and 0. van Cleemput, University of Gent, Belgium

Methane fluxes from the Pantanal floodplain in Brazil: seasonal 95 variation

P. C. Alva/a and V WJ.H Kirchhof, Inst. Nac. de Pesquisas Espaciais, S. Paulo, Brazil

Methane emissions by grazing livestock: a synopsis of 1 000 direct 1 0 1 measurements

KR. Lassey, Nat. Inst. of Water and Atmospheric Research, Wellington, andMJ. Ulyatt, New Zealand Pastoral Agricultural Research Institute, Palmerston North

Verifying agricultural emissions of methane: air sampling from 107 airc·raft and mesoscale modelling

KR. Lassey, NR. Gimson, D.S. Wratt, G. W Brailsford and A.M Bromley, Nat. Inst. ofWater and Atmospheric Research, Wellington, New Zealand

vii

The impact of grassland conversion on C02 emission and C~ 115 uptake

Li Yu 'e and Lin Erda, Agrometeorology lost., Chinese Academy Of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China

Methane fraction in carbon components in biogas from wa:>te 121 disposal sites in Japan and Southeast Asia

I. Watanabe, M Yamada, M Osako, T. Ikeguchi, National Institute of Public Health; Tokyo Metropolitan Research Institute; Min. of Health and Welfare, Japan

Methane budget in heavily polluted urban atmosphere derived from 127 concentration and isotope data: a case from Central Europe

JM Necki, J Miroslav, A. Korns and K. Rozanski, Univ. of Mining and Metallurgy, Krakow, Poland

Diurnal and seasonal variations in C~ emission from various 131 freshwater wetlands: effects of growth stage, plant-mediated transport and water table elevations

J Kim, S.B. Verma, NJ Shurpali, Y. Harazono, A. Miyata, J-1. Yun, B. Tanner and J-W Kim, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea and other collaborating universities and institutes

Modelling moisture and temperature effects on methane oxidation in 13 7 soils

A. De Visscher and 0. Van Cleemput, University of Ghent, Belgium

Methane concentrations 1990-1997: what do they tell? 13 9 H Visser and ME.JP. Vosbeek, KEMA Sustainable, Arnhem, The Netherlands

Role of microbial iron reduction in paddy soil 143 U. Jackel and S. Schnell, Max Planck lost. for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany

A 125 year history of CRt emission factors variation and 145 emissions from livestock and animal waste in Russia

V.M Artyomov and A .I. Nakhutin, Inst. of Global Climate and Ecology, Moscow, Russia

New approach to an inventory ofC~ and N20 emissions from 147 agriculture in Western Europe

A. Freibauer, University of Stuttgart, Germany

viii

A regionalized, biophysically based model for the turnover of 149 biomass and enteric methane emissions in the global food system

S. Wirsenius and S. Karlsson, Chalmers University of Technology and Goteborg University, Goteborg, Sweden

513C patterns of C02 and C~ in peatlands: the role of 151 diffusion/advection vs. microbial reactions

P. Steinmann, B. Eilrich and S.J. Bums, University ofNeuchatel and University of Bern, Switzerland

Emissions and sinks of Kyoto gases: nitrous oxide

Emission estimates based on ambient N20 concentrations measured 153 at a 200m high tower in the Netherlands 1995-1997

A. Hensen, A. Dieguez VillarandA.T. Vermeulen, ECN, Petten, The Netherlands

Should process soil models be admitted to estimate agricultural N20 · 159 emissions under FCCC?

J. Harnisch and J. Reilly, Massachusetts lnst. of Technology, Cambridge, USA

Impact of changes in temperature and precipitation on N20 and NO 165 emissions from forest soils

K Butterbach-Bahl, F. Stange, H Papen, G. Grell and C. Li, Fraunhofer Institute for Atmospheric Environmental Research, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany; Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space, Durham, USA

Impact of organic amendments on N20 production through 173 denitrification in soil

H De Wever, M Swerts, S. Mussen, R. Merckx and K Vlassak, K.atholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgie

Balancing the N20 budgets: constraints from two-isotope 179 characterization

K-R. Kim, F. Joos, M Keller, P. Matson and H Craig, Dept. of Oceanography, Seoul National University, Korea

Isotopomer analysis of methane and nitrous oxide for the study of 185 their geochemical cycles

N Yoshida, U. Tsunogai, S. Toyoda and F. Nakagawa, Tokyo Inst. ofTechnology, Yokohama, Japan

ix

Variation ofN20 and CRt fluxes through two winter seasons in sub- 189 boreal forests, Japan

Y.-W Kim, Hokkaido Univ. Sapporo and Int. Arctic Research Centre, Univ. Alaska Fairbanks and N Tanaka, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan

Emissions of methane and nitrous oxide from different forms of pig 191 Fattening

H -J. Ahlgrimm, J Breford and W Asendorj, F AL, Braunschweig, Germany

N20 flux from a forest soil located in an area of intensive animal 193 breeding in Belgium

H Vervaet, A. Goossens, P. Boeckx, 0. van Cleemput and G. Hofman, University of Ghent, Belgium

Nitrous oxide {N20) emissions from vehicles 195 K.H. Becker, T. Jensen, R.Kurtenbach, JC. Lorzer, T.J Wallington and P. Wiesen, Bergische Universitat Wuppertal, Germany and Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI, USA

Emissions and sinks of Kyoto gases: fluorine compounds

A reversed trend in emissions ofSF6 to the atmosphere? 199 M Maiss and C.A.M Brenninkmeijer, Max Planck lnst. for Chemistry, Mainz, Germany

Atmospheric perfluororcarbons: sources and concentrations 205 J. Harnisch, Massachusetts Inst. ofTechnology, Cambridge, USA

Long-term evolution in the loading of CRt, N20, CO, CChF2, 211 CHClF2 and SF6 above Central Europe during the last 15 years

R. Zander, E. Mahieu, P. Demoulin, C. Servais and F. Me/en, lnst. of Astrophysics and Geophysics, Univ. of Liege, Belgium

Inventory of non-C02 GHG and first estimates of emissions of 217 New Gases in Russia

A. 0. Kokorin and A.l Nakhutin, Inst. of Global Climate and Ecology, Moscow, Russia

Halocarbon Greenhouse Gas emissions during the next century 223 A. McCulloch, ICI Chemicals and Polymers Ltd, Runcom, UK

X

Regional emission scenarios for HFCs, PFCs and SF6 J. Harnisch, H.D. Jacoby, R.G. Prinn and C. Wang, Massachusetts lnst. ofTechnology, Cambridge, USA

Long-lived halogenated compounds in the stratosphere W. T. Sturges, D. E. Oram, S.A. Penkett P.J. Fraser and A. Engel, Univ. of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

231

239

Non-Kyoto gases and impact on climate; GWP-concept,

Modelling the effects of ozone changes on climate 241 A. G. Straume, J.P. F. Fortuin, P. Siegmund, H. Kelder and E. Roeckner, KNMI, The Netherlands

Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuel use in Asia 24 7 D. G. Streets and S.T. Waldho.IJ, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, USA

Effective emission indices (EEl) of the subsonic air transport 255 exhausts and estimations of their world inventories

IL. Karol, A.A. Kiselev, Y.E. Ozolin and E. V. Rozanov, Main Geophysical Observatory, St Petersburg, Russia

Uncertainties in photochemical grid modeling of ozone 259 V Sathya, A. G. Russel, S. Perego, M Maignan, M Junier, A Clappier and H. van den Bergh, Numerical Modelling Group, LP AS-DGR(IGE) EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland

Global warming potential and global warming commitment 265 concepts in the assessment of climate radiative forcing effects

LL. Karol, V.A. Frolkis and A.A. Kiselev, Main Geophysical Observatory, St Petersburg, Russia

Climatology and environmental significance of the surface ozone 271 over the north-western region of Russia

1 Brouskina, Inst. of Global Climate and Ecology, Moscow, Russia

Study of ozone and temperature variations in the troposphere 273 and stratosphere due to anthropogenic perturbations

lG. Dyominov and A.M Zadorozhny, Novosibirsk State Univ., Novosibirsk, Russia

xi

Atmospheric pollutants responsible for acid rains: a mathematical 275 model for transport

A.P. Kesarkar, P.N Sen and A.D. Tillu, Univ. ofPune, India

Control of biological sources

NO and N20 emissions from upland soils with the application of 277 different types of nitrogen fertilizer

H Tsuruta and H Akiyama, National Institute of Agro­Environmental Sciences, Tsukuba, Japan

Mitigating methane emissions from rice fields in Asia 283 R.S. Lantin, R. Wassmann, H U. Neue and L. V. Buendia, International Rice Research Institute, Makati City, Philippines

Reduction ofN20 and C~ emissions by designing agricultural 291 production processes - potential and limitations

I. Ackermann and M Ploch/, Inst. for Agricultural Engineering Bornim (ATB), Potsdam, Germany

The emission flux and mitigation options for N20 and C~ 295 from wheat fields under different rotation systems in Central China

Guo Liping, Lin Erda, Li Zhangpei and Wang Yanquing, Agrometeorology Inst., Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China

Interaction of soil carbon sequestration and N20 flux with 303 different land use practices

S.J del Grosso, WJ Parton, A.R. Mosier, D.S. Ojima and MD. Hartman, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA

Reducing landfill methane emissions through biological pre- 313 treatment of waste

H Oonk, TNO-MEP, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

Assessment of mitigation options in greenhouse gas emissions 321 from agriculture

A.l. Gibson, S.C. Jarvis, D.E. Beever, HM ApSimon and J Webb, Imperial College, London, UK

Control and reduction of methane and nitrous oxide emissions 323 within animal husbandry and manure application

