meta data for this page
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
sector:energy:fuel_combustion:transport:civil_aviation:start [2021/04/08 08:35] – kotzulla | sector:energy:fuel_combustion:transport:civil_aviation:start [2021/12/15 20:00] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
==== Activity Data ==== | ==== Activity Data ==== | ||
- | Emissions estimation is mainly based on consumption data for jet kerosene and aviation gasoline as provided in the national Energy Balances (AGEB, 2020) [(AGEB2020)]. For very recent years with no AGEB data available (Normally the last year of the period reported.) data provided by the Federal Office of Economics and Export Control (BAFA) is being used. | + | Emissions estimation is mainly based on consumption data for jet kerosene and aviation gasoline as provided in the national Energy Balances (AGEB, 2020) [(AGEB2020)]. For very recent years with no AGEB data available (Normally the last year of the period reported.) data provided by the Federal Office of Economics and Export Control (BAFA) |
Table 1: Sources for 1.A.3.a activity data | Table 1: Sources for 1.A.3.a activity data | ||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
As a basis for these functions the EF of types of aircraft with given EF have been used (see: Knörr et al. (2020c)) [(KNOERR2020c)]. From the trend of the emissions calculated within TREMOD AV, annual average EF for the entire fleet have been formed, which have then been used for reporting. Hence, the EF differ widely from those used in earlier submissions. | As a basis for these functions the EF of types of aircraft with given EF have been used (see: Knörr et al. (2020c)) [(KNOERR2020c)]. From the trend of the emissions calculated within TREMOD AV, annual average EF for the entire fleet have been formed, which have then been used for reporting. Hence, the EF differ widely from those used in earlier submissions. | ||
- | **Ammonia (NH,,3,,)** emissions were estimated using an EF of 0.173 g/kg kerosene for both flight stages (UBA, 2009) [(UBA2009)]. | + | **Ammonia (NH<sub>3</ |
The EFs for **non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC)** were calculated as the difference between the EF for over-all hydrocarbons (HC) and the EF for methane (CH< | The EFs for **non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC)** were calculated as the difference between the EF for over-all hydrocarbons (HC) and the EF for methane (CH< | ||
**Particulate Matter** | **Particulate Matter** | ||
- | Within the IPCC EF data base, there are no default data provided for emissions of particulate matter (TSP, PM< | + | Within the IPCC EF data base, there are no default data provided for emissions of particulate matter (TSP, PM< |
- | The EF for **water vapor (H< | + | The EF for **water vapor (H< |
As for **polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons** (PAH), tier1 EF from (EMEP/EEA, 2019) [(EMEPEEA2019)] have been apllied here. As the EMEP guidebook does not provide original EF for jet kerosene, values provided for gasoline in road transport have been used here as a proxy and will be replaced by more appropriate data as soon as this is available. | As for **polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons** (PAH), tier1 EF from (EMEP/EEA, 2019) [(EMEPEEA2019)] have been apllied here. As the EMEP guidebook does not provide original EF for jet kerosene, values provided for gasoline in road transport have been used here as a proxy and will be replaced by more appropriate data as soon as this is available. | ||
Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
=== Aviation gasoline === | === Aviation gasoline === | ||
- | For aviation gasoline (avgas) a deviation onto LTO and cruise is assumed to be unnecessary. Therefore, there are no such specific EF used here. As for kerosene, the EF for **NO,,x,,**, **CO** and **HC** have been taken from the calculations carried out within TREMOD AV. Here, for calculating aircraft specific NO,,x,,, CO, and HC emissions corresponding EF from the EMEP-EEA data base have been used that have than been divided by the annual avgas consumption to form annual average EF for emission reporting. | + | For aviation gasoline (avgas) a deviation onto LTO and cruise is assumed to be unnecessary. Therefore, there are no such specific EF used here. As for kerosene, the EF for **NO<sub>x</ |
- | With respect to fuel characteristics, | + | With respect to fuel characteristics, |
There are different sorts of avgas sold with different **lead (Pb)** contents. As an exact annual ration of the sorts sold is not available, the most common type of avgas (AvGas 100 LL (Low Lead)) with a lead content of 0.56 g/l is set as an approximation. This value lies slightly below the value of 0.6 g/l as proposed in the EMEP Guidebook 2009. – For estimating lead emissions here the value provided for AvGas 100 LL has been converted into an EF of about 0.75 g lead/kg avgas using a density of 0.75 kg/l. | There are different sorts of avgas sold with different **lead (Pb)** contents. As an exact annual ration of the sorts sold is not available, the most common type of avgas (AvGas 100 LL (Low Lead)) with a lead content of 0.56 g/l is set as an approximation. This value lies slightly below the value of 0.6 g/l as proposed in the EMEP Guidebook 2009. – For estimating lead emissions here the value provided for AvGas 100 LL has been converted into an EF of about 0.75 g lead/kg avgas using a density of 0.75 kg/l. | ||
Line 144: | Line 144: | ||
All other EF are not available specifically for small aircraft and therefore have been equalized with the EF used for kerosene, national, cruise. | All other EF are not available specifically for small aircraft and therefore have been equalized with the EF used for kerosene, national, cruise. | ||
