Latest developments in the European Monitoring and

Evaluation Programme (EMEP)

Laurence ROUÏL Chair of the EMEP Steering Body (CLRTAP)

The EMEP prioritiesSupport the implementation of the Convention on

Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP)Implementation of the Protocols of the Convention

(Gothenburg, Heavy metals and POPs)Ratification by an increasing number of Parties (51 in total) Larger involvement of countries from Eastern Europe , the

Caucasus and Central Asia (EECCA)Implementation EMEP monitoring strategyYearly reporting of emissions and projections (+

adjustment process)Air quality in Europe : trends, assessments for now and in

the futureCooperation with other European and International bodiesIncreasing cooperation with and between the Parties Increasing visibility and communication on transboundary

air pollution issues

Information for air

pollution reduction policies

WGE

EMEP

- Deposition exceedance- Ecosystem area at risk- Ozone indicator- Health indicator- Economic analyses

Dose/responses

Empirical CLd

WGE indicatorsand impact assessment

Target loads

Biodiv indic

Asp.Targets

GAINSEMEP model

O3 flux

WGSREBUEDepositions

CLd, CLe

CLd, CLe

Emissions,Atmospheric

transport

Monitoring

Approaches driven by air pollution effects

Implementation of the EMEP monitoring strategyEMEP is acknowledged as a reference framework for Air

pollution in Europe with stringent rules for monitoring long range transport of air pollution, chemical analyses

It provides scientific insights and evidence for the implementation of air quality legislation (Convention and EU)

Implementation index to assess the quality and representativeness of the EMEP network Slight drop in the network development : funding issues and changes

in priorities of the Parties are the main reasonsNeed to enhance consistency with the EU legislation Need to maintain long historical datasets

Close cooperation with relevant research programs and Infrastructures (level 3) : GAW, ACTRIS2, Copernicus, ...

Reporting Emission Inventories EMEP task Force and Centre on emission inventories

and projections (TFEIP and CEIP) define an appropriate framework for reporting emissions:From a large number of sources In a shared gridded system (target resolution: 0.1°)In a consistent way , with stringent QA/QC rules

A huge amount of work is done to check reported emissions (in-depth reviews), for gap filling, for capacity building and support to national experts

In 2015 for the first time, Black carbon emissions have been reported by 28 countries

Adjustment emission process Parties may apply to adjust their emission reduction commitments or

inventory data in extraordinary circumstances, as defined in the EMEP Executive Body decisions 2012/3 and 2012/4 (ECE/EB.AIR/111/Add.1) as amended by EB decision 2014/1. (a) Emission source categories are identified that were not accounted for

at the time when the emission reduction commitments were set; (for a more detailed definition see decision 2014/1, annex, para. 3 (a) (i)–(iii));

(b) Emission factors used to determine emissions levels for particular source categories for the year in which emissions reduction commitments are to be attained are significantly different than the emission factors applied to these categories when emission reduction commitments were set;

(c) The methodologies used for determining emissions from specific source categories have undergone significant changes between the time when emission reduction commitments were set and the year they are to be attained.

CEIP and national experts are in charge of the review of the applications submitted by the Parties : 7 countries in 2015, 6 in 2014.

Air quality in Europe: a number of initiatives (i)Trends in air pollutant concentrations and

deposition over the 20 past years (Task Force on Measurement and Modelling)

Nitrate in air (orange), precip (blue)and NO2 in Air (red)dotted lines = EMEP model

NO2 measurements reported in AIRBASE

Air quality in Europe: a number of initiatives (ii)

EURODELTA 3 modelling exercises (TFMM)Evaluation of the EMEP model and

other European Chemistry Transport models against data from EMEP field campaigns (Since 2006) http://emep.int/publ/reports/2014/MSCW_technical_1_2014.pdf

the models capacities in simulating air quality responses to 20 years of emission changes

Air quality in Europe: a number of initiatives (iii)

Heleen de Wit 1st joint session EMEP-WGE sept 2015

EMEPICP ForestICP IMICP MaterialsICP VegetationICP WatersAMAP

Example :Heavy metals

Heleen de Wit 1st joint session EMEP-WGE sept 2015

13

Pb

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

199

01

991

199

21

99

31

99

41

99

51

996

199

71

998

199

92

00

02

00

12

002

200

32

004

200

520

06

20

07

20

082

009

201

020

11

201

2

De

po

sitio

n fl

ux,

kg

/km

2 /y

Grid-averaged (time series)Forests (time series)Natural (time series) Grid-averaged (trend)Forests (trend)Natural (trend)

Cd

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

19

901

991

199

21

993

199

419

95

19

96

19

97

19

981

999

200

02

001

200

220

03

200

42

00

52

00

62

007

200

82

009

201

020

11

201

2

De

po

sitio

n fl

ux,

kg

/km

2 /y

Grid-averaged (time series)Forests (time series)Natural (time series) Grid-averaged (trend)Forests (trend)Natural (trend)

Hg

0

5

10

15

20

19

901

991

199

21

993

199

419

95

19

96

19

97

19

981

999

200

02

001

200

220

03

200

42

00

52

00

62

007

200

82

009

201

020

11

201

2

De

po

sitio

n fl

ux,

kg

/km

2 /y

Grid-averaged (time series)Forests (time series)Natural (time series)

Grid-averaged (trend)Forests (trend)Natural (trend)

EMEP

Deposition lead (left), cadmium (middle) and mercury (right) for 1990-2012

Concentrations in mosses of lead, cadmium and mercury for 1985-2010

0

5

10

15

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Hg

de

po

sitio

n (g

km

-2y-

1)

Hg

mo

ss (

mg

kg

-1)

Year

Mercury

-14%

-27%

ICP Vegetation

Air quality in Europe : the CLRTAP assessment report - 2016 A policy-oriented report which compiles results and knowledge from the

Convention to describe : The current situation in terms of air pollution exposure (human health and

ecosystems) What has been achieved so far with the regulations Where further efforts are still needed Which solutions/options and What can be achieved

Publication of the Executive summary in May 2016 and the full report will follow according the CLRTAP review process

Among the key messages : Further international coordination remains necessary to reduce background

levels of PM and ozone Ozone requires Northern Hemispheric cooperation that includes methane

abatement Ammonia emission reduction will have transboundary impacts: reduced urban

PM-exposure and biodiversity protection Climate & energy measures together with additional end-of-pipe measures and

cost-effective local actions on transport & domestic heating would enable meeting WHO-guideline values for PM in most parts in Europe

Outreach initiativesEnhanced cooperation with other organisations and

bodies to share data, views, develop common strategies and optimise resourcesEIONET – regulatory pollutants- UNEP/Stockholm Convention – POPs -UNEP/Minamata Convention – Mercury-Artic Council and AMAP – PM/ Black carbon-Copernicus Atmosphere Services (ECMWF/CAMS)

Enhance communication an visibility of the Convention and its technical and scientific bodies (EMEP/WGE)

Thank you for your attention !

Laurence.rouil@ineris.fr