INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE
WMO

UNEP
NAT IONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES PROGRAMME

Revision of the “Revised 1996 IPCC
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories
IPCC Expert Group Scoping Meeting Report

Geneva, Switzerland
16 - 18 September 2003

Supporting material prepared for consideration by the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change. This supporting material has not been subject to formal
IPCC review and approval process.

Acknowledgements
This report was prepared by Taka Hiraishi, Thelma Krug, Riitta Pipatti, Leandro Buendia,
Ayako Hongo, Akiko Kawase, Kyoko Miwa, Todd Ngara, Kiyoto Tanabe and Fabian Wagner,with inputs from the co-chairs and rapporteurs of the breakout groups of the meeting. We are
grateful to all experts who contributed to this report and attended the meeting. We also thankthe IPCC Secretariat and the WMO Conferences Unit (CNF) for organising the meeting.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
1 BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES AND ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING.................. 42 PLENARY AND BOG SESSIONS ......................................................................................... 4
2.1 FIRST PLENARY............................................................................................................... 4
2.2 BOG SESSIONS ................................................................................................................ 7
2.2.1 Cross-cutting issues.................................................................................................. 7
2.2.2 Energy....................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.3 Industrial Processes and Solvent and Other Product Use ....................................... 8
2.2.4 Agriculture and LULUCF ........................................................................................ 9
2.2.5 Waste ...................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.6 Emerging issues and consolidation of the BOG outputs ........................................ 10
2.3 FINAL PLENARY AND OUTPUTS OF THE MEETING ............................................. 10
ATTACHMENT 1: DRAFT TOR, TOC and WP (as agreed by TFB11) .............................. 12
ATTACHMENT 2: CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES – MINUTES OF THE BOG SESSIONSAND DETAILED DRAFT TOC ............................................................................................ 18
ATTACHMENT 3: ENERGY – DRAFT DETAILED TOC, TOR AND OTHER INPUT .. 22
ATTACHMENT 4: INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES AND PRODUCT USE – SUMMARY OF
ISSUES DISCUSSED AND DRAFT DETAILED TOR AND TOC..................................... 25
ATTACHMENT 5: AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND OTHER LAND USE (AFOLU) 29
ATTACHMENT 6: WASTE – ISSUES DISCUSSED AND DETAILED DRAFT TOR AND
TOC......................................................................................................................................... 32

SUMMARY
The Scoping meeting developed the draft Terms of Reference (TOR), the Table ofContents (TOC) and work plan for the work on the revision of the Revised 1996
IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. The drafts were
forwarded to the 11th Session of the Task Force Bureau of the IPCC National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme for finalisation before forwarding themto IPCC Panel (Vienna, Austria, 3 – 7 November 2003) for endorsement.

3

1 BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES AND ORGANISATION OF THE
MEETING
1.

The Scoping Meeting on the “Revision of the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories” was held in Geneva on 16 – 18 September 2003. The
meeting was organised by the IPCC NGGIP. Its main objectives were:• to assess existing methods for the sectors and also for the cross-cutting issues and how
to improve them within the framework of the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC Guidelines) including the Good PracticeGuidance (GPG2000);• to draft the detailed Terms of Reference (TOR), the Table of Contents (TOC) and theWork Plan for the work on the Revision of the IPCC Guidelines, and• to formulate a proposal of expertise needed for drafting the revised Guidelines.

2.

The meeting was attended by sixty six experts (Participant list attached at the end of thisreport in Attachment 7) and its deliberations were conducted both in plenary sessions andin seven Breakout Groups (BOGs). The BOGs covered all sectors in the IPCC Guidelines(Energy, Industrial Processes and Solvent and Other Product Use (joint BOG), Agricultureand Land Use, land-use change and forestry (joint BOG), and Waste), cross-cutting issues
and the so-called emerging issues. The Emerging Issues BOG focused on issues related tothe integration of the existing materials, scope of gases and sources/sinks and other issuesof relevance to the whole report. They consolidated the inputs from the other BOGs on
draft TOR, TOC and Work Plan for the discussions and approval at the last plenary of themeeting.

3.

