meta data for this page
  •  

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
general:projections:recalculations [2021/04/23 10:38] – braunsgeneral:projections:recalculations [2025/04/03 21:20] (current) – eisold
Line 1: Line 1:
 ===== Recalculations ===== ===== Recalculations =====
  
-Due to recalculations for the emission inventory submission 2020, all emission reduction potentials had to be updated compared to the emission inventory submission 2018, upon which the emission projections reporting in 2019 was based. Furthermore, measures that had been included in the former WAM scenario have now been integrated in the WM scenario, as they were put into force in the meantime (e. g. 44<sup>th</sup> BImSchV). In addition, updated GHG emission projections using most recent projections of economic and other parameters result in a new projection of activity rates that needs to be considered for updating the emission projections of air pollutants. +Due to recalculations in each underlying emission inventory submission, all calculations of emission reduction potentials in the WM and WAM scenario of the respective projection are regularly updated. Furthermore, additional measures that had been included in the WAM scenario in the previous projection can become part of the WM scenario in the current projection, as they were put into force in the meantime (e. g. amendment of the 17<sup>th</sup> BImSchV). In addition, updated GHG emission projections using most recent projections of economic and other parameters result in a new projection of activity rates that needs to be considered for updating the emission projections of air pollutants. For the regular update of the projections under NEC-Directive (EU) 2016/2284, in between the regular update of the National Air Pollution Control Programme every four years, remaining measures in the WAM scenario of the current NAPCP stay and their mitigation potential is reassessed, unless they were dropped by the current federal government. The last is the case for the package of additional agricultural measures in the WAM scenario of the German NAPCP 2023. Thus, it was not reassessed for the current projections.
  
-The following figures show the differences between submission 2018 and 2020 for past emissions as well as the differences between the emission projections reported in 2019 and the current projections in the WM and the WAM scenario for each pollutant. For each pollutant a breif explanation of the most relevant reasons for the occurring differences is given.+For each pollutant the following figures show the differences between inventory submissions 2018, 2022 and 2024 for historic emissions as well as the differences between the WAM emission projections reported in 2019 (consistent with the NAPCP 2019), the WM and WAM scenario reported in 2023 (consistent with the NAPCP 2023) and the current WM and WAM scenario reported in 2025. For each pollutant a brief explanation of the most relevant reasons for the occurring differences compared to the previous reporting is given. For explanation of the differences between reporting in 2023 as well as the NAPCP 2023 reported in 2024 and 2021 please see IIR 2024((https://iir.umweltbundesamt.de/2024/general/projections/recalculations)) and for the differences between reporting in 2021 and 2019 please see the IIR of the 2021 reporting((https://iir.umweltbundesamt.de/2021/general/projections/recalculations)).
  
-**Nitrogen Oxide (NO<sub>X</sub>)**+In general, there is not much change in the current projection for **NO<sub>X</sub>**, that needs further explanation. Apart from the recalculations in the inventory since submission 2018, explaining most of the differences in 2025 between the NAPCP 2019 projection and the more current projections, there are two relevant reasons for differences between the current WM projection and the previous WM projection of the NAPCP 2023: 
 +    * The coal phase-out until 2030 is now included in the WM projection. To some extent because of legislation that did take place in the meantime and to some extent because of updated assumptions on price development of fuels, prices at the energy market as well as for CO<sub>2</sub>-prices, making especially the power generation from lignite in the remaining capacities less and less economical. 
 +    * Second, most measures from the road transport package of the NAPCP 2023 are now part of the WM scenario as they entered into force in the meantime (e. g. amended truck toll, Euro 7 legislation). There is neither further increase of the share of electrically driven mileage for passenger cars nor further increase of the number of passenger cars in the fleet assumed beyond the WM scenario (for description of assumptions in the road transport sector in the current WM scenario see [[General:Projections:calculation_documentation| calculation documentation]] and referred publications). 
  
-For NO<sub>X</sub> a new version of the HBEFA (4.1) was used for calculating past emissions of road transport in the submission 2020 leading to higher historical emissions for all vehicle categories (HDV, LDV, PC). The vehicles with higher emission factors compared to former HBEFA versions stay in the fleet until 2030. This also explains the differences between the two WAM scenarios. Whereas the WM scenarios show a similar difference in 2020, caused by the same reason, this is nearly compensated until 2030, where the current WM scenario ends up with lower emissions than the WM scenario from 2019. This can be explained by the coal phase-out, that has been taken from the former WAM into the current WM scenario leading to lower projected emissions from the energy sector.+{{:general:projections:nox_recalculations_2025.png?|}}
  
-{{:general:projections:nox_recalculation.png?|}}+There is also not much change in the current projection for **SO<sub>X</sub>**, that needs further explanation. There is only one relevant reason for differences between the current WM projection and the previous WM projection of the NAPCP 2023: 
 +    * The coal phase-out until 2030 is now included in the WM projection. To some extent because of legislation that did take place in the meantime and to some extent because of updated assumptions on price development of fuels, prices at the energy market as well as for CO<sub>2</sub>-prices, making especially the power generation from lignite in the remaining capacities less and less economical. In the WM scenario of the NAPCP 2023 this was assumed to take place until 2038 (see description of the previous WM scenario in the IIR 2024).
  
-**Sulfur Dioxide (SO<sub>2</sub>)**+{{:general:projections:sox_recalculations_2025.png?|}}
  
-The coal phase-out is also the reason for the differences between the two WM scenarios for SO<sub>2</sub>. Furthermore, the reduction potential had been overestimated in the WAM scenario from 2019. This can be explained by a bug in calculating sulphur dioxide emissions from refineries in the 2019 WAM scenario, that more than halved the emission factors for SO<sub>2</sub> in this sector unintentionally.+**NMVOC** emission projections are strongly influenced by economic projections. Updates on these are therefore causing changes in NMVOC emission projections. The deviating trend of the current WM projection against the previous WM projection of the NAPCP 2023 is explained in the chapter [[General:Projections:calculation_documentation| calculation documentation]]. However, the latest historic emissions in 2022 are already below the current WM projection for 2025 to 2050, which is caused by decreases over all sectors.
  
