meta data for this page
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
general:assessment_completeness:start [2023/04/12 12:24] – [Table] kotzulla | general:assessment_completeness:start [2023/04/28 13:08] – reichel | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
===== Explanation on the use of notation keys ===== | ===== Explanation on the use of notation keys ===== | ||
- | The use of notation keys in the German inventory is carefully checked each year. All notation keys are used as defined in the guidance documents. | + | The use of notation keys in the German inventory is carefully checked each year. All notation keys are used as defined in the guidance documents. |
- | {{: | + | The following tables from the CLRTAP Stage 1 Reviews 2022 and 2023 give a good indication on where and how frequently notation keys are used in Germany' |
- | As shown in the table, most flagged cells are the ones reporting on the use of NE. Though NEs are great in number, the actual emission behind each of the notation keys is estimated to be very small. In some cases, it is actually used instead of NA to make absolutely sure to be on the conservative side of the estimate. | + | Though NEs are great in number, the actual emission behind each of the notation keys is estimated to be very small. In some cases, it is actually used instead of NA to make absolutely sure to be on the conservative side of the estimate. |
- | + | ||
- | As for categories, NE notations are used mainly in **Industrial Processes** and **Waste** (please refer to [[https:// | + | |
Germany is working continuously to decrease the number of notation keys used and has already made good progress in this regard. | Germany is working continuously to decrease the number of notation keys used and has already made good progress in this regard. | ||
+ | The comparison shows that the number of NE notations used in the inventory could be reduced for almost all reported pollutants. However, this is mainly due to two facts: | ||
+ | * For //NFR 1.A.2.b//, all NE notations have been replaced by IE. | ||
+ | and | ||
+ | * The entire //NFR 2.J - Production of POPs// is reported as not occuring in Germany now and all NE have been replacd by NO notations. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [{{ : | ||
+ | [{{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | As for categories, NE notations are used mainly in **Industrial Processes** and **Waste** (please refer to [[https:// | ||
+ | Each use is individually justified in the corresponding source category sections of this report as well as in the table below. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
==== NFR categories reported as 'not estimated' | ==== NFR categories reported as 'not estimated' | ||
^ NFR category | ^ NFR category | ||
- | | 1.A.1.b | + | | 1.A.1.b |
- | | 1.A.1.c | + | | 1.A.1.c |
- | | 1.A.2.a | + | | 1.A.2.a |
- | | 1.A.2.b | + | | 1.A.2.e |
- | | 1.A.2.e | + | |
| 1.A.2.g vii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | | 1.A.2.g vii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | ||
| 1.A.3.a i(i) | PCDD/ | | 1.A.3.a i(i) | PCDD/ | ||
Line 62: | Line 71: | ||
| 1.A.3.b vii | Hg, as of 2000: BC | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | | 1.A.3.b vii | Hg, as of 2000: BC | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | ||
| 1.A.3.c | | 1.A.3.c | ||
- | | 1.A.3.e i | as of 2000: BC | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2016 | | + | | 1.A.3.e i | as of 2000: BC | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2016, GB 2019 to be checked |
- | | 1.A.4.a i | Se | no appropriate EF available | + | | 1.A.4.a i | Se | GB 2019 to be checked |