The final outputs of the meeting were forwarded to the 11th Session of Task Force Bureau(TFB) for consideration and finalisation before forwarding them to IPCC Panel (Vienna,
Austria, 3 – 7 November 2003) for endorsement. TFB11 met on 19 September 2003, backto-back with this Scoping Meeting. The draft TOC, TOR and Work Plan, as agreed by the
TFB 11, are attached to this report (see Attachment 1).

2 PLENARY AND BOG SESSIONS
2.1 FIRST PLENARY
4.

The meeting was opened by the TFI (Task Force on Inventories) Co-chair Taka Hiraishi.
The IPCC Acting Secretary Renate Christ welcomed the participants to Geneva, andinformed them of other ongoing and starting IPCC work. Taka Hiraishi continued
presenting the background and objectives for the Scoping Meeting.

5.

Dina Kruger (TFB) gave brief overview of the IPCC Guidelines and GPG2000, and theforthcoming report on Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change andForestry (GPG-LULUCF). She noted that the good practice reports complement the IPCC
Guidelines, and that they do not include good practice guidance for the Solvent and Other
Product Use Sector, which addresses mainly emissions of non-methane volatile organic
compounds (NMVOCs). She explained the standard format for methodological guidance inthe good practice reports, and the key category concept, as well as the elaborated andsystematic guidance on QA/QC, time series consistency and quantifying uncertainties inthese reports. She emphasised that the IPCC Guidelines and good practices reports form astrong foundation for the forthcoming revision and noted areas to be considered in the4scoping of the work: improved user-friendliness, maintaining a balance between scientificcompleteness and practicability, new areas to be covered (new sources, new gases, etc.)
and the improved applicability to all countries (maintaining the tier-structure, putting moreemphasis on regional issues and improving data for developing countries).
6.

Stelios Pesmajoglou (UNFCCC Secretariat) presented UNFCCC experiences in the use of
the IPCC Guidelines and GPG2000 in the preparation and review of national greenhousegas inventories. He gave an overview of relevant decisions by the Conference of theParties to the UNFCCC (COP) and conclusions by its Subsidiary Body for Scientific andTechnological Advice (SBSTA) and explained the different requirements for Annex I and
non-Annex I Parties on reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. He listed
identified gaps in the guidelines, and pointed out areas for possible improvement. There
are no IPCC methodologies for solvents, only references to methodologies by CORINAIR
and US EPA. Default values are not given for all emission factors, country-specificmethodologies could be included (e.g. for dams), a common approach for the decision trees
would be helpful. Methods and/or data for biomass combustion, geothermal energy, boilers
used in desalination plants and the non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions could be included or
improved in the Energy Sector. The Agriculture and LULUCF sectors methodologies do
not cover conversions related to desert lands. Some estimation methods could be improved,e.g. the waste sector would need more suitable methods. He also proposed close
cooperation between the IPCC and UNFCCC in the revision and informed that the
UNFCCC Secretariat is preparing a paper for SBSTA on the experiences with the IPCC
Guidelines and GPG2000 – this would be available in October 2003.

7.

Riitta Pipatti (NGGIP TSU) presented in more detail the background, objectives and scopeof the meeting based on a background paper with the same title. She presented theconclusions from the TFB meetings on the revision and issues to be addressed at themeeting:
•
•
•
•
•
•

integration of existing material;
scope of gases, source and sink categories;
structural changes and improvements;
methodological updates;
incorporation of abatement technologies in the methodologies;
how to improve usability and other emerging issues.

She also presented a preliminary work plan for the revision of the IPCC Guidelines, andassignments for the BOGs.
8.

Specific issues taken up in the presentation by Riitta Pipatti were given more detailed
background. Fabian Wagner (NGGIP TSU) presented the scope of gases and possible
criteria (with pros and cons for these) to be used in the decision to include new gases or in
reducing the scope of existing ones. An issue paper on the subject had also been prepared
for the participants. The criteria presented included availability of Global Warming
Potential (GWP) values, importance of the new gases, practicability to develop
methodologies, resource intensity in including these in the inventory, existing
methodologies developed for other conventions or agreements.

9.