M Ploch/ and W Berg, Inst. for Agricultural Engineering Bornim (ATB). Potsdam. Germany

xii

Control of industrial sources: methane

Abatement and utilisation of methane 325 J Gale and P Freund, lEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, CRE Group Ltd, Cheltenham, UK

How to mitigate methane emission from coal mines in China 3 31 Zhu Xingshan, Energy Research Institute of SDPC, Beijing, China

Greenhouse gas elimination and heat recovery from dilute methane 339 emissions by using a catalytic flow reversal reactor technology

H Sapoundjiev and M Sejnoha, Natural Resources Canada, CANMET Energy Diversification Research Lab., Quebec, Canada

Control of industrial emissions: nitrous oxide

Adipic acid industry- N20 abatement: implementation of 347 technologies for abatement ofNzO emissions associated with adipic acid manufacture

R.A. Reimer, C.S. Slaten, M Seapan, TA, Koch and V.G. Triner, E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co, Orange, USA

Selective catalytic reduction of nitrous oxide with hydrocarbons using 359 a S02 resistant Fe/zeolite catalyst

JR. Pels and MJFM Verhaak, ECN Petten, The Netherlands

Catalytic decomposition ofN20 over Co, Cu, and Rh-ZSM-5 365 activited by repeated heat-treatment and ion exchange

Y Korai, H lwaizono and I. Mochida, Kyushu Univ., Kasuga, Japan

Control of industrial emissions: fluorine components

Reduction ofperfluorinated carbon compound emissions from 369 primary aluminum production

J. Marks, Alcoa Inc. Alcoa Center, USA

Emission reduction ofnon-COz greenhouse gases used as refrigerant 377 R. J M van Gerwen and M Verwoerd, TNO-MEP, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

xiii

An integrated approach to achieve low environmental impact in the 385 special hazards fire suppression industry

MD. Cisneros, Great Lakes Chemical Corporation, Lafayette, USA

Life cycle assessment: electricity supply using SF6-technology 391 E. Preisegger, R. Durschner, W. Klotz, C.-A. Konig, H Krahling, C. Neumann and B. Zahn, Solvay Fluor und Derivate GmbH, Hannover, Germany

Integrating sustainability into design of alternatives for CFCs 399 R.J Berends, E.M van den Haak, E. C. B. Koerts, G. Kraijo, 1M Mewe, G.J Harmsen and S.M Lemkowitz, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Process development for the selective hydrogenolysis of CChF2 into 405 CH2F2

M Makkee, A. Wiersma, E.JA.X van de Sandt, H van Bekkum and JA. Moulijn, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

GHG mitigation technology performance: evaluations underway at 411 the GHG Technology Verification Center

S.D. Piccot, Southern Research lost. and D.A. Kirchgessner, US Environmental Protection Agency

Tools for control policies

Suitability of non-energy greenhouse gases for emissions trading 417 E. Haites and A. Proestos, Margaree Consultants, Toronto, Canada

Contribution of CH4 to multi-gas emission reduction targets: the 425 impact of atmospheric chemistry on GWPs

K. Hayhoe, A. Jain, H Kheshgi and D. Wuebbles, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana; Exxon Research and Engineering Cy, Annandale; USA

Global methane and nitrous oxide emissions: options and potential for 433 Reduction

C.A. Hendriks and D. de Jager, Ecofys, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Multiple gas control under the Kyoto Agreement 44 7 J Reilly, M Mayer, and J Harnisch, Massachusetts lost. of Technology, Cambridge, USA

xiv

Economic evaluation of strategies to avoid the emissions of 455 greenhouse gases from farming systems

E. Angenendt, H.-U. Muller and J. Zeddies, Univ. ofHohenheim, Germany

Greenhouse gas emission accounting 461 A.R. van Amstel, L.J.H.M Janssen and iG.J. Olivier, Wageningen University, Wageningen and RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands

The potential for cost-effective reductions ofnon-C02 greenhouse gas 469 emissions in the U.S.

R. Harvey and F de Ia Chesnaye,. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, USA

Patient care issues in HFC emissions policy 4 77 R. Maginley, Norton Healthcare Ltd, London, England

HFC emissions strategy for foams - what can be learned from CFCs 485 and HCFCs?

P. Ashford, Caleb Management Services, Bristol, UK

NH3 abatement in Europe and the impact on greenhouse gas emissions: an analysis with RAINS

J.C. Brink and C. Kroeze, Wageningen University, The Netherlands

Uncertainties of emission inventories

491

Uncertainties in the calculation of agricultural N20 emissions in The 493 Netherlands using IPCC guidelines

J. van Aardenne, C. Kroeze, MP.J. Pulles and L. Hordijk, Wageningen University, Wageningen and TNO, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

Non-C02 greenhouse gas policy and quality of emissions estimates 499 J.J.M Berdowski and H. Oonk, TNO-MEP, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

Good practice in greenhouse gas emission inventories: agricultural 507 emissions of methane and nitrous oxide

A.R. van Amstel, C. Kroeze, J. van Aardenne and A.R. Mosier, Wageningen University, The Netherlands and USDNARS, Fort Collins, USA

XV

Sensitivity study of the inverse modelling of non-C02 greenhouse gas 515

emissions in Europe A. T. Vermeulen, A. Hensen, J W Erisman and J Slanina, ECN,

Petten, The Netherlands

Goals and preliminary results of the project on greenhouse 523

gas emissions monitoring in Novgorod region, Russia

A.O. Kokorin, A.J. Nakhutin, Inst. of Global Climate and Ecology,

Moscow, Russia; WN. Irving, US EPA, Washington, USA; S.L.

Legro, Pacific Northwest Lab., Washington, USA

The Colombian greenhouse gases inventory 1990: results and 529

uncertainties H. Rodriguez and F Gonzalez, Colombian Academy of Sciences,

Bogota, Colombia

Evaluating uncertainties in the national greenhouse gas

inventories P. Fott, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, Prague, Czech

Republic

National policies on NCGG-emission mitigation

535

US actions to reduce emissions ofNon-C02 gases 539

D. Kruger and S. Rand, United States EPA, Washington, USA

Portugese industry under the Kyoto Protocol 54 7

C. Borrego, M Lopes, A.I. Miranda and MJ Portas, University

of A veiro, Portugal

Cost saving in meeting the commitments of the Kyoto Protocol 555

through the abatement of non-C02 greenhouse gas emissions

S. Tuhkanen and R. Pipatti, VTT Energy, Espoo, Finland

Emission reduction potentials for HFCs, PFCs and SF6 in Germany 561

P. Mahrenholz, Federal Environmental Agency, Berlin, Germany

N20 emission inventory and the abatement technologies in Japan 567

H. Moritomi and !sao Mochida, Gifu University, Japan

Authors Index 575

Subject Index 579

Participants List 589

Preface

This volume contains the proceedings of the second international symposium on Non-C02 Greenhouse Gases: Scientific understanding, control and implementation that was held in Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands from 8 - 10 September 1999. The first symposium was organized in December 1993 (Maastricht, The Netherlands). Not without reason there is a considerable timespan between the two symposia.

In spite of the scientific recognition of their substantial contribution to climatic forcing the non-C02 greenhouse gases have always been in the shadow of the dominant greenhouse gas C02. This situation changed with the conclusion of the Kyoto Protocol in December 1997 in which their equivalency as greenhouse gases is politically recognized. This fact triggered the initiative to organize the second symposium.

The symposium has been sponsored from several sides. The ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment in The Netherlands and the United States Environmental Protection Agency both supported the symposium. Furthermore, participation of delegates from developing countries has been stimulated by travel grants from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change secretariate in Geneva and the ministry of Foreign Affairs and Deveiopment Cooperation in The Netherlands. The cooperation with IPCC, the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, the Commission of the European Union, the International Global Atmospheric Chemistry Project of IGBP, Eurotrac-2 and the Federation of Clean Air and Environmental Protection Associations further assisted in reaching a representative participation.

As apparent from this volume the focus of the contributions has changed since the first symposium. The review papers on methane, nitrous oxide and the fluorine compounds reflect an enormous progress in our knowledge. At the same time there is still considerable potential for improvement of the emissions data base as witnessed by the substantial number of source strength studies at the symposium. But then the commitments of countries under the Kyoto Protocol renders much more significance to the national

XVII

xviii

greenhouse gases emission inventories and requires strict procedures for verification.

This symposium laid more emphasis on the policy implications of our present knowledge. A separate chapter on uncertainties in emissions inventories reflects the attention for and increased importance of robust data as do reports on advanced approaches towards verification of emissions.

As the Kyoto Protocol calls for substantial reductions of emissions of greenhouse gases by the end of the next decade technological options to accomplish this for the non-C02 gases constituted a major area of interest at the symposium. Various solutions in agricultural management, modification of industrial processes, abatement techniques and the development of substitutes for the non-C02 gases have been presented and are documented in these proceedings.

As the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol requires that feasible policy instruments and tools will have to be available soon, both in the national as in the international context, proposals for such tools and instruments presented at the symposium attracted considerable interest. Actual practice and proposals for potentially more effective approaches are documented.

The progress in all these fields, as reported during the symposium, has been summarized during the Closing Session and has been combined to a condensed Conftrence Report, which was presented to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shortly after the conference. These proceedings open with this Report. The contents further reflect the programme of the symposmm.

From the discussions it was clear that, in spite of the progress, there are still considerable gaps in our knowledge and in available technology. This will, undoubtedly, trigger the development of new approaches or improved estimates of essential numbers. As such information will be highly needed in the forthcoming years of implementation of the Kyoto Protocol the Organizers propose not to wait another six years but to reconvene a third symposium in the year 2001.

