Upload
katrina-bradley
View
219
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TF HTAP, TF IAM, Vienna, February 2015.0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Mill
ion
tons
RCP
GAINS CLE
GAINS NFC
GAINS MTFR
SO2
HTAP-GAINS scenario analysis: preliminary exploration of emission scenarios with regard to the benefits of global cooperation.
Rita Van Dingenen, Frank Dentener (JRC), Chris Heyes, Zig Klimont (IIASA)
ExamplesA prototype for HTAP
•Examine transport of air pollution across the Northern Hemisphere, including ozone (precursors) and PM and components (including black carbon), mercury, and persistent organic pollutants.
•Assess potential emission mitigation options available inside and outside the UNECE region
•Assess their impacts on regional and global air quality,public health, ecosystems, near-term climate change
•Collaboration with other groups both inside and outside the Convention
HTAP’s Mandate
2
Based on Wild et al, ACP, 2012
Previous HTAP scenario analysis based on HTAP Phase 1 multi-model simulations
Annual average ozone changes in Europe for various scenarios
From emissions to impacts: the FAst Scenario Screening Tool: TM5-FASST
•Emissions considered: - SO2, NOx, NMVOC, NH3, CO ; CH4, Elemental Carbon, Primary Organic Matter, other primary PM
•Examples of impacts considered:- PM2.5 and O3 surface concentration and population exposure- O3 metrics for crops and vegetation exposure + impact on yield loss- Radiative forcing and CO2eq of SLCFs (GWP and GTP based)- Temperature trend for selected time horizons and emission trajectories of
pollutants and CO2
- Deposition of BC to the Arctic /Himalayas - Deposition of nitrogen and impacts on sensitive ecosystems
•Global Source - Receptor model for air pollutants, radiative forcing and deposition
•Simplified linear emission-concentration/forcing/deposition relations between regions
•Uses TM5-CTM output (2-way nested model, 1°x1° over multiple zoom regions)
TM5 2-way nested model grid
56 TM5-FASST source-receptor regions
TM5-FASST
Overlaps with a ranges of IAMs (e.g. IMAGE-MESSAGE-POLES)
The HTAP regional mask is fairly consistent
56 TM5-FASST source-receptor regions
TM5-FASST:
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1402468
101214
f(x) = 0.9461654302 x + 0.7072822726R² = 0.836298599119163
PM2.5, µg/m³
TM5 full modelTM
5 - F
ASS
T
y = 1.03x + 0.08R² = 0.9815
20
25
30
35
40
45
15 25 35 45
TM5
-FA
SST
TM5 full model
O3PPB, µg/m³
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.60
0.20.40.60.8
11.21.41.6
f(x) = 0.9816511287 x + 0.007914524R² = 0.989618161231194
BC, µg/m³
TM5 full model
TM5
- FA
SST
HTAP 2 GAINS Global Emission Scenarios:• NFC: No-further-control: what if technology and legislation would
stagnate on current levels• CLE: Current legislation would be implemented (but no new policies
made)• MFR: Maximum Feasible Reduction (all currently known technology
implemented)
Timeframe: 2020-2030-2050
Example of HTAP policy relevant questions:
How would the regional pollution change due emission developments within the region compared to those outside for the given emission scenarios?
What would be the global benefit of progressive emission reduction within a specific region?
Function of atmospheric concentrations, population density and exposure-response functions
How would the regional pollution change due emission developments within the region compared to those outside for
the given emission scenarios?
China+ China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
Western Europe China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
USA China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
India+ China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
Where is it coming from?Change in Particulate Matter 2050 CLE - 2050 MFR
China+ China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
Western Europe China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
USA China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
India+ China+
India+
USA
Central Europe
Western Europe
ROW
Where is it coming from?O3 change by emission source region: 2050 CLE - 2050 MFR
If China would go MFR in 2030, and the rest of the world stays on CLE? Benefits for crops by reducing ozone!
Eastern AfricaNorthern AfricaSouthern AfricaWestern Africa
OceaniaChina+Japan
Korea RegionCentral Europe
Western EuropeCentral America
MexicoMiddle East
TurkeyCanada
USAKazachstan Region
RussiaUkraine Region
BrazilRest of South America
India+South Eastern Asia
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Crop yield benefit per capita
kg/person
Conclusions:
Preliminary results using TM5-FASST
Shows the potential of evaluating regional and global benefits of air pollution controls.
Health, crops, and climate impacts
HTAP 2 will provide updated and evaluated model results using ensembles of global and regional models=> improved estimate of impacts and involvement of modelers worldwide
These modeling tools provide the opportunity to evaluate additional scenarios and assumptions:
- country perspectives on emission reductions- a set of country perspectives- etc.
Extras
Change in direct forcing in 2030 due to China MFR and RoW CLE
Inorganic, direct (SO4,NO3,NH4)
BC, all
POM, direct
SO4, indirect
O3 (except from CH4)
O3 from CH4
CO2
CH4
N2O
Total
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100
74
-36
10
85
-22
-34
0
-84
0
-7
Change in total instyantaneous forcing, mW/m²