Kiyoto Tanabe (NGGIP TSU) presented the contents of another issue paper prepared for5the meeting on “Clarification, re-organisation and/or integration if IPCC source/sink
categories. Issue included were:• treatment of emissions from non-energy fuel use – how to consider associatedimmediate and delayed emissions and related export/import issues, this issue is across-sectoral for Energy, Industrial Processes and Waste Sectors;• consistent treatment of N2O emissions taking into consideration the large number ofsources and pathways – integration of relevant parts of the Energy, Industrial
Processes, Agriculture and Waste Sectors may deserve consideration to allow for amore integrated approach in the estimation of N2O emissions considering the global N
cycle;• CO2 emissions from oxidation of NMVOCs in the atmosphere – should additional
guidance be developed;• CO2 capture and storage – where to include and how (revised emission factors or
separate methodology);• agricultural soils – treatment of gases is inconsistent and divided between the
Agriculture and LULUCF Sectors. Possible actions to improve consistency could be toinclude all gases under either sector or merge the sectors. The latter would also allow
for more consistent treatment of land conversions;• hydroelectric dams - should the methods for this be included in the LULUCF or
Energy sector.
10. The discussions that followed these presentations were lively and included following
issues:• Integration of the IPCC Guidelines and good practices guidance report(s) was
welcomed as a starting point for the revision. The structure of the 2006 guidelines was
also discussed and many favoured an approach where all sectors would be in separate
volumes.
• Should all known sources be included in the revision or should the focus be on themost important sources? The question of new sources had been addressed also in a
background paper for the meeting prepared by Anke Herold. She noted that most of
the new sources identified in her paper were related to emissions of non-methane
volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs) and sources mentioned in the IPCC
Guidelines but for which no methodologies were provided there. In that sense many ofthese categories where not completely new.
• Should aerosols (black and organic carbon, mineral dust) be included? Views on
the issue were divided: this was opposed due to the fact that they are not greenhousegases and therefore not covered by the Convention, and supported due to theirimportance for climate change and to achieve a complete coverage of theanthropogenic influence on the climate system.
• It was noted that the scope of sources and gases should be critically evaluated – e.g.
inclusion of new minor sources might not be justified, as the time and resources arelimited. The scientific understanding and the importance of the gas or source, andwhether it is possible to develop methods and default emission factors, as well as thecosts to implement the methodologies, should be included in the evaluation.
• The scoping meeting should not attempt to list all new gases and sources, but develop

6criteria on how to identify/include these.
• Inclusion of new sources and gases would need to be reflected in the IPCC Emission
Factor Database (EFDB), e.g. by including any new source categories also in the
database.
• It was agreed that duplication of work to develop methodologies for gases covered byother conventions or agreements should be avoided.
• Would CO2 capture and storage be included? The IPCC is preparing a Special
Report on the issues and close cooperation with this process would be continued.
Specific issues related to the methodologies for CO2 capture and storage werehighlighted. The issue is cross-sectoral (Energy and Industrial Process Sectors,
possibly also other sectors). The fact that use of decarbonised fuels, capture,transportation and storage of CO2 could take place in different countries would needspecial attention. The issue would be discussed further in the BOGs.
11. The UNFCCC Secretariat noted that the presentations have omitted the inclusion ofreporting tables (worksheets – compilation tables/sectoral tables - summary tables). It wasnoted that the issue of reporting would be covered as a cross-cutting issue.
2.2 BOG SESSIONS
2.2.1

Cross-cutting issues

12. The BOG on cross-cutting noted that the IPCC Guidelines contain limited information on
cross-cutting issues but that the issues are treated comprehensively in the GPG2000, and
the GPG-LULUCF. It was concluded that the outline of GPG2000 should be the basis forthe revision, complemented with a section on data collection. This section would briefly
introduce sampling to derive emission factors and other parameters used in methodologies,
as well as activity data. The section would address also procedures like expert judgment
and literature surveys for the purpose. Possible improvements to the issues addressed in thegood practice reports were identified and discussed. The verification chapter should bemade more practical and source/sector specific. Furthermore, source-specific information
on cross-cutting issues (QA/QC, uncertainties and time-series consistency) should be
streamlined based on guidance from the authors of cross-cutting issues. The results andconclusions of the discussions are presented in Attachment 2 which includes also a detailed
draft TOC for the cross-cutting issues.