October 1999 The Editors

METHANE: EMISSIONS, REDUCTION POTENTIALS AND POLICIES

D. Kruger1 and K. Blok2

1) United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, USA; J) Ecofys, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Emissions

Significant progress has been reported in quantifying the emissions of methane from a wide range of sources. The quality of the methods used and the way in which they have been implemented has improved significantly in recent years. However, studies presented at the conference also discussed remaining areas of uncertainty for some of the known sources, both in emission factors and activity data.

The scientific capacity for research on methane sources, in particular in Asia but also elsewhere, has improved considerably. In this respect, researchers reported advances in quantification of methane emissions from rice growing in Asian countries, with fine spatial and temporal detail. Similarly, researchers are demonstrating progress in programmes meant to improve the quality of national methane emissions inventories, such as Russia's inventory programme in Novgorod.

International sharing of data and methods should continue in order to improve emissions estimates in the future. In addition, quantifying atmospheric concentrations of methane has been continued, thus expanding a database that is useful for calculating the global methane budget.

Global warming potential

Reports. at the meeting showed that global warming potentials are an important policy tool, but are also subject to technical complexity.

XIX

XX D. Kruger and K. Blok

Methane emission reduction technology

One of the main conclusions, and in striking contrast with the previous conference of this type in 1993, is that technology development has taken off. At present many institutes carry out R&D work on emission reduction options. It is promising that also dedicated sector research institutes, especially in the agricultural sector, now are working on methane emission reduction. Apparently, in the past period, the consciousness about the problem has increased, and researchers have turned to the area of greenhouse gas emission reduction. Some interesting technologies to be mentioned are: • Researchers in Canada turned out to be able to design a system for the

catalytic treatment of gas flows containing between 0.1% to 1.0% (v/v) of methane. The prospects are good; the researchers claim that the process is economically attractive for coal mine off-gases.

• Several papers report on possible emission reduction options through changes in agricultural practices, like changes in stable lay-out, or in the life-cycle productivity of animals. Also the use agents to suppres the process of methanogenesis with cows seems to be a possible option.

• Biological pre-treatment of waste is reported as an option to reduce methane emissions from landfills.

• Researchers have shown that iron fertilisation greatly reduces the methane emissions from landfills. Experiments were only carried out on a very small scale, but it certainly is an interesting line for further research.

Emission reduction potentials

At the previous conference, the quantitative knowledge on emission reduction potentials was still limited. On the basis of the then existing information, Blok and De Jager [ 1994] only could make a preliminary estimate of the possibilities. The results oftheir previous overview are given in Table I. By now, much more information is available. Sector research institutes, especially in the agricultural sector, carried out various inventories. Also a range of dedicated sector studies appeared from the lEA Greenhouse Gas Programme, among others on coal mining, the oil and gas sector and on landfills. A wider distribution of these studies, also outside the lEA area, is highly recommended. Furthermore, it is important to note that detailed inventories of emission reduction potentials and associated costs are now available for the European Union and for the USA. In the corridors we hear that various others are under way. This stresses

Methane: emissions, reduction potential and policies XXI

the importance of international co-ordination in this area, in order to be able to attain comparability of the various national or regional studies. When we compare the past results presented in Table 1 with what we know now, we note some changes. The potential in the coal, oil and natural gas sectors will be somewhat lower than estimated then. For animal waste, there certainly is some economic potential now. For rice paddies and enteric fermentation the potential may become higher, especially if new developments are taken into account. Overall, the total emission reduction potential is comparable to the one estimated in 1993.

Table 1. Estimate in 1993 of the emission reduction potential by sector by Blok and De Jager [1994]. The emission reduction potentials are reductions compared to the unabated (frozen technology) situation. The arrows indicate whether the potentials as they are estimated now are lower or higher than those estimated in 1993. Source Technical Change Economic Change

potential (%) potential (%)

Coal mining 80 -1- 50 Natural gas system 90 -1- 60 -1-Oil production 80 -1- 40 -1-Rice paddies 20 t 0 t Enteric 30 t 30 fermentation 25 t

0 t Animal wastes 75 50 Landfills

Policies

Countries are demonstrating that voluntary programs, regulations, and legislation can be used effectively to reduce methane emissions. For example, to reduce emissions from landfills, countries are using voluntary recycling programs, taxing waste sent to landfills, and requiring landfill gas collection and destruction. Moreover, the attention to the favourable cost-effectiveness of methane emissions reductions when compared with other greenhouse gases has increased. An example ofthis was given in the presentation of Finland's optimal GHG strategy.

XXll D. Kruger and K. Blok

There is a promise that methane sources represent a high potential for agreements under the flexible mechanisms, as demonstrated by the multi-gas analysis presented by MIT researchers. Researchers agreed, however, that more work is necessary to assess the potential in the agricultural sector. Finally, a numbers of conference speakers noted that a comprehensive approach is necessary to consider the effects of policies on emissions of all greenhouse gases (e.g., policies that decrease methane may increase nitrous oxide).

Reference K. Blok and D. de Jager, 1994. Effectiveness of non-COz Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Technologies, Envirorunental Monitoring and Assessment, 31(1994)17-40.

NITROUS OXIDE: EMISSION INVENTORIES, OPTIONS FOR CONTROL AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULTING SCENARIOS

Carolien Kroeze1 and Arvin Mosier2 1 Wageningen University, Environmental Systems Analysis Group, P.O. Box 9101, 6700 HB Wageningen, The Netherlands, carolien.kroeze@wimek.cmkw. wau.nl; 2 US Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box E, Fort Collins, CO 80522 USA, amosier@lamar.colostate.edu

Key words: nitrous oxide, emission scenarios, reduction options

1. INTRODUCTION

In this report we will give an impression of information on nitrous oxide (N20) presented at the Second International Symposium on Non-C02 Greenhouse Gases (NCGG-2). We will address the following four questions: • What is the present status of our knowledge on sources ofN20 and what

new insights were presented at the symposium? • What would be important policy options to consider in the near future? • What recommendations could be made with respect to future research?

2. PRESENT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT N20 EMISSIONS AND NEW INSIGHTS

At the NCGG-2 Symposium several new results of experimental and modeling efforts were presented. These studies were aiming at quantification of N20 emissions from agricultural fields, forest soils, animal waste, traffic,

xxiii

XXIV Arvin Mosier and Carolien Kroeze

industry and waste, as well as measuring the trends in atmospheric concentrations. Several studies focused not only on N20 but also on other air pollutants, for instance carbon dioxide (C02), methane (C~) and/or ammonia (NH3).

Recent analyses indicate that current estimates for global N20 emissions are consistent with trends in atmospheric concentrations. In other words, our present knowledge seems sufficient to explain the observed atmospheric increase on a global scale. Nevertheless, N20 emission estimates are associated with large uncertainties, in particular estimates on national or lower scale.

Without doubt, most of the atmospheric increase is associated with agricultural activities. Agricultural activities may directly result in N20 emissions from agricultural fields (associated with nitrogen inputs) and from animal production systems (stables and grazing animals). In addition, there may be indirect emissions of N20, associated with for instance leaching of agricultural nitrogen to surface waters, or with atmospheric deposition of agricultural emissions of nitrogen oxides and ammonia. Of these, the indirect emissions are the most uncertain.

About one-quarter of the present-day anthropogenic emissions may be associated with energy use, industrial processes and biomass combustion. New information presented at the NCGG-2 Symposium indicates that there are a number of minor sources of N20 that are usually not considered in emission inventories. These may include industrial sources, but also formation of N20 in the atmosphere or enhanced emissions resulting from global warming. On the other hand, new measurements of N20 emissions from traffic indicate that emissions from vehicles may be overestimated considerably in many inventories.

3. POLICY OPTIONS

At the NCGG-2 Symposium several papers were presented on options to reduce nitrous oxide emissions. Some studies also focused on the cost effectiveness of control technologies. For some countries an overview was given of their present policy plans.

Agricultural emissions account for about three-quarters of the present-day worldwide anthropogenic emissions. A global scenario for agricultural emissions by 2020 resulted in a 25-30% reduction in emissions relative to the year 2000. The reduction was achieved in the scenario by improved fertilizer efficiency, changes in fertilizer application and manure storage and a change in the human diet.

Nitrous oxide XXV

Industrial processes (adipic acid and nitric acid production) accounted for about 4% of worldwide anthropogenic 1990 emissions and may contribute considerably to total N20 emissions from specific countries. In industry, emissions of N20 can be reduced by end-of-pipe technologies. Information presented at the NCGG-2 Symposium indicated that during recent years, major adipic acid manufacturers have implemented technologies, resulting in catalytic or thermal destruction of N20. As a result, global emissions associated with adipic acid production may, by the year 2000, be considerably lower than in 1990. Minor producers, however, have not yet started to implement reduction technologies and their emissions may continue to increase. Therefore, adipic acid production may stay a source of N20 after the turn of the century.

A second industrial source of N20 is nitric acid production. At NCGG-2, new information was presented on the ongoing development of a catalytic converter for N20, applicable in nitric acid production.

Several studies focused on potential interrelations between control of emissions of N20 and other air pollutants, including carbon dioxide (C02), methane (Cllt) and ammonia (NH3). These interrelationships may influence the overall and cost effectiveness of both acid rain policy and climate policy.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

As mentioned above, emission estimates for N20 are considered to be relatively uncertain. At the NCGG-2 Symposium several papers were presented on reducing these uncertainties. First of all, additional experimental research on N20 emissions may reduce uncertainties. This may hold in particular for the biogenic sources contributing most to the overall uncertainty. These include emissions from agricultural fields and natural soils, but also from polluted surface waters. Experimental research is preferably set up to measure also related air pollutants, including CH.t, NH3 andNOx.

