National implementation of CLRTAP Protocols in light of the EU challenges case of Poland, a coal using country (by Andrzej Jagusiewicz-Director, Department of Monitoring, Assessment and Outlooks with the Chief Inspectorate of Environmental Protection) UN/ECE Workshop on Air quality management and the international legal framework, Almaty, Kazakhstan, 12-14 October 25)
Structure of energy sources in electricity generation 198-199 2 + 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 N R CT O 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 N R CT O nuclear renewables conventional thermal other
Fuel structure in electricity generation 198-199 2 + 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 HC BC O G HC BC O G hard coal oil brown coal natural gas
Fuel structure in electricity generation 198-199 2 + 65 % on hard coal and 35 % on brown coal in 2 Minimal energy growth 5 % up to 225; expected up to 75 % Thermal energy (HC+BC) 85 %, renewables 1-14 % and 1 % others (hydrogen?) High oil prices and gas transfer risks require maximal use of own energy sources quaranteeing national energy safety Slow changes in fuel structure beyond 2 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 HC BC O G
Comparison of different national emission values as required by EU obligations and the 1999 Gothenburg Protocol Emission 22 LCP Directive emission bubble option A 28 LCP Directive emission bubble + AT derogations option B 28 option C AT limits 21 212 Gothenburg ceilings (NEC) 21 Emission SO 2 81 142 555 96 666 239 454 426 358 1,397 including: Existing LCPs under NERP 738 737 419 913 53 192 318 143 322 51 292 71 - Existing LCP subject to 2. h 53 33 1 471 1 471 68 92 - - - derogations New LCPs 9 382 35 576 35 576 37 54 - - - Emission NO x 257 164 321 192 32 577 254 251 239 879 Including: Existing LCPs under NERP 233 113 273 514 272 899 19 881 197 454 193 98 - Existing LCP subject to 2. h 18 717 14 687 14 687 14 687 - - - derogations New LCPs 5 334 32 991 32 991 32 991 - - -
Visualisation of S national emission values as required by the EU and the 1999 Gothenburg Protocol 16 14 12 1 8 6 1397 4 2 81 556 666 454 426 358 Emission 22 Dir.option A 28 Dir.option B 28 AT limit option C 28 AT limit 21 AT limit 212 Gothenburg Protokol
PM 2,5 and SOx emissions (precursor of secondary PM 2.5 aerosols) Emissions PM 2.5 25 2 15 1 5 215 12 92 53 48 CLE 2 22 22 Rok MFTR-I i II 16 14 12 1 8 6 1515 1397 554 4 2 21 21 195 167 2 21 22 22 "A" 22 "B" 22 "C" 22 NEC LCP MFTR/CAFE
Structure of gas emissions to air by sectors of economy in 23 1% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% % SO2 NOx NH3 NMVOC CO 1. Agriculture 9. Waste management 8. Other vehicles and machines 7. Road transport 6. Use of solvents 5. Mining of fuels 4. Production processes 3. Combustion processes in industry 2. Municipal and household sector 1. Production and transformation of energy Source: ME, CSO.