| 1.A.4.a ii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | | 1.A.4.a ii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | ||
- | | 1.A.4.b i | Se | no appropriate EF available | + | | 1.A.4.b i | Se | GB 2019 to be checked |
| 1.A.4.b ii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | | 1.A.4.b ii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | ||
- | | 1.A.4.c i | Se | no appropriate EF available | + | | 1.A.4.c i | Se | GB 2019 to be checked |
| 1.A.4.c ii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | | 1.A.4.c ii | HCB, PCBs | no EFs provided in EMEP GB 2019 | | ||
- | | 1.A.5.a | + | | 1.A.5.a |
| 2.A.1 | as of 2000: BC | no appropriate EFs available | | 2.A.1 | as of 2000: BC | no appropriate EFs available | ||
| 2.A.2 | as of 2000: BC | no appropriate EFs available | | 2.A.2 | as of 2000: BC | no appropriate EFs available | ||
- | | 2.B.3 | + | | 2.B.3 | PM< |
| 2.B.6 | NO< | | 2.B.6 | NO< | ||
| 2.B.7 | as of 1995: PM< | | 2.B.7 | as of 1995: PM< | ||
Line 79: | Line 88: | ||
| 2.C.2 | NO< | | 2.C.2 | NO< | ||
| 2.C.3 | NMVOC, BC, B[b]F, B[k]F, I[1, | | 2.C.3 | NMVOC, BC, B[b]F, B[k]F, I[1, | ||
- | | 2.C.4 | NMVOC, TSP, PM< | + | | 2.C.4 | NMVOC, TSP, PM< |
| 2.C.5 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | | 2.C.5 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | ||
| 2.C.6 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | | 2.C.6 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | ||
- | | 2.C.7.a | + | | 2.C.7.a |
- | | 2.C.7.c | + | | 2.C.7.c |
- | | 2.D.3.b | + | | 2.D.3.b |
- | | 2.D.3.c | + | | 2.D.3.c |
- | | 2.D.3.h | + | | 2.H.1 | PCBs, as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for BC, use of ' |
- | | 2.H.1 | + | |
| 2.H.2 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | | 2.H.2 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | ||
| 2.H.3 | as of 2000: BC | use of ' | | 2.H.3 | as of 2000: BC | use of ' | ||
- | | 2.I | as of 2000: BC | no information in EMEP GB 2016 | | + | | 2.I | as of 2000: BC | no information in EMEP GB 2016, GB 2019 to be checked |
- | | 2.J | NO< | + | | 2.K |
- | | 2.K | + | |
| 2.L | BC | BC emissions unlikely to occur from dry bulk goods; no information in EMEP GB 2016 | | | 2.L | BC | BC emissions unlikely to occur from dry bulk goods; no information in EMEP GB 2016 | | ||
| 3.B.4.h | | 3.B.4.h | ||
- | | 5.A | NMVOC, PM< | + | | 5.C.1.b v | BC, As, Cr, Cu, Ni, Se, Zn, B[k]F | ' |
- | | 5.B.1 | as of 2000: BC | no country-specific EF at hand; EMEP GB 2016, https:// | + | |
- | | 5.B.2 | as of 2000: BC | no country-specific EF at hand; EMEP GB 2016, https:// | + | |
- | | 5.C.1.b v | BC, As, Cr, Cu, Ni, Se, Zn, B[k]F | ' | + | |
| 5.C.2 | NMVOC, NH< | | 5.C.2 | NMVOC, NH< | ||
| 1.A.3.a i(ii) | PCDD/ | | 1.A.3.a i(ii) | PCDD/ | ||
Line 114: | Line 118: | ||
| 1.A.2.d | | 1.A.2.d | ||
| 1.A.2.e | | 1.A.2.e | ||
- | | 1.A.2.f | + | | 1.A.2.f |
| 1.A.2.g viii | B[b]F, B[k]F, I[1, | | 1.A.2.g viii | B[b]F, B[k]F, I[1, | ||
| 1.A.3.d i(ii) | all emissions | | 1.A.3.d i(ii) | all emissions | ||
| 2.A.1 | CO, B[b]F, B[k]F, I[1, | | 2.A.1 | CO, B[b]F, B[k]F, I[1, | ||
- | | 2.A.2 | NH< | + | | 2.A.2 | NH< |
- | | 2.A.3 | CO | + | |
| 2.A.5.c | | 2.A.5.c | ||
| 2.A.6 | CO | 1.A.2.f | | 2.A.6 | CO | 1.A.2.f | ||
Line 136: | Line 139: | ||
All inventory improvements coming from our own QA/QC or review recommendations can not be applied for the years before 1990. Insofar, the long-time series is provided only as additional information and to illustrate the general trend since 1970. | All inventory improvements coming from our own QA/QC or review recommendations can not be applied for the years before 1990. Insofar, the long-time series is provided only as additional information and to illustrate the general trend since 1970. | ||
- | [{{: | + | [{{ : |