Further development of process-based models, aiming at modeling cycling of nitrogen through the terrestrial and aquatic system and the atmosphere, may improve our knowledge. In particular there are large uncertainties in the estimates for so-called indirect N20 emissions, associated with nitrogen leaching and atmospheric deposition of nitrogen compounds. Future research needs to address the question where all the agricultural nitrogen is going and how it contributes to N20 emissions.

Several papers were presented on the further use of atmospheric data as a cross-check of emission inventories. The use of isotopic information on NzO

xxvi Arvin Mosier and Carolien Kroeze

was discussed as a promising option for analyses at the global scale. In addition, the possibilities for inverse modeling on a regional scale, using atmospheric concentration measurements as an input, were discussed.

Based on the above, we formulated the following research needs: • There is an ongoing need for ~xperimental research on N20 emissions

in terrestrial and aquatic systems and for further development of process-based models.

• A systems approach is needed to improve quantification of emissions ofN20 related to agriculture (and related air pollutants like C02, CR., NH3 and NOx), that takes into account both the nitrogen and the carbon cycle

• Emissions from traffic may be overestimated in recent inventories and the associated uncertainties. may be reduced by additional experimental research.

• There is a need for further analysis of N20 mitigation options, focusing on their technical potential to reduce emissions and their cost-effectiveness, while including the potential interactions with other air pollutants (in particular C02, CR., NH3 and NOx).

• The implementation of end-of-pipe technologies in adipic acid production needs continued attention, as well as the further development and implementation of catalytic conversion in nitric acid production.

With respect to the further developments of the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories we suggest the following activities: • Evaluation of the IPCC Guidelines with respect to their usefulness for

monitoring of emission reduction • Evaluation of the use of process-based models to improve national

emission estimates • Development of guidelines for quantitative uncertainty analysis • Evaluation of possible side-effects of environmental policy on other

problems (in particular relations between N20, C02, CR., NH3 and NOx).

FLUORINE COMPOUNDS: EMISSIONS INVENTRORIES, OPTIONS FOR CONTROL AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULTING SCENARIOS

Mack McFarland1 and Rene van Gerwen2

1) DuPont F1uoroproducts, Wilmington, USA 2) TNO Environment, Energy and Process Innovation, Ape/doom, The Netherlands

There are three significant differences between the fluorine compounds (HFCs, PFCs and SF6) and the other compounds included in the basket of gases ofthe Kyoto Protocol: • Unlike carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that have significant

natural sources as well as anthropogenic sources, the fluorine compounds have only very minor or no natural sources.

• Most of the projected production of fluorine compounds is intentional for use in enclosed systems which means that emissions can occur years to decades after production and consumption, and can allow emissions reductions through containment, recovery and recapture.

• Most of the projected growth in emissions of these compounds is for use in applications such as refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pumps that use large amounts of energy. Thus, energy efficiency is an important factor when considering options to reduce emissions.

These compounds have global warming potentials ranging from 150 to 23,700. Emissions of these compounds have disproportionately large contributions to global climate change. Thus, although use of these compounds can provide societal benefits, their emissions should be minimized.

xxvn

XXVlll M McFarland and R.J.M van Gerwen

Where are we now?

Production, use and emtsstons control for the fluorine compounds is currently in a period of very significant transition.

Unintended byproduct emissions are being successfully controlled. Improved process control has allowed emissions of PFCs produced as an unintended byproduct during the manufacture of aluminum to be reduced significantly. Companies participating in an International Primary Aluminium Institute program and representing almost 60% of global aluminum production have reported a reduction in PFC emissions of almost 50% over the past decade. A combination of voluntary programs and agreements and regulations in developed countries are resulting in emission reductions of HFC-23 emissions produced as an unintended byproduct during the manufacture of HCFC-22.

SF6 emissions reductions are underway. Voluntary programs and agreements are leading to reductions or elimination of use in some applications and emission reductions in other applications. Programs are underway to reduce emissions in the two major applications for SF6; a cover gas for magnesium production and as a dielectric fluid in high voltage switching equipment.

The semiconductor industry is committed to PFC emissions reductions. Small amounts of PFCs are used in the manufacture of semiconductors and companies representing 90% of global manufacture have agreed to reduce emissions to I 0% below 1995 levels by 2010 despite growth in the industry.

Only small amounts of PFCs are used in several other specialized applications. The PFCs are being replaced in some of these applications.

Almost all of former CFC and halon consumption in developed countries has been replaced by alternative technologies or alternative working fluids including fluorocarbons (CFCs, halons, HCFCs and HFCs). The Montreal Protocol has resulted in large reductions in the quantities of fluorocarbons produced and consumed globally. The quantities of fluorocarbons produced globally in 1997 were about one-half of quantities produced in 1988, the year of maximum global production. The reduction is much larger when current consumption is compared to projected growth in consumption that would have occurred without the Montreal Protocol. Further reductions in fluorocarbon consumption are anticipated as CFCs and halons are phased out in the developing countries and HCFCs are phased out globally.

Fluorine compounds XXlX

By far the largest current consumption of HFCs is in refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump applications. HFCs were the most significant replacements for CFCs in these applications. HCFCs played a more minor role as replacements and other refrigerant fluids including hydrocarbons and ammonia played only a minor role in the CFC phaseout. However, emission reductions that occurred as a result of improved containment and service practices and capture upon equipment disposal has resulted in emission reductions of almost 70% compared to CFC emissions.

CFC consumption for production of insulating foams was replaced by a variety of gases including HCFCs that replaced about one-half of former CFC consumption. Hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide were used to replace the remainder of former CFC use.

HFCs are the only propellants that have been identified and developed to replace the small amount of CFCs (about 10,000 tons annually) still used in the metered dose inhaler (MDI) drug delivery systems. The transition from CFCs to HFCs is just beginning and quantities of HFCs use for this application in 20 I 0 are projected to be slightly less than current global use of CFCs in spite of growth in demand due to increased use of alternative drug delivery systems.

Alternative technologies and compounds dominated in the replacement of CFCs and halons in other applications including aerosol propellants, solvents and cleaning agents, non-insulating foam blowing agents and fire extinguisants. However, some HFCs and PFCs are being used in specialized applications requiring the unique properties of these compounds.

HFCs are expected to be among the alternatives to be used to phase out HCFCs as required by the Montreal Protocol. Further reductions in the quantities of fluorocarbons produced and consumed are expected as a result of this transition.

By 2010 when most HCFC consumption will have been phased out, over two-thirds of HFC consumption is anticipated to be in refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump applications. Further reductions in HFC emissions are anticipated to result from improved containment and service practices and capture of the refrigerant upon decommissioning of equipment.

Most of the remainder of HFC consumption in 20 I 0 is likely to be for producing insulating foams. However, about half of current HCFC use for this application is expected to be displaced through use of a variety of other blowing agents including carbon dioxide and hydrocarbons.

XXX M McFarland and R.JM van Gerwen

Continued use of small amounts of HFCs are expected in a variety of specialized applications including MDis and fire protection equipment.

There are two primary methods of reducing emissions of HFCs. Reducing leaks, recovering and recycling refrigerants during servicing and capturing and recycling or destroying refrigerant at decommissioning of equipment has lead to significant emissions reductions in refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump systems. It is anticipated that significant additional emissions reductions can still be achieved through further measures in these areas. Recovering and destroying HFCs remaining in insulating foams at decommissioning of equipment or buildings using the foams could reduce emissions of HFCs in this application by up to 50%. However, the high costs associated with this recovery and destruction is likely to limit the amount of emissions reductions that can be achieved through this option.

Eliminating the use of HFCs through the use of alternative technologies or working fluids would, of course, eliminate emissions. For the most part, current and projected use of HFCs are in applications where their unique properties are required to cost effectively meet stringent safety, efficiency and/or equipment reliability criteria. However, research, development and demonstration of promising and new potential alternatives should continue to provide additional future options to further reduce emissions ofHFCs.

Energy efficiency is a critical consideration in considering options to replace HFCs. Most current and projected consumption of HFCs is for applications that consume large amounts of energy. Any loss in energy efficiency that might result from replacing HFCs with other fluids could lead to carbon dioxide emissions that more than offset the effect of the HFC emissions that would be eliminated. Thus, the full life cycle contributions to climate change due to both direct effects of refrigerant or blowing agent emissions and carbon dioxide emissions due to energy consumption should be considered in evaluating climate benefits of various options. Furthermore, work should continue to improve energy efficiencies of systems using HFCs.

What are the new insights?

Annual emissions calculated from atmospheric measurements suggest that HFC, PFC and SF 6 carbon equivalent emissions are currently almost 2% as large as fossil carbon emissions. In order of their relative contributions to the total, the most important contributors in terms of carbon equivalents are HFC-23, SF6, HFC-134a, CF4, C2F6 and C4F8. Current emissions and recent emission trends for these compounds are generally understood in terms of their

Fluorine compounds XXXI

sources. For example, CF4 emissions have decreased by about 25% over the past decade consistent with the reported 50% reduction achieved by companies representing 60% of global aluminum production, the major source of this compound. Also, measurements indicate a recent reduction in emissions of SF6

consistent with emissions from reported sources.

However, the emissions raise a few questions. Increases in HFC-23 emissions have recently accelerated despite HFC-23 emission reductions that have occurred in developed countries as a result of improved process control and capturing and destroying the unintended byproduct. It is possible that the emissions reductions have occurred too recently to be reflected in the measurements. It is also possible that rapidly increasing production of HCFC-22 in a developing country is leading to increases in emission of byproduct HFC-23.

Emission reductions of C4F s occurred at about the same time as the CF4 emission reductions. The CF4 emission reductions were due to actions taken by aluminum manufacture and there is currently no information to indicate that C~s is also produced during aluminum manufacture. Thus, more work is needed to understand the sources ofC~s.

