Note_IC2_11_rev1_6_July

Comments

Transcription

Note_IC2_11_rev1_6_July
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
Implementation Committee, twenty-eighth meeting
Agenda item 4b
Note IC2/11/rev.1
page 1
06/07/2011
STATUS OF EMISSION DATA REPORTED BY PARTIES TO THE PROTOCOLS
Note by the secretariat
This note updates note IC2/11 and presents the status of emission data reporting as of 6 July
2011. It presents the information in the form of draft text for chapter III, sections A and B of the
fourteenth report of the Implementation Committee. It contains seven tables reflecting reporting
under the seven Protocols in force: the 1985 Sulphur Protocol, the Protocol on Nitrogen Oxides,
the Protocol in VOCs, the 1994 Protocol on Sulphur, the Protocol on Heavy Metals, the Protocol
on POPs and the Gothenburg Protocol. The tables were prepared by the secretariat with the help
of the EMEP Centre on Emission Inventories and Projections (CEIP).
The tables give an overview of the emission data reported under the seven protocols cited above.
The “X’s” in the tables refer to the submission of national totals for each Party that submitted
data to CEIP (and notified the secretariat about their submission). Tables 1 to 4 show whether
Parties have reported national totals for the pollutant required under Protocols they are Party to.
Tables 4 to 7 show whether Parties have reported on time (“XT”) in the latest reporting round.
Table 5 shows reporting for total PAHs, Dioxin/Furans, HCB, the three POPs listed in Annex III
as substances referred to in article 3, paragraph 5(a) for which Parties to the Protocol have
emission reduction obligations. Table 6 shows heavy metal reporting of the priority metals (Cd,
Pb and Hg). Table 7 shows reporting under the Gothenburg Protocol for SO2, NOx, VOCs and
ammonia.
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
Implementation Committee, twenty-eighth meeting
Agenda item 4b
Note IC2/11/rev.1
page 2
06/07/2011
A. Follow-up to Executive Body decisions 2010/14, 2010/15 and 2010/16
1.
In its decision 2010/14, the Executive Body urged the Republic of Moldova to provide its
missing annual data for 2007 and the gridded data for 2005 under the Protocol on POPs and the
Protocol on Heavy Metals without delay. The secretariat informed the Committee that as of 6
July 2011, the Republic of Moldova had not yet submitted the missing data for 2005 and 2007,
although it had reported on its annual emission data for 2009 (on 31 March 2011). The
Committee noted with regret that the Republic of Moldova had not complied with the requests in
decision 2010/14 and thus remained in non-compliance with its emission data reporting
obligations. (In its decision, the Executive Body also regretted that the Republic of Moldova had
failed to respond to the 2008 and the 2010 questionnaires on strategies and policies and was thus
in non-compliance with its obligations to report on strategies and policies for a second
consecutive reporting round. It urged the Republic of Moldova to provide its replies to the 2010
questionnaire without a delay. The secretariat informed the Committee that the Republic of
Moldova had responded to the 2010 questionnaire on strategies and policies on 31 March 2011).
2.
In its decision 2010/15 the Executive Body urged Iceland to provide the gridded data for
2005 under the Protocol on POPs (for dioxins/furans and PAHs) without delay. The secretariat
informed the Committee that the decision 2010/15 had been based on erroneous information,
since Iceland had submitted the totality of its gridded data for 2005, including for dioxins/furans
and PAHs already on 25 June 2010. CEIP confirmed the receipt of these data and explained to
the secretariat that this had been an oversight from their side due to “a typing error in the
templates that CEIP had used to extract the information from the emission database”. The
Committee concluded that as regards its gridded data for 2005, Iceland had reached compliance
with its reporting obligations.
3.
In its decision 2010/16, the Executive Body urged Luxembourg to provide, as a matter of
urgency, its missing annual and gridded data. It also expressed strong concern that Luxembourg
had been in non-compliance with its obligation to report on strategies and policies for the fourth
consecutive reporting round and urged Luxembourg to provide responses to the 2010
questionnaire on strategies and policies without a delay and not later than 28 February 2011. It
requested the secretariat to bring this matter to the attention of the Minister of Foreign Affairs
and the Minister of the Environment of Luxembourg. The secretariat informed the Committee
that as of 6 July, Luxembourg had not provided its annual and gridded data, nor had it replied to
the 2010 questionnaire on strategies and policies. The secretariat confirmed that the decision
2010/16 had been brought to the attention of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of
the Environment of Luxembourg on 15 February 2011. The Committee noted with regret that
Luxembourg had not complied with the request in decision 2010/16 and thus remained in noncompliance with its reporting obligations.