2.2.2

Energy13. The discussion in the BOG on Energy included overarching issues (e.g. improvement of
the user-friendliness, change of level key category analysis for the sector, inclusion ofworked examples for a sample country, possibly as a training package on the web), activity
data issues (e.g. related to non-energy use of fuels, international vs. domestic bunkers andmilitary activities for aviation and navigation), emission factors (e.g. update of default
emission factors and how to utilise the IPCC Emission Factor Database (EFDB)), intersectoral issues (e.g. linkage between biomass fuels and the LULUCF Sector, waste as fuel)and other issues (e.g. geothermal energy, how to treat the decomposition of methane from7

fossil origin). The group developed a draft TOR and TOC for the sector and these areincluded in Attachment 3.
14. There was no consensus on the inclusion or exclusion of aerosols. This issue was referredto the Plenary Session for further consideration.
2.2.3

Industrial Processes and Solvent and Other Product Use

15. The BOG on Industrial process and Solvent and Product Use discussed a number of sectorspecific issues. Issues highlighted in the discussions include:
•
•
•
•
•

gases for inclusion;
updating/revising process;merger of “Industrial Processes” and “Solvent and Other Product Use”;
new or “missing” sources;
possible linkages with the other organizations/processes (e.g., WBCSD/WRI, ISO,GGEEC); (See explanations acronyms below in paragraph 17).
• relative significance (prioritization) of sources;• existing references;• availability of expertise.
16. In relation to the updating/revising process, it was noted that the differences between
GPG2000 and IPCC Guidelines were greater in the Industrial Processes area than in any
other sector. The BOG also highlighted the importance of distinguishing energy-related
emissions from process emissions. The BOG had consultations on this with the BOG on
Energy.
17. Based on the discussions on the aforementioned issues, the BOG came up with elements tobe considered in developing the TOR of the sector(s) as follows:• Relevant existing information from organisations such as (World Resources Institute(WRI), International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Greenhouse Gases
Emission Estimating Consortium (GGEEC), World Business Council for Sustainable
Development (WBCSD)) should be reviewed and included or referred to in therevision. The same applies to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe(UNECE) Task Force on Emission Inventories and Projections in particular for the
NMVOCs. The work done under the Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air
Pollution (LRTAP) including the information in the EMEP (Co-operative Programme
for Monitoring and Evaluation of Long-Range Transmissions of Air
Pollutants in Europe)/CORINAIR (CORe INventory of AIR emissions) Atmospheric
Emission Inventory Guidebook should be referred to in the revision of the Guidelines
especially in as far as they relate to NOX from combustion, NMVOC’s from industrial
and evaporation processes and NH3 from agriculture. Use of this backgroundinformation would avoid duplication and focus efforts where they are most needed likethe development of default emission for developing countries.
• The IPCC Guidelines and GPG2000 should be consolidated into a single report: theextended scope of the Chapter 3 of the “2006 Guidelines” should comprise Industrial
processes, solvents and other product use.
• Updating should include new F-gases. Default emission factors need to be updated andfed into the EFDB. It will not be practical to address all sources and gases in this
sector. The sources and gases covered should reflect both the relative importance of

8

•
•
•
•

the source/gas and the current level of knowledge and methodological development.
Updating will require contributions from experts of different fields, and will also
require additional innovative means (databases, workshops, utilising outside events,
etc).
A definition for “industrial process emissions” should be developed and this should
include what should be reported in this sector to avoid double counting and to improveconsistency and transparency.
Comparable data on industrial process emissions should be ensured taking into
account normal and exceptional emissions and consistent assumptions on source types(i.e. end of pipe and/or diffuse).
Verification and QA/QC should be considered at different levels (e.g. national, global)
by type of processes and by type of gases especially for F-gases.

18. Attachment 4 includes more details on the discussions as well as the draft TOC for“Industrial Processes and Product Use” which covers the “Industrial Processes” Sector andthe “Solvent and Other Product Use” Sector in the IPCC Guidelines.
2.2.4