What policy options are being implemented or discussed to reduce emissions of fluorine compounds?

Virtually all policy options are being implemented on an application specific basis. This is necessary because of the widely varying opportunities for emission controls for the many emission sources of these compounds. It is also very likely that policy options will need to be evaluated on a regional basis due to the wide variations in societal and geographic issues such as building codes, regulations, fire codes, climate and consumer preferences.

Voluntary agreements and programs have lead to significant emission reductions in some cases. For example, unintended byproduct PFC emissions from aluminum manufacture and unintended byproduct HFC-23 emissions from HCFC-22 production are occurring as a result of such programs. PFC emissions from semiconductor manufacture are being reduced. Specific uses of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 have been eliminated in some applications where other viable alternatives are available. These types of programs are continuing and expanding.

Regulations are leading to elimination of HFC, PFC and SF6 use in some applications and are reducing emissions in others. There is at least one

xxxu M McFarland and R.J.M van Gerwen

country that requires approval of any substitute for compounds being phased out under the Montreal Protocol. A fluorine compound can be used only if no other viable alternative is available. Some countries have specific use restrictions for fluorine compounds in some applications. Several countries have or are considering programs for refrigerants to require improved containment and service practices and capture at decommissioning of equipment in order tO limit HFC emissions.

Governments are supporting research, development and demonstration programs to develop alternative technologies or working fluids to reduce use of HFCs. These programs are generally focused on alternatives that could cost effectively meet both the application requirements and the requirement to maintain or improve energy efficiency.

The policy options being applied or considered are generally aimed at achieving objectives that follow principles falling under what is being increasingly referred to as "RESPONSIBLE USE." Although still under development, the general principles of responsible use are: • Use the fluorine compounds only where their unique properties are required

to cost effectively meet application criteria including safety, reliability and efficiency.

• Minimize emissions to the extent practical where the fluorine compounds are used.

• Where two or more fluorine compounds both adequately meet application criteria, use the one with the lower GWP.

What are the future issues?

Scenarios of future emissions of fluorine compounds vary significantly. Scenarios for emissions of HFCs used as replacements for ozone depleting substances (ODSs) being phased out under the Montreal Protocol begin from near zero in 1995, rise rapidly as they replace ODSs then rise more slowly to 2100. Two scenarios presented at the meeting have a range of emissions in 2100 from less than current total fluorocarbon emissions to more than the peak emissions of fluorocarbons that occurred in 1988; a range of approximately a factor of three. Scenarios ofPFC and SF6 emissions varied from a net decrease over the next century to an increase of about a factor of two by 2100. All of these scenarios were based on assumptions of a continuation of current policies and practices and assumed no significant applications for the compounds.

Continued/enhanced focus on emission reduction through containment, recovery and capture could significantly reduce emissions. Equipment

Fluorine compounds XXXlll

manufacturers are continuing to improve the containment of HFCs and SF 6.

However, for the case of refrigerants, the costs of recovery and recycle during service and at decommissioning of equipment is often greater than the value of the refrigerant and voluntary or incentive programs or regulations may be required to minimize emissions through these options. For the case of HFCs in foams, it simply may not be cost effective to recover and destroy the HFC at decommissioning of the foam.

Continued research, development and demonstration of promising or new alternatives to replace fluorine compounds would provide options for future emission reductions. For the most part, fluorine compounds are currently being used and are projected to be used only in applications where they provide superior performance and safety. However, there are a number of promising alternatives under development that might provide viable alternatives to reduce future emissions.

There must be continued focus on energy efficiency for systems using fluorine compounds. Most current and projected consumption of fluorine compounds is for equipment and systems that use significant amounts of energy and, hence, cause carbon dioxide emissions. Care must me taken to ensure that any replacements for fluorine compounds maintain or enhance energy efficiency. Also, programs should continue to enhance energy efficiencies of systems using fluorine compounds.

Global participation in emission reduction programs should be enhanced. One success story in this area is PFC emission reduction programs for the semiconductor industry where producers representing 90% of global manufacture have agreed to reduce emissions. However, data indicates that producers representing only about 60% of aluminum manufacture are participating in PFC emission reduction programs and there are indications that HFC-23 emission rates may be increasing due to production of HCFC-23 in developing countries where producers have not yet agreed to reduce the unintended byproduct emissions.

Care must be taken to ensure that there is no interference between the Kyoto and Montreal Protocols. Studies indicate that there need not be interference. However, overly restrictive controls on HFCs or threats of unavailability of HFCs could slow implementation of measures to reduce consumption of ODSs, especially in developing countries.

Although there has been increasing discussion around "responsible use" of HFCs, there needs to be additional emphasis on defining and

XXXIV M McFarland and R.J.M van Gerwen

implementing responsible use. Because of the large variation in selection criteria for technologies and working fluids for the various applications for which HFCs are being used, responsible use will be application specific. Also, due to the wide variations in factors including building standards, regulations, fire codes, societal values, and climates, responsible use will vary by region.

LINKAGES BETWEEN KYOTO PROTOCOL AND MONTREAL PROTOCOL

Remko Ybema ECN Netherlands Energy Research Foundation, unit Policy Studies, P.O. Box 1, 1755 ZG, Petten, The Netherlands, ybema@ecn.nl

Key words: mitigation options, HFCs, PFCs, Kyoto Protocol, Montreal Protocol

1. INTRODUCTION This paper gives a brief report on linkages between Montreal Protocol and the Kyoto Protocol. Partly, it has been based on the results of a joint IPCCffEAP expert meeting that was specifically aimed at options for the mitigation of emissions of HFCs and PFCs (IPCCffEAP, 1999). This has been combined with insights that were gained from the present meeting, the Second Conference on Non-C02 Greenhouse Gases.

The issues of ozone depletion and climate change are scientifically and 'technically' interrelated. They are scientifically interrelated because changes in ozone affect the Earth's climate and changes in temperature, greenhouse gases and climate affect the ozone layer (see section 1.4). The Montreal and Kyoto Protocols are 'technically' interrelated because HFCs included in the basket of gases of the Kyoto Protocol are significant substitutes for some ozone depleting substances (ODSs) controlled under the Montreal Protocol. The issue of energy efficiency adds another interrelation via the C02

emissions arising from energy production. Some non-HFC substances or technologies may significantly influence energy usage. In some cases the effect can be beneficial. However, in other situations there is an energy

XXXV

xxxvi R. Ybema

penalty, which can actually lead to an increase m C02 emissions that outweighs the benefits of reduced HFC emissions.

The following questions issues will be covered in this paper: • What are important differences between Kyoto Protocol and Montreal

Protocol? • What are new insights? • What are important opportunities for policy options • What are future issues?

2. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN KYOTO PROTOCOL AND MONTREAL PROTOCOL

Six important differences between the protocols of Montreal and Kyoto have been listed here. This list of differences may serve the improvement of understanding that can further be used in evaluation and design of balanced mitigation strategies that aim both at emissions of ozone depleting substances and greenhouse gases. 1. The Montreal Protocol is older than the Kyoto Protocol. The Montreal

Protocol is already more than I 0 years old. It was immediately signed in Montreal Protocol by the countries that were present in the Montreal Conference and it got into force at the end of 1988. It has been further negotiated several times to make the phase out schedule stricter, to expand the number of substances covered and to include mechanisms that facilitate the phase out in developing countries. The Montreal Protocol already had measurable effects both on consumption and production figures of ODSs and on the atmospheric concentration trends. The Kyoto Conference was only held at the end of 1997. It did not yet get into force and its consequences are still fairly indirect and probably not measurable. It is noted that the Framework Convention on Climate Change noted that the Montreal Protocol already existed as clearly it refers to "all greenhouse gases not controlled under the Montreal Protocol".

2. The Montreal Protocol involves substances that have many relatively specific and limited uses as refrigerant, blowing agent and propellant. On the other hand the gases controlled under the Kyoto Protocol are tied to most human activities, e.g. including all fossil fuel based energy use. As a consequence it is more difficult to change trends in the case of the

Linkages between Kyoto Protocol and Montreal Protocol xxxvii

greenhouse gases as it involves large changes that are spread throughout the whole society and which are relatively inert and which are more expensive.

3. The Montreal Protocol makes a link to production and consumption of CFCs, HCFCs, halons etc. while the Kyoto Protocol refers to emissions. That causes some flexibility for the use of gases controlled under the Kyoto Protocol. Unlike the ODSs the use ofHFCs etc. is not banned; the primary aim of the Kyoto Protocol is to reduce the emissions.

4. . The Montreal Protocol and successive meeting aim at a full phase out of the use ofODSs. The environmental issue at st.ake requires such a drastic target. In the case of the Kyoto Protocol such a complete phase out is neither the current target nor the ultimate objective.

5. The Montreal Protocol has much shorter and tighter time schedules. The first dates that intermediate reductions were targeted for allowed only a few years of implementation time. In the case of the Kyoto Protocol the first budget period is 10 years or more down the line. This is of course linked to the above mentioned third difference pointing at the fact that greenhouse gas emissions are linked to a larger range of human activities that are frequently more inert.

6. There is a difference in the set of policy instruments to achieve emission reduction. In the case of reduction of ODSs fewer actors are involved than in the case of mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. This more easily allowed to achieve agreements between industry and government which was succeeded by regulation. In the case of the Kyoto Protocol the situation is more complex as emissions are not to be reduced by 100%. Many alternative mitigation options have been suggested that can be implemented using different policy instruments ranging from regulation to various flexible instruments like Joint Implementation and emission trading.