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
Implementation Committee, twenty-eighth meeting
Agenda item 4b
B.
Note IC2/11/rev.1
page 3
06/07/2011
Compliance with emission data reporting obligations
4.
As requested by the Executive Body in its workplan (item 1.2) (ECE/EB.AIR/106/Add.2,
as adopted by the Executive Body at its twenty-eighth session), the Committee evaluated
compliance with the emission data reporting obligations under the seven Protocols in force. The
evaluation covered the completeness and timeliness of reporting, but not its quality. It was based
on the data reported up to 6 July 2011. Tables 1–7 give an overview of the 2009 emission data
reported under the seven Protocols in force, including national totals and gridded data where
applicable.
5.
The Committee noted that the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia which had
ratified all the Protocols to the Convention in 2010 had also submitted emission data for 2009.
1.
1985 Protocol on Sulphur1: compliance with article 4, concerning reporting of
annual emissions
6.
Table 1 gives an overview of emission data reported by the Parties to the 1985 Sulphur
Protocol and shows that reporting under the Protocol is not yet complete. 22 of the 24 Parties to
which the obligation applied have submitted complete emission data for 2009, but no data were
received from Albania and Luxembourg. The Committee concluded that, as of 6 July 2011,
Albania and Luxembourg were not in compliance with the emission data reporting obligations
under article 4 of the 1985 Protocol on Sulphur. Albania had not yet submitted data for the base
year.
2.
Protocol on Nitrogen Oxides: compliance with article 8,concerning emission data
reporting
7.
Table 2 gives an overview of emission data reported by the Parties to the Protocol on
Nitrogen Oxides and shows that reporting under the Protocol is not yet complete. 31 of the 33
Parties to which the reporting obligation applied had submitted complete emission data for 2009.
No data were received from Albania and Luxembourg. The Committee concluded that, as of 6
July 2011, Albania and Luxembourg were not in compliance with the emission data reporting
obligations under article 8 of the Protocol on Nitrogen Oxides.
3.
1
Protocol on VOCs: compliance with article 8.1, concerning emission data reporting
1985 Protocol on the Reduction of Sulphur Emissions or their Transboundary Fluxes by at least 30 per cent.
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
Implementation Committee, twenty-eighth meeting
Agenda item 4b
Note IC2/11/rev.1
page 4
06/07/2011
8.
Table 3 gives an overview of the emission data reported by the Parties to the Protocol on
VOCs and shows that reporting under the Protocol is not yet complete. 21 of the 22 Parties to the
Protocol to which the obligation applied submitted complete emission data for 2009. No data
were received from Luxembourg. The Committee concluded that, as of 6 July 2011,
Luxembourg was not in compliance with the emission data reporting obligations under article
8.1 of the Protocol on VOC.
4.
1994 Protocol on Sulphur: compliance with article 5.1(b) and article 5.2, concerning
emission data reporting
9.
Table 4 gives an overview of the emission data reported by the Parties to the 1994
Sulphur Protocol (including annual totals and gridded data for EMEP Parties for 2000 and 2005)
and shows that reporting under the Protocol is not yet complete. 21 of the 27 Parties to which the
obligation applied submitted emission data for 2009 under the Protocol by 15 February 2010, the
legally binding deadline. Five Parties submitted data for 2009 after the legally binding deadline:
Germany, Greece, Italy, Liechtenstein and the European Union. No data were received from
Luxembourg.
10.
The Committee noted that one Party outside the geographic scope of EMEP (Canada) had
also submitted data.
11.
With the exception of Luxembourg, all Parties to which the obligation applied had
submitted gridded data for 2000 and 2005 by 30 April 2011.
12.