-{{:general:projections:so2_recalculation.png?|}}+{{:general:projections:nmvoc_recalculations_2025.png?|}}
  
-**Non-Methane Volatile Organic Compounds (NMVOC)**+For ammonia (**NH<sub>3</sub>**) two comparisons to previous projections are shown as two WM projections were submitted under NEC-Directive & CLRTAP in 2025, one based on inventory submission 2024 and the other one based on inventory submission 2025 under otherwise identical assumptions. In both cases, from submission 2021 onwards a methodological change in emission calculations for inorganic fertilisers is leading to less variation from one year to another((for further explanation see: https://iir.umweltbundesamt.de/2021/general/recalculations/ammonia)). Apart from that, current WM projection based on inventory submission 2024 is slightly above the previous WM and WAM scenarios of the NAPCP 2023 in 2030 and beyond as there are slight changes in the assumptions on animal numbers and thus, in the amount of manure and inorganic fertilisers applicated. The current WM projection based on inventory submission 2025 is significantly higher, due to recalculations in the inventory. The main reason for higher emissions are adjusted emission factors for various inorganic fertilisers according to the latest EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook 2023. Development of historic emissions and projections in the current WM scenario (in both variations) is not parallel, as the amount of fertilisers is multiplied with the emission factors and therefore difference in resulting emissions is not linear. 
  
-The current NMVOC emission projections show a different trend than the 2019 projections in both scenarios, caused by updated economic projections, which strongly influence the NMVOC emission projections from solvent production and use.+{{:general:projections:nh3_recalculations_2025_sub2024.png?|}}
  
-{{:general:projections:nmvoc_recalculation.png?|}}+{{:general:projections:nh3_recalculations_2025_sub2025.png?|}}
  
-**Ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>)**+**PM<sub>2.5</sub>** projections are mostly consistent over the various projection reportings. However, the projection of the NAPCP 2019 and later projections are containing mutually compensating assumptions. The WAM scenario of the NAPCP 2019 had assumed a much higher coal use as well as a much lower use of solid biomass in 2030 than the following projections, leading to an almost congruent estimate of the projected national PM<sub>2.5</sub> total. Thus, the WM scenario of the NAPCP 2023 lies above all other displayed scenarios, because of higher biomass use than in the WAM scenario of the NAPCP 2019 (and also than in the current WM and WAM scenarios) in combination with a lower coal use than in the NAPCP 2019. 
  
-The current WM scenario for NH<sub>3</sub> shows a significant decrease compared to the 2019 WM scenario mainly caused by the assumed effects of the new Fertilizing Ordinance (DÜV 2020) from 2020. However, the remaining reduction potentials in the current WAM scenario result in a less steep decrease from 2020 to 2030 than in the 2019 WAM scenario. The assumptions for calculating the reduction potential of measures in the WAM scenario were carefully updated by the Thünen Institute according to current political activities and incentives for their implementation in practice as described above.+However, the assumed coal use in the current WM scenario is almost phased out until 2030 (see description in the [[General:Projections:wm-scenario| WM scenario]]) in combination with an assumed use of solid biomass that is lower than in the NAPCP 2023 but higher than in the NAPCP 2019. That the WAM scenario of the NAPCP 2023 is also slightly above the current WM projection in the year 2025 is mostly due to a previously projected sharper increase in the use of solid biomass in the building sector than under updated assumptions. Apart from these differing assumptions of coal use in the energy and industry sector and the use of solid biomass in the building sector as well as in the energy and industry sector, also updated assumptions in the road transport sector have a mitigation effect (e. g. Euro 7 regulation introducing limit values for tyre and brake wear). With less biomass in the current WM scenario than in the NAPCP 2023 also the mitigation potential of the revision of the Ecodesign directives for solid fuel boilers and solid fuel local space heaters in the current [[General:Projections:wam-scenario| WAM scenario]] is slightly lower than in the previous WAM scenario of the NAPCP 2023.
  
-{{:general:projections:nh3_recalculation.png?|}}+{{:general:projections:pm2-5_recalculations_2025.png?|}}
  
-**Fine Particulate Matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>)** 
- 
-For fine PM (PM<sub>2.5</sub>), the recalculations for past emissions are not that relevant. Nevertheless, the projected emissions are higher than those reported in 2019, at least compared to the former WAM scenario. This is mainly caused by three effects: 
- 
-First, there are higher PM<sub>2.5</sub> emission factors in the HBEFA 4.1 also influencing the future fleet (increasing the projection in 2030 by about 1.5 kt). Second, there is a higher projected use of solid biomass in small combustion installations due to climate protection policies that are still promoting biomass as a renewable and climate friendly energy source ignoring the antagonism with other environmental goals (increasing the projection in 2030 by about 1.3 kt). And third, we applied a different methodology for the projection of activity rates in certain industrial sectors that have no GHG emissions and therefore no projection of activity rates in the underlying dataset (increasing the projection in 2030 by about 1.5 kt). While assuming the latest historical activity rate as constant for projections reported in 2019 (that means using the value of 2016 from the emission inventory submission 2018), for the current projections the average of the last 10 years (2008-2018 according to submission 2020) was set constant for the projection years. This leads for example, to significantly higher emissions in the source category handling and storage of bulk products. However, in most cases estimates can be considered conservative. 
- 
-{{:general:projections:pm2.5_recalculation.png?|}}