3. NEW INSIGHTS In 1998, developing countries expressed concern that actions taken under the Kyoto Protocol to control HFCs and PFCs could have implications for their development process. In November 1998 both the Conference of the Parties of the FCCC and the Parties under the Montreal Protocol encouraged "the convening of a workshop by the IPCC and the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) ofthe Montreal Protocol in 1999 which will assist

XXXVlll R. Ybema

SBSTA to establish information on available and potential ways and means of limiting emissions of hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbons ... ". This Joint IPCC!fEAP Expert Meeting on Options for the Limitation of Emissions ofHFCs and PFCs was held at ECN Petten, The Netherlands, 26-28 May 1999. It was attended by approximately 100 participants from 24 countries.

Some of the main insight of this Joint Expert Meeting are listed here: • The widely different replacement strategies for ODSs among countries

demonstrate the need for more explicit international co-ordination of actions taken to address ozone depletion and climate protection simultaneously.

• Presentations and discussions at the Joint Expert Meeting highlighted the complexity of the links between ozone depletion and climate change mitigation activities, the multiplicity of solutions required to address these two global change issues simultaneously, and the need for solutions tailored to regional or national needs.

• Despite uncertainty and differing opinions expressed at the Joint Expert Meeting, many practical options for reducing emissions of these gases were identified.

• The expert groups identified four distinct categories of options to reduce the emissions ofHFCs, PFCs and SF6:

I. Alternative Substances and Technologies. 2. Containment 3. Improved System or Process Design 4. End of Product Life Recovery for Recycling or Destruction.

• There was a strong plea to assist developing countries and countries with economies in transition in simultaneously improving the energy efficiency of appliances and systems while assisting them in shifting away from CFCs in refrigeration, air conditioning, foams and other applications.

4. IMPORTANT POLICY OPTIONS Several options for policy can be suggested. Some general recommendations are listed here: • ·It needs to be taken into account that the interrelations between

mitigation options for greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances

Linkages between Kyoto Protocol and Montreal Protocol XXXlX

are complex. Consequence is that for many applications, where ODSs were used and other fluorcompounds are now in use, no simple single best mitigation option exists. Further analysis of alternatives in different situations is expected to be needed on a continuous basis.

• It is important to involve industry in evaluating and assessing the consequences of different alternative mitigation options. Both industries that pursue fluorocompounds should be involved as well as industries that manufacture other substances and technologies.

• There is a further need for authoritative studies on the global warming impacts of different alternatives. It is suggested to develop guidelines for studies that use the total equivalent warming impacts (TEWI) of different alternatives as well as fpr studies that evaluate the life cycle emissions of different alternatives.

• Joint assessments involving TEAP and IPCC have only recently started. A continuation of such joint work is suggested for the mutual benefit that will result from an exchange in approaches and perspectives.

5. FUTURE ISSUES Several sector working-groups at the Joint IPCC!fEAP Expert Meeting quantified the range of technically feasible emission reduction options available in the near term. It was concluded that more detailed analysis is still needed for the many sub-sectors of refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pumps. More information is also needed to derive global estimates of future emissions of HFCs under different system tightness and replacement scenarios, and alternative assumptions concerning different emission projections, life cycle analysis, cost performance ratios etc. In addition, more work is needed to quantify carbon dioxide emissions reductions that could be achieved at various costs through energy efficiency improvements in the refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump sector and in building related insulation foam.

References IPCCffEAP, 1999, Meeting report of the Joint IPCCITEAP Expert Meeting on

Options for the Limitation of Emissions HFCs and PFCs, Petten, The Netherlands, May 26-28 1999, report Netherlands Energy Research Foundation, ECN-RX-99-029.

Welcome

J.K. Mak president Netherlands Association of Environmental Professionals (VVM)

On behalf of the European Federation of Clean Air and Environmental Protection Associations, and of its Dutch member organisation, the Netherlands Association of Environmental Professionals, I welcome you cordially here in Noordwijkerhout. It is a great honour for the Netherlands Association, with its acronym WM, to host 200 leading experts from all over the world from 3 7 countries for the 2nd International Symposium on the Non-C02 Greenhouse Gases that starts today.

The WM organizing this conference has gone out of its way to create the right atmosphere here in The Netherlands. If you have already been here for a few days, you know, e.g., that we've even arranged for weather conditions in accordance with the symposium subject: today, I believe, will be going to be the fifth consecutive day with temperatures over 25 centigrade - never recorded before in September in The Netherlands.

But to be serious, we take great pride and pleasure in organising this conference, devoted to an increasingly important group of contributors to one of our greatest environmental challenges: global warming. Although C02 emissions will remain the largest source of global warming potential, the contributions of methane HFC's, PFC's and SF6 are substential and likely to rise in the next century when no policy measures at a global scale are taken.

The serious worrisome problems of global warming can only properly be assessed if we further deepen our insight into the sources and sinks of Kyoto gases and their chemical and biogeochemical cycles. And the problem can only properly be addressed if we achieve common viewpoints on priorities, as well as on ways and means to reduce them. Therefore, you will be devoting part of the coming days, Session 1 through 6 to be precise, to the scientific topics related to sources and sinks. And control options, both from a technical and a policy viewpoint, as well as a review of the currently existing uncertainties, will be the themes of the subsequent sessions. To all of these topics contributions will be made from eminent scientists from all over the world, and from academia as well as from industry and governments.

xli J. van Ham eta/. (eds.), Non-COz Greenhouse Gases: Scientific Understanding. Control and Implementation, xli-xlii. © 2000 All Rights Reserved.

xlii

It seems to me that this broad composition of the speakers group is of great importance to the success and outcomes of this conference. A global challenge must be addressed by globally reaching hands. And a challenge with multiple sources AND multiple potential solutions must be addressed by the combined expertise of researchers in scientific institutions, as well as in the realm of industrial corporations and governmental policymakers.

The nature of the conference that you will be forming these three days fits very well with the goals and mission of the VVM. For the Dutch Association of Environmental Professionals strives to provide a platform for the exchange of expertise, knowledge and insights among scientists with different professional backgrounds, with the aim of promoting environmental scientific development and thus contributing to effective, efficient and equitable environmental policies.

The organisation of this conference by our association, in which so many people from all comers of the globe convene, has benefited greatly from resources that were made available by a number of contributors beyond VVM. Let me express our appreciation for the substantial financial support we have been offered by our four sponsors: your Ministry, Mr Pronk, the Netherlands Government Ministry of the Environment, your previous Ministry, the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs Directorate General for International Co-operation, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and also the International Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC also provides us with two excellent experts who will serve as your conference chairmen, Dr Ogunlade Davidson and Dr Bert Metz.

I would like to stress the importance of the support of these four sponsors, for even a relatively large association as VVM (with 2,500 members on a 15 million population) - even VVM would not have the means to carry an event like this on its own.

Notwithstanding this external support, our organizing committee has performed a great task in preparing this conference, and I would like to thank these five people, Mr Baede, Mr Van Ham, Mr Meyer, Mrs Verbeek and Mr Ybema, for the fine job they've done (so far). Finally, let me extend our appreciation to the Scientific Committee, a group of 13 hard-working scientists from 5 countries, for their reviewing the many presentations.

And now it is time for you to start enjoying the fruits of all this preparatiory work and to make your contributions to the success of this Second International Symposium on Non-C02 Greenhouse Gases. Let me wish you a good conference and with that put you back in the hands of our conference co-chairman, Bert Metz!

Thank you.

Opening address

Jan Pronk Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment in The Netherlands

It is a great pleasure to welcome you on behalf of the Government of the Netherlands to this Second International Conference on non-C02 greenhouse gases. I would like to express my appreciation for the initiative of the Clean Air Section of VVM, the Netherlands Association of Environmental Professionals, to organise an international symposium on this important subject.

It pleases me that you show such a great interest in the issue of non-C02 greenhouse gases, because they are important. These gases - methane, nitrous oxide and the fluorine compounds - cause together about one-third of the global warming problem. Nevertheless, they have been in the shadow for a long time compared to their "big brother" C02•

Your first symposium on non-COz Greenhouse Gases in 1993 has definitely contributed to a better scientific and technical understanding of the complex field of non-C02 greenhouse gases and the technical options to control their emissions. But governmental policies and measures were hardly discussed at that time. This is understandable. In the Convention on Climate Change of 1992, methane, nitrous oxide and the fluorine compounds are not even mentioned. The Convention only refers to "all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal protocol".

Between 1993 and now a lot has changed. The United Nations Convention on Climate Change agreed in December 1997 on the Kyoto Protocol. Methane, nitrous oxide and those fluorine compounds that are not controlled by the Montreal Protocol, were explicitly included in the emission reduction commitments of the industrialised countries. In these countries, this legally binding protocol has created a boost in the development of emission reduction options, and national policies are being formulated right now by parties to meet their targets for the first commitment period, 2008 to 2012. Governments take this difficult task very seriously. At the same time, the Working group III of the

xliii J. van Ham et al. (eds.), Non-COzGreenhouse Gases: Scientific Understanding, Control and Implementation, xliii-xlvi. © 2000 All Rights Reserved.

xliv

IPCC is now assessing the knowledge on mitigation options of all greenhouse gases for their Third Assessment Report.

This second symposium on non-C02 greenhouse gases is therefore timely. Although the main focus of this conference is on the science and technology side, it pleases me to see that there is also a section on policy options and national policies in the programme. Policy has to be based on inside technical knowledge -but measures should not be postponed because we don't know everything!