Restriction of emission limit values over 199-22 Emission standard [mg/m 3 ] 4 35 SO 2 3 25 PL 9 PL 98 and PL 1 2 15 SO 2 PL 3=UE 1 1 NO x 5 NO x NO x SO 2 199 1992 1994 1996 1998 2 22 24 26 28 21 212 214 216 218 22
Changes in emissions from LCP sector 1989-22 25 2 15 1 5 22 1989 199 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2 21 Emission [thous. of Mg/year] Year SO2 emission NOx emission T SP emission
Decoupling of SO2 emissions from electricity generation 1989-22 [thousand of Mg SO 2 ] [TWh] 2 5 2 1 5 16 14 12 1 8 1 5 6 4 89 9 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 1 2 2
Decoupling of NOx emissions from electricity generation 1989-22 [thous. of Mg NO X ] [TWh] 6 5 4 3 16 14 12 1 8 2 1 6 4 2 89 9 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 1 2
Decoupling of PM emissions from electricity generation 1989-22 [thous. of Mg TSP] [TWh] 1 2 16 1 14 12 8 1 6 8 4 6 4 2 2 89 9 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 1 2
Problems to solve What emission ceilings?? A few choices remain: The Gothenburg NECs/ EU NEC Directive 21 almost met LCP Directive>NERP or ELVs AT limits>recommended value~3 Kt MFTR/CAFE>16 Kt Polish National Energy Policy 225 vs European Energy Scenario 22 Introduction of emission trading (ET) system for GHG and LCP pollutants- Sixth Draft of National Allocation Plan for GHG: Stage I National Allocation Plan for CO2 for 25-27 according to EU Directive 23/87/EC Stage II-National Allocation Plan for LCP pollutants for 26-27 by end of 25 (warming up before 28, when LCP Directive ELVs obligatory) Economic aspects: emission charges and fines, cost of allocation>free of charge, penalties for non-compliance in ET (4 and 1 euro for 1t of CO2) Explore synergies>gain gain in GHG trading to invest in SOx/NOx abatement techniques Renewables: how much and how to integrate into ET system?
Measures to be implemented SOx abatement -LCP > 5 MWth: 89 % equipped with wet FGD, extended operating time and new FGD on 7. MW -1 MWth<LCP<5 MWth: dry and semi-dry FGD -LCP<1 MWth: low S coal (<,5 %) NOx abatement -LCP> 5 MWth: 1. MW equipped with SCR starting in 216-1 MWth<LCP<5 MWth 75 % equipped with combination of primary measures Economic instruments -ET, emission charges and fees, expected EU cofinancing Non-technical measures: energy management etc.
Estimation of direct cost of compliance depending on the option choosen in PLN (1 U$ dollar=3,3 PLN) LCP Directive ELVs NERPoption A NERPoption B AT option C Direct investment 13,1 bln 11,7 bln zł 1,9 bln 13,6 bln Increase in heat generation 1,5 PLN/GJ 1,3 PLN/GJ 1,2 PLN/GJ 1,57 PLN/GJ (in fuel) Increase in electricity price 16,8 PLN/MWh 14,7 PLN/MWh 13,5 PLN/MWh 17,64 PLN/MWh
A way forward-how to comply with the EU REQUIREMENTS/EXPECTATIONS 22: TARGET FOR LCP (3. of SOx) SECTOR REALISTIC PROVIDED: Linear not shaky long-term reduction of SOx emissions By 225 planned electricity growth exclusively in the power plant sector due to new investments (district heating as complementary) and renewables Optimal use of national energy carriers (HC and BC) combined with clean coal combustion technology Final approval by the EC of both NAP and NERP, if choosen and their successful implementation starting still in 25 and 28 Emission trading to aligne SOx emission intensity in the LCP sector (differences from,5 kg/mwh to almost 2 kg/mwh); synergie and trade-off between GHG and SOx/NOx/PM The intermediary emission limits from the AT to be achieved with some delay but full compliance with AQ standards Employment is reasonably kept in the mining and energy sectors avoiding social unrest and unneccessary coal import
Required emission abatement of SO 2 from the LCP sector according to the EU target 1 9 8 7 98 6 5 4 3 2 1 454 426 358 3 2 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 22
Conclusions Fuel structure in heat and power generation and energy safety impose the Polish way to meet the EU targets New Energy Policy till 225 must be re-assessed in order to meet revised CLRTAP/EU requirements (full harmonization of NECs for EU-25) Final ecological decisions will be possible at the beginning of 26, including EU and UN/ECE after the debate over a TSAP Independently, the expert work on nuclear options in order to fill the gap in long-term energy balance is seriously envisaged
Nuclear reactors in Europe 9 35 58 4 12 2 7 1 17 6 15 24 5 1 1 6 31
Lessons learnt Active participation in the scientific work and policy development under the CLRTAP Convention has been and still is a catalyst to comply with the EU requirements EU air protection policy is quite similar to that developed under the Convention although its Directives are stricter than Annexes to the Convention To combat transboundary pollution a geographical scope as large as possible is needed
Thank you for your attention For more information a.jagusiewicz@gios.gov.pl