meta data for this page
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
general:assessment_completeness:start [2023/04/14 08:18] – [Explanation on the use of notation keys] kotzulla | general:assessment_completeness:start [2024/11/06 13:50] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
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. | ||
- | However, | + | Germany is working continuously to decrease |
+ | 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+ | * For //NFR 1.A.2.b//, all NE notations have been replaced by IE.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. | ||
[{{ : | [{{ : | ||
Line 51: | Line 55: | ||
Each use is individually justified in the corresponding source category sections of this report as well as in the table below. | Each use is individually justified in the corresponding source category sections of this report as well as in the table below. | ||
- | Germany is working continuously to decrease the number of notation keys used and has already made good progress in this regard. | + | |
==== 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 68: | 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.7 | as of 1995: PM< | | 2.B.7 | as of 1995: PM< | ||
- | | 2.B.10.b | ||
| 2.C.1 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | | 2.C.1 | as of 2000: BC | use of default EF will be checked for following submissions | ||
- | | 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, |
- | | 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.C.1.b v | BC, As, Cr, Cu, Ni, Se, Zn, B[k]F | ' | + | | 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 117: | Line 116: | ||
| 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 |