Political relevance Let me explain why the emission reduction of the "other greenhouse gases"

is so important for climate policy makers. I can give you three reasons:

1. Gases that create one third of the problem should contribute to 1/3 of the solution.

2. Many non-C02 reduction options are relatively cheap compared to C02. In the Kyoto protocol we have adopted a comprehensive or multiple-gas approach: six gases in one basket, all in the same units, namely tonnes of C02 equivalents. Therefore it is attractive to include a substantial fraction of non-C02 gases in the national emission reduction portfolio. Putting it differently: for each dollar, euro, or yen, we can realise more emission reductions from a basket of 6 gases than from a basket containing only C02•

Adding the non-C02 greenhouse gases to the Kyoto basket has greatly enhanced the flexibility for parties to meet their demands. I am convinced that without this multiple-gas approach, the results from Kyoto would have been far less ambitious. With regard to flexibility, the inclusion of the so-called Flexible Mechanisms, or the Kyoto Mechanisms, is, of course, of enormous importance as well. I refer to Joint Implementation, the Clean Development Mechanism and Emission Trading. I like to note here that the possibilities of combining these two flexible elements in the protocol have, to my knowledge, hardly been investigated yet. I mean applying the Kyoto mechanisms on the non-C02 greenhouse gases. I think here is a challenge for you here in the near future. There might be yet an unexplored potential for cheap reduction options.

3. The non-C02 emissions are to a large extent avoidable by-products from industry, traffic or agriculture. So we can get rid of the largest part of these emissions without too much technical difficulties. It also means that we will run out of cost-effective emission reduction options of non-C02 greenhouse gases in a few decades! But C02 is not an avoidable by-product: as long as we bum fuel,

xlv

we will have C02 emissions. We will need a lot of time and technology development to find robust solutions to deal with this. By using reduction potential of the non-C02 greenhouse gases for the short and medium term, we can buy such time. This will be an absolute necessity if we want to meet the ultimate objective of the Climate convention. That is, stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations, and enabling at the same time economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.

Netherlands situation The industrialised countries are developing their national climate plans to

meet their Kyoto targets. The Netherlands Government presented last July our National Climate Policy Implementation plan.

The first part of this Plan contains three policy packages for domestic measures: I) a basic package, to meet the emission reduction requirements for the first

commitment period (2008-20I2). This is about 25 Mton C02 equivalent per year compared to a business as usual-scenario;

2) a complementary reserve package in case the first package turns out not to fulfilling its expectations;

3) and a third package, called the innovation package, dealing with the development of robust C02 reduction strategies for the period after 2012.

A second part, the governmental plan for application of the Kyoto­mechanisms for the first commitment period, will be presented by the end of this year.

Within the National Climate Policy implementation Plan, there is a non-C02

Emission Reduction Plan. It contains money for developing national emission reductions, for investment support and for fiscal support until 2008. Altogether we reserved a budget of 200 Million Euro. This should lead to a reduction of 8 Mton C02 equivalent in the basic package and possibly another I 0 Mton C02 equivalent in the reserve package.

These 10 Mton C02 equivalents area mainly the .emissions of nitrous oxide as a by-product from nitric acid production in The Netherlands. Our research institutes are, in close collaboration with the industry, developing suitable catalysts that hopefully can largely eliminate these emissions. If this development is successful, we will have a very substantial reduction option of just about I Euro per avoided tonne C02 equivalent. Good opportunities for joint implementation projects might emerge from this project as well.

xlvi

Now, I would like to draw your attention to two gases, namely the HFCs and PFCs. There is, as you know, the Montreal protocol and the Kyoto protocol. Use and production of CFCs are being phased out and the phasing out of HCFCs in the European Union has recently been accelerated. HFCs and PFCs are replacements for these ozone depleting substances. But they are powerful greenhouse gases too. I am not against use and production of HFCs and PFCs. I just don't want these gases in the atmosphere! If these substances can be well contained inside installations, then they cause no global warming problem.

If that is not sufficiently possible, then we will need - sooner or later - safe, sound, environmentally friendly and cost effective alternatives. But the prospect of future HFC and PFC measures should not slow down the execution of the Montreal protocol!· The Kyoto protocol and the Montreal protocol are equally important. No one should use one protocol as an excuse to delay or frustrate the execution of the other.

You will hear much more on our national non-C02 greenhouse gas policy plans later in this conference. So let me make my concluding remarks.

Closure I had a look at the participants list and concluded that participation is well

spread with representatives from 37 countries. This is important because the non-C02 greenhouse gases have their sources all over the world. In dealing with hem, there are, as usual, both opportunities and risks.

First the opportunities. Non-C02 greenhouse gas reductions can often be achieved at low costs. Here are market opportunities for innovative, environmental technologies. Perhaps there are good prospects for applying the Kyoto mechanisms. And I would like to mention the positive effects on society when we can show that counteracting climate change is indeed possible.

But the options will not materialise automatically. We do have a lot of experience in reducing the related C02 emissions. Due to the energy crises in the past, we acquired a lot of experience in improvement of energy efficiency since the early 70's. But our experience with controlling non-C02 greenhouse gas emissions is still very young. We should not overestimate its reduction potentials at this stage. Combined efforts in solid scientific research and technological development will be needed to underpin both actions. That is your challenge.

Thank you very much for your attention, and I wish you all an inspiring conference.

Address on behalf of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Ogunlade Davidson and Bert Metz Co-chairmen of Working Group III of IPCC

Recognizing the problem of potential global climate change the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988. It is open to all members ofthe UNEP and WMO. The role of the IPCC is to assess the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant for the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change. It does not carry out new research nor does it monitor climate related data. It bases its assessment mainly on published and peer reviewed scientific technical literature.

The IPCC has three working groups Working Group I assesses the scientific aspects of the climate system and climate change. Working Group II addresses the vulnerability of socio-economic and natural systems to climate change, negative and positive consequences of climate change, and options for adapting to it. Working Group III assesses options for limiting greenhouse gas emissions and otherwise mitigating climate change. A Task Force has been established to carry out work on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

The IPCC has completed its First Assessment Report in 1990. It played an important role in establishing the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) by the UN General Assembly. The UNFCCC was adopted in 1992 and entered into force in 1994. It provides the overall policy framework for addressing the climate change issue.

xlvii J. van Ham et al. (eds.). Non-COzGreenhouse Gases: Scientific Understanding. Control and Implementation. xlvii-xlviii. © 2000 All Rights Reserved.

xi viii

The IPCC has continued to provide scientific, technical and socio-economic advice to the world community, and in particular to the 170-plus Parties to the UNFCCC through its periodic assessment reports on the state of knowledge of causes of climate change, its potential impacts and options for response strategies. Its Second Assessment Report, Climate Change 1995, provided key input to the negotiations, which lead to the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC in 1997. The IPCC also prepares Special Reports and Technical Papers on topics where independent scientific information and advice is deemed necessary and it supports the UNFCCC through its work on methodologies for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

In view of the commitments agreed in the Kyoto Protocol the need for technologies for the mitigation of emissions of the six gases mentioned in the Protocol and for policies suitable for implementation of these technologies has increased. It is also clear that robust emission inventories are important when implementing the commitments of the Kyoto Protocol. Especially for gases other than C02 new information has been published in the literature over the past years. Many questions remain open however. In a recent IPCC Special report on Aviation and the Global Atmosphere the role of non-COz greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere was highlighted.

The Third Assessment Report currently under preparation will be a comprehensive and up-to-date assessment of the policy-relevant scientific, technical, and socio-economic dimensions of climate change. It will concentrate on new findings since 1995, pay greater attention to the regional (in addition to the global) scale, and include non-English literature to the extent possible. It is obvious that the information of the Second international symposium on Non­COz Greenhouse Gases will be a very useful reference for the Assessment Report.

One particular aspect deserves some further elaboration. Specific requests were made to IPCC by the Parties to the UNFCCC and the Montreal Protocol to pay special attention to the global warming and the ozone depletion issues when assessing options to limit or reduce emissions of gases that are replacing ozone depleting substances. As a result IPCC decided to give special attention to this in the Third Assessment report by including a dedicated annex to this point.

For the IPCC therefore the symposium that we are opening today is a very timely and welcome activity. We would like to congratulate the Organizers with their initiative and with the prospect of a very successful meeting and wish you all interesting and satisfactory days in Noordwijkerhout.

Address on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency

Dina Kruger, USEPA, Washington, USA Climate Protection Division, Washington, United States

It is my pleasure to present these remarks on behalf of Paul Stolpman, the director of the Office of Atmospheric Programs of the US EPA. Dr. Stolpman regrets that he cannot participate in this important conference, with its emphasis on the non-C02 Greenhouse Gases. He extends his appreciation to the Dutch government, the IPCC and the other conference sponsors, as well as the Netherlands Association of Environmental Professionals for Organizing this conference.

US EPA is especially pleased to co-sponsor this conference because of the significance of non-C02 Greenhouse Gases emissions in the United States and the role these gases will play in mitigating climate change. The US has been working to reduce emissions of non-C02 Greenhouse Gases for almost 10 years. We have strongly supported a comprehensive approach to addressing climate change for 3 reasons:

First, the emissions of the non-C02 Greenhouse Gases in the US are significant - almost 20% of total greenhouse gases emissions. Methane is the largest source, followed by N20. The high GWP gases are currently a small share of emissions, but are growing rapidly due to the phase-out of Ozone Depleting Substances.

Second, reducing emissions of non-C02 Greenhouse Gases makes important environmental contributions. Failure to consider the trends in and effects ofthe non-C02 gases and to explicitly account for their contribution to the radiative forcing of the atmosphere could lead to unpleasant surprises. It could cause us to overshoot our environmental goals significantly, with potentially severe consequences.