- | |||
- | __Table 6: EF,,2018,, used for emission estimation from avgas use in aircraft, in g/kg__ | ||
- | ||~ Pollutant ||~ EF ||~ Source or estimation info || | ||
- | || NO,, | ||
- | || NMVOC ||> | ||
- | || SO,, | ||
- | || CO ||> 661 || estimated within TREMOD AV || | ||
- | || TSP ||> | ||
- | || Pb ||> | ||
The conversion of the EF from [kg emission/kg avgas consumed] into [kg emission/TJ energy converted] has been carried out using a net calorific value of 44,300 kJ/kg. | The conversion of the EF from [kg emission/kg avgas consumed] into [kg emission/TJ energy converted] has been carried out using a net calorific value of 44,300 kJ/kg. | ||
Line 158: | Line 149: | ||
> **NOTE:** For the country-specific emission factors applied for particulate matter, no clear indication is available, whether or not condensables are included. | > **NOTE:** For the country-specific emission factors applied for particulate matter, no clear indication is available, whether or not condensables are included. | ||
- | > For information on the **emission factors for heavy-metal and POP exhaust emissions**, | + | > For information on the **emission factors for heavy-metal and POP exhaust emissions**, |
=====Recalculations===== | =====Recalculations===== | ||
Line 215: | Line 206: | ||
Information on uncertainties is provided here with most data representing expert judgement from the research project mentioned above. | Information on uncertainties is provided here with most data representing expert judgement from the research project mentioned above. | ||
- | For estimating uncertainties, | + | For estimating uncertainties, |
- | By additive linking of the squared partial uncertainties the overall uncertainty (U,,total,,) can then be estimated (IPCC, 2000) [(IPCC2000)]. | + | By additive linking of the squared partial uncertainties the overall uncertainty (U<sub>total</ |
The uncertainties given here have been evaluated for all time series and flight stages as average values. | The uncertainties given here have been evaluated for all time series and flight stages as average values. | ||
Line 226: | Line 217: | ||
For the years 1990 to 2002 data is based upon estimations carried out within TREMOD AV which themselves are based on data from the Federal Statistical Office and EF from the EMEP-EEA data base. For 2003 to 2011 data from Eurocontrol are being used, that are calculated within ANCAT. Comparing results from the ANCAT model with actual consumption data show aberrations of ±12 %. Here, data calculated with AEM 3 model would have an uncertainty of only 3 to 5 % (EUROCONTROL 2006) [(EUROCONTROL2006)]. | For the years 1990 to 2002 data is based upon estimations carried out within TREMOD AV which themselves are based on data from the Federal Statistical Office and EF from the EMEP-EEA data base. For 2003 to 2011 data from Eurocontrol are being used, that are calculated within ANCAT. Comparing results from the ANCAT model with actual consumption data show aberrations of ±12 %. Here, data calculated with AEM 3 model would have an uncertainty of only 3 to 5 % (EUROCONTROL 2006) [(EUROCONTROL2006)]. | ||
- | The image below shows the partial uncertainties and correlations used for uncertainty estimations carried out during the research project. Mouseclick to enlarge! | + | As no uncertainty estimates were carried out for ammonia |
- | [[gallery size=" | + | |
- | : Uncertainties.png | + | |
- | [[/ | + | |
- | + | ||
- | As no uncertainty estimates were carried out for NH,, | + | |
===== FAQs ===== | ===== FAQs ===== | ||
- | **//Whereby does the party justify the adding-up of the two amounts given in BAFA table 7j as deliveries 'An die Luftfahrt' | + | **Whereby does the party justify the adding-up of the two amounts given in BAFA table 7j as deliveries 'An die Luftfahrt' |
For mineral oils, German National Energy Balances (NEBs) - amongst other sources - are based on BAFA data on the amounts delivered to different sectors. A comparison with consumption data from AGEB and BAFA shows that data from NEB line 76 /63: ' | For mineral oils, German National Energy Balances (NEBs) - amongst other sources - are based on BAFA data on the amounts delivered to different sectors. A comparison with consumption data from AGEB and BAFA shows that data from NEB line 76 /63: ' | ||
- | **//Why is there no aviation gasoline | + | **On which basis does the party estimate the reported lead emissions from aviation gasoline?** |
- | Due to the lack of further information, | + | assumption by party: aviation gasoline |
+ | (AvGas 100 LL is the predominant sort of aviation gasoline in Western Europe)1 | ||
+ | lead content of AvGas 100 LL: 0.56 g lead/ | ||
+ | The applied procedure is similar to the one used for calculating lead emissions from leaded gasoline used in road transport. (There, in contrast to aviation gasoline, the lead content constantly declined resulting in a ban of leaded gasoline in 1997.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | **On which basis does the party estimate the reported TSP emissions from aviation gasoline?** | ||
+ | |||
+ | The TSP emissions calculated depend directly on the reported lead emissions: The emission factor for TSP is 1.6 times the emission factor used for lead: EF(TSP) = 1.6 x EF(Pb). | ||
+ | The applied procedure is similar to the one used for calculating TSP emissions from leaded gasoline used in road transport. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [(AGEB2020> | ||
+ | [(BAFA2020> | ||
+ | URL: https:// | ||
[(KNOERR2010> | [(KNOERR2010> | ||
[(KNOERR2020c> | [(KNOERR2020c> | ||
Line 259: | Line 257: | ||
[(IPCC2000> | [(IPCC2000> | ||
[(EUROCONTROL2006> | [(EUROCONTROL2006> | ||
- | |||
- | |||
- | [(UBA2001> | ||
- | : 6 : ÖKO-INSTITUT, | ||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- | |||
- |