The Committee concluded that six Parties were not in compliance with their emission
reporting obligations under the 1994 Protocol on Sulphur by the legally binding deadline. As of
6 July 2011 one Party remained in non-compliance: Luxembourg.
5.
Protocol on POPs: compliance with article 9.1 (b), concerning emission data
reporting
13.
Table 5 gives an overview of the emission data reported by Parties to the Protocol on
POPs and shows that reporting under the Protocol is not yet complete. Twenty-one of the 28
Parties to which the reporting obligation applied had submitted emission data for 2009 for all
three of the reported POPs by 15 February 2011, the legally binding deadline. Five Parties
submitted data after the legally binding deadline: Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, the Republic of
Moldova and the European Union. No data for 2009 were received from Iceland and
Luxembourg.
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
Implementation Committee, twenty-eighth meeting
Agenda item 4b
Note IC2/11/rev.1
page 5
06/07/2011
14.
The Committee noted that one Party outside the geographic scope of EMEP (Canada) had
also submitted annual data on all three POPs.
15.
Twenty-three of the 25 Parties to which the obligation applied had submitted gridded data
for the three POPs for 2005 by 6 July 2011. Two Parties (Luxembourg and the Republic of
Moldova) have not yet submitted any gridded data for 2005.
16.
The Committee concluded that seven Parties were not in compliance with their emission
reporting obligations under the Protocol on POPs by the legally binding deadline. As of 6 July
2011, Iceland and Luxembourg remained in non-compliance.
17.
Two Parties (Luxembourg and the Republic of Moldova) remained in non-compliance for
gridded data for 2005. The Republic of Moldova also remained in non-compliance for annual
emission data for 2007.
6.
Protocol on Heavy Metals: compliance with article 7.1(b),concerning emission data
reporting
18.
Table 6 gives an overview of emission data reported by the Parties to the Protocol on
Heavy Metals and shows that reporting under the Protocol is not yet complete. Twenty-three of
the 27 Parties to which the reporting obligation applied had submitted complete emission data
for 2009 by 15 February 2011, the legally binding deadline. Three Parties submitted data after
the legally binding deadline: Germany, the Republic of Moldova and the European Union. No
data were received from Luxembourg.
19.
The Committee noted that one Party outside the geographic scope of EMEP (Canada) had
also submitted data.
20.
Twenty-two of the 24 Parties to which the obligation applied had submitted gridded data
for heavy metals for 2005 by 6 July 2011. Luxembourg and the Republic of Moldova have not
yet submitted any gridded data for 2005.
21.
The Committee concluded that four Parties were not in compliance with their emission
reporting obligations under the Protocol on Heavy Metals by the legally binding deadline. As of
6 July 2011, one Party remained in non-compliance: Luxembourg.
22.
Two Parties (Luxembourg and the Republic of Moldova) remained in non-compliance for
gridded data for 2005. The Republic of Moldova also remained in non-compliance for annual
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
Implementation Committee, twenty-eighth meeting
Agenda item 4b
Note IC2/11/rev.1
page 6
06/07/2011
emission data for 2007.
7.
Gothenburg Protocol: compliance with article 7.1(b), concerning emission data
reporting on sulphur, nitrogen oxides, ammonia and VOCs
23.
Table 7 gives an overview of emission data reported by the Parties to the Gothenburg
Protocol and shows that reporting under the Protocol is not yet complete. 21 of the 24 Parties to
whom the reporting obligation applied had submitted complete emission data for 2009 by 15
February 2011, the legally binding deadline. Two Parties submitted data after the legally binding
deadline: Germany and the European Union. No data were received from Luxembourg.
24.
The Committee noted that one Party outside the geographic scope of EMEP (the United
States) had also submitted data by the deadline of 15 February 2011.
25.
Nineteen of the 20 Parties to which the obligation applied had submitted gridded data for
2005 the pollutants covered by the Gothenburg Protocol by 30 April 2011. Luxembourg has not
yet submitted any gridded data for 2005.
26.
The Committee concluded that three Parties were not in compliance with their emission
reporting obligations by the legally binding deadline. As of 6 July 2011, one Party remained in
non-compliance: Luxembourg. (Luxembourg remained in non compliance both for its annual
emission data for 2009 and its gridded data for 2005).

Similar documents