Mitigating emissions of the non-C02 Greenhouse Gases. however, can protect the environment. Reducing emissions of methane, for example, can provide near-term climate protection because its short atmospheric lifetime and potency relative to C02. Methane offers the most attractive means of slowing the near-term rate of climate change.

xlix J. van Ham eta/. (eds.), Non-C02 Greenhouse Gases: Scientific Understanding, Control and Implementation, xlix-1. © 2000 All Rights Reserved.

Reducing emissions of high GWP gases is important for a different reason. These gases have extremely long atmospheric lifetimes and are the most potent of the global warming gases. Thus, the effects of emitting these gases are severe and essentially irreversible, and it is in our interest to do what we can to ensure responsible use that minimizes emissions.

Third and finally, focusing on non-C02 Greenhouse Gases provides significant economic benefits. Research and practical experience is demonstrating that there are large economically attractive emission reductions that can be made across the sources of the non-C02 gases. In the US we have successful programs to reduce methane from landfills, coal mines, natural gas systems, livestock enteric fermentation and animal waste management systems. We also have programs to reduce PFC emissions from aluminium smelting, HFC-23 emissions from HCFC-22 production, SF 4 use by electric utilities and magnesium smelters, semiconductor Greenhouse Gases, emissions and to limit the use of greenhouse gases as substitutes for ozone depleting substances where attractive alternatives exist.

In addition as you will hear later in the conference, taking a comprehensive approach to meeting Greenhouse Gases targets can reduce compliance costs by more than 20%, as compared to meeting the same goals through C02 alone.

Because of their environmental and economic importance, the US has made a significant investment on better understanding and managing emissions of the non-C02 gases. We are focusing on all aspects of these gases: • Source: so that we better understand their atmospheric interactions and

long-term trends; • current Emission Levels: so that we can ensure that emission inventories

and near-term emission trends are reliable; • Climate Protection Opportunities: that are available now - encouraging

emission reduction through more than I 0 voluntary partnership with industry;

• and the Economic and Policy issues of managing these gases.

We expect to learn a great deal through this meeting with respect to all of these issues. We are gratified to see that the world's leading scientists, economists and policy makers on the non-C02 gases are here. So we again commend the conference organizers and sponsors for their vision in gathering all of us here to focus on these critical issues. And we offer our encouragement for a productive exchange of the latest information on all aspects of the non-C02 gases, leading to better understanding, better management and ultimately a better environment for all of us, our children and grandchildren.

Opening statement on behalf of the European Commission

P. Rosenquist DIRECTORATE-GENERAL XI.D.3 - Air quality, urban environment, noise and transport

INTRODUCTION Let me begin by thanking for the invitation and to express how pleased I am

to have the opportunity to address this audience on behalf of the European Commission, at this second International Symposium on non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gases in these nice surroundings ofNoordwijkerhout.

The topics we have come here to discuss - greenhouse gases and climate change - have for some time now been attracting strong interest from both the scientific community and governmental bodies as well as from industry. In the ongoing hearings of the new Commission, Mrs Wallstrom, the Commissioner designate for environment, made clear that combating climate change was one of her absolute priorities.

However, also the public shows a lot of concern about this issue. According to the latest EUROBAROMETER on environment, nearly two thirds of Europeans are more worried about climate change today than 5 years ago. This should be seen against the background that important steps have been taken during the last couple of years. I'm thinking in particular about the Kyoto Protocol which set our minds on the track of emission reductions.

Perhaps it is the notion that the Kyoto Protocol in itself won't be sufficient to solve the climate change problem that is reflected in the worries of an already well informed public.

KYOTO PROTOCOL-NEXT STEPS Although the Kyoto Protocol will not bring about the ultimate solution to the

climate change problem, it must be seen as a success and an important achievement on our way towards building a more sustainable society that does not threaten our planet to overheat.

The complexity of the issue that the Kyoto Protocol seeks to address is however enormous and therefore the fact that this protocol has also given rise to

li J. van Ham eta/. (eds.), Non-C02Greenhouse Gases: Scientific Understanding, Control and Implementation. li-liv. @ 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Iii

a number of questions should not astonish anyone. There is now a need to continue on the track embarked on in Kyoto and to start giving effect to the obligations we have agreed and committed ourselves to.

Issues concerning sinks and flexible mechanisms are among those that will have to be clarified over the next couple of years. The European Union is strongly committed to reaching results and to removing any uncertainty that might linger in relation to these issues over the next couple of years.

The importance of this year's COP (COP 5) is by some downplayed as focus is on next year's very important COP 6. However also COP5 is important as it can be seen as a stepping stone in the preparations leading up to COP 6. In particular, I believe that COP 5 will be of key importance for getting developing countries more involved in the process and hence it is crucial for making further progress at COP6.

GLOBAL ISSUE- EVERYBODY MUST BE ON BOARD The European Commission fully appreciates that the issue of climate change

is a truly global environmental issue and thus needs universal attention if it is to be resolved.

Early ratification and implementation of the Kyoto Protocol can bring momentum to the whole process of climate negotiations. This was recognised by the June European Council in Cologne, which deemed the Kyoto Protocol an important milestone and stressed the importance of a speedy ratification alongside with action for its implementation.

In addition it is worthwhile mentioning that some of the flexible mechanisms developed under the Kyoto Protocol can provide incentives for developing countries to become more involved in the process.

Although the different flexible mechanisms have the prospect of providing cost effective solutions for reducing GHG emissions and thus will play an important role in reaching the Kyoto objectives, the Community has always stressed that taking domestic action is paramount.

The June Council of Ministers underlined the urgency of such domestic action, especially in industrialised countries. Europe's leaders thus once again highlighted the need for industrialised countries to take the lead and encouraged other industrialised countries to follow Europe's example. Providing leadership in driving the development of new technologies and change of life-style is nothing less than a precondition for future progress. Only by doing so can we expect to gain credibility in the eyes of developing countries. This in turn will be crucial in preparing the grounds for a wider concerted action in which all countries take part aiming at reductions necessary for a long-term sustainable development of Earth's climate.

liii

EUROPEAN ACTION Obtaining substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions won't be easy

and painless. The recent Commission Communication "preparing for ratification of the Kyoto Protocol", acknowledges this fact and underlines that the whole society and its citizens will be affected and that more action and more efforts on all fronts will be required.

Because of the distribution of greenhouse gas emissions and the current upward trend of emissions, particular efforts will no doubt have to be made in the transport sector. However also in other sectors of society, both in those that have already managed to reduce emissions such as certain industry sectors and in others such as energy and agriculture further efforts are needed. The European Council in Cardiff and Vienna last year requested the councils responsible for energy, transport and agriculture to prepare strategies for integrating environmental aspects and sustainable development into their respective policies. The importance of such strategies in addressing the climate change issue was firmly stressed. Work is now underway and the strategies are to be presented to the Helsinki Council in December. Needless to say, it will be essential for the future success in reducing greenhouse gases that these strategies are credible, that they lay down a framework providing clear guidance including clear targets, time-tables and instruments for monitoring and evaluating progress. Although many measures that could be included in such strategies have already been identified, this workshop will no doubt shed further light and stimulate the debate on what further measures might be considered.

I have already touched upon the crucial task that the Council of ministers has to perform in the near future in relation to EU climate change policies. However, the Council of ministers already has stressed as well as it has been repeatedly demonstrated at several occasions that also the European Commission plays an important role, particularly for developing co-ordinated and common measures at EU level. To this end, the Commission has proposed a number of measures in its recent Communications to the Council of ministers and to the European Parliament. A large share of the work completed to date pertains to measures aiming at reducing carbon dioxide emissions. However, non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gases have also been addressed and there will undoubtedly be a need for further proposals and action programmes in the years to come.

ACTION ON SPECIFIC NON-C02 GASES A Commission strategy paper for reducing emissions of methane,

COM(l996)557 identified a number of measures in agriculture, waste management and in industry to be considered for cost-effective mitigation of methane emissions. Indeed methane emissions have already declined and a

liv

further decrease is expected over the years to come. Nevertheless there is good scope for additional reductions at low cost as identified in the Commission Communication. I am pleased to note in this context that some of these measures now seem to be coming into effect. One important element in relation to methane emissions is the ongoing work on the "Landfill directive" that will reduce the amounts of biodegradable waste for landfills and thus emissions of methane from this sector.

Nitrous oxide emissions are also projected to decline in future but again it appears that further reductions would be necessary and indeed feasible. Measures need to be taken in diff~rent sectors but overall there is a need for further research as there are still many uncertainties in terms of emission sources and regarding the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of different measures. In this context further work by the IPCC and other international organisations will be instrumental in enhancing the understanding of natural sources and the removal processes for both N20 and Methane.

On the three industrial gases (HFCs PFCs and SF6), several studies and the recently concluded exercise of putting together a submission to the Climate secretariat of ways and means of reducing emissions of these gases -as was requested by Decisions under both the Kyoto and the Montreal Protocols- have substantially increased our understanding of the sectors using and emitting these gases. It has been shown that a number of cost effective measures are at hand for reducing emissions of these gases. Nevertheless further policy development will benefit from more information and I am looking forward to hearing many interesting presentations over the next couple of days.

Common and co-ordinated measures have been identified by Council as a means of reducing emissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 and the Commission is currently evaluating different emission reduction options with the view to work towards a framework covering all fields of emissions and production of these gases. Such a framework could consist of various types of measures and it is quite likely that a combination of measures such as voluntary agreements, legislation or other instruments would form the most suitable way forward.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, I would once again like to underline that any step that can bring ·us closer to a better understanding of all the complexity surrounding climate change and provide us with more insight in different options to curb emissions are of highest importance for future policy making. I am confident that this symposium will be successful in this respect and form another important step towards better understanding of the specific aspects surrounding non-C02 greenhouse gases. I am therefore looking forward with great interest to the numerous presentations that are on the agenda for the next couple of days.