Agriculture and LULUCF

The BOGs on Agriculture and LULUCF met in one group to explore the possibility of merging
the materials from the LUCF and Agriculture Chapters of the IPCC Guidelines, GPG2000, and
GPG-LULUCF. The group decided to recommend the merger after thorough discussions onpros and cons, as well as how to structure the new Sector “Agriculture, Forestry and Other
Land Use (AFOLU)
19. Major issues identified in developing the TOR and TOC for the integrated included:• terminology issues (e.g. definitions, managed, land use, conversion, etc.)• methodological issues (e.g. mapping back, description of tiers, and step by step
approach to inventory, disaggregation of activity data, sampling)• issues on national land use systems including guidance on sampling and allocation oflands to categories such as shifting cultivation, agroforestry, urban trees• definition and guidance to avoid double counting in peatlands (wetlands) with forest
organic soils• treatment of settlements that would include urban trees, parks, golf courses• treatment of other lands, harvested wood products, and the implication and linkages
for the Energy and Waste Sectors relating to biomass burning, wood products andorganic materials in landfills, and• development of new or improved reporting tables that would be more flexible forreporting of country-specific methods.
20. The final draft TOC constitutes an overview and cross-cutting issues, a section for
consistent representation of lands, a separate section each for agriculture, forest lands,
wetlands, settlements, other land, and other items (see Attachment 5). The Agriculture
section addresses cropland (including rice cultivation), grassland, lands converted tocropland or grassland, and livestock. The forest land section addresses forest landremaining forest land, and land converted to forest land. All sections (land-uses) will
elaborate the changes in C stocks (five pools), burning of biomass, non-CO2 gases,
fertilization/liming, organic soils/peatlands, new gases, sources and sinks. The background
paper/information used in the development of the TOR and the TOC for Agriculture and
LULUCF is summarised in Attachment 5.

9

2.2.5Waste

21. The BOG analysed the main issues identified in the meeting documents as relevant for thedevelopment of TOR, TOC and WP. Analyses were made separately for the three main
source categories of the sector:• Solid Waste Disposal Sites• Wastewater Handling• Waste Incineration
22. The group did not identify major new sources or gases that would contribute significantly
to the total greenhouse gas emissions from the sector, but analysed options for a morecomprehensive coverage of gases(e.g. NOx, CO, NMVOCs, SO2 and particles fromincineration) and alternative waste treatment techniques (e.g. composting, anaerobic
digestion, etc.). The BOG discussed ways to improve the structure of the sector, update
methodologies and links (possible gaps or double counting) to other sectors. The results
and conclusions of the analysis and discussions are presented in Attachment 6, which
includes also a detailed draft TOC for the chapter.
2.2.6

Emerging issues and consolidation of the BOG outputs

23. Emerging issues group considered the integration of the existing material (IPCC
Guidelines and the GPG2000), and it was proposed that the Technical Support Unit would
undertake this exercise under the guidance of the TFB and its Co-chairs.
24. The group developed criteria for inclusion of new gases and sources, and these were
presented to all participants and it was agreed to include them in the TOR. The group also
consolidated the inputs of all BOGs for a draft TOR and TOC for the Methodology Report:
2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. The TOC for the whole
report was consolidated at a higher level than the detailed TOCs developed by the other
BOGs and the subsection where not numbered to retain flexibility for the authors toreorganize during the drafting of the report, if deemed necessary (the detailed draft TORs
and TOCs for the proposed volumes of the new report should be considered only as
indicative input for the authors of the report). The group also developed further the
workplan for the preparation of the report. The consolidated draft TOR, TOC and Work
Plan were presented to the final plenary of the meeting for finalisation.
2.3 FINAL PLENARY AND OUTPUTS OF THE MEETING
25. The output of all BOGs were presented and discussed at the final plenary of the meetingwith focus on finalising the draft TOR, TOC and WP to be forwarded to the TFB11 forfinalisation before submission to the IPCC Panel XXI for endorsement. The consolidated
TOR and TOC were agreed upon after much discussion and minor changes. The draft TOC
for cross-cutting issues was complemented with a section including reporting tables.
26. The proposed merger of the Agriculture and LULUCF sections provoked much discussion,
especially in participants who were not familiar with the structure of the forthcoming
GPG-LULUCF. The BOG Co-chairs and members explained the rationale, confirmed theconsistency with the GPG-LULCUF and the meeting confirmed that the proposal was ajustified improvement. ).

10

27. The issue on the inclusion of aerosols in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines continued to divide theparticipants. The proposal from the emerging issues group was to include the aerosols as
an appendix in the report as basis for further consideration. The proposal was that thisappendix would review available literature on quantifying anthropogenic emissions of
relevant aerosols and provide a synthesis and preliminary consideration of themethodological issues. The meeting could however not agree on this, and it was decided toforward this issue to the TFB11 for further consideration before presenting the issue to the
IPCC Panel.
28. The TFB Co-chair Thelma Krug closed the meeting at 18.00 and thanked the participants
for productive work in scoping for the preparation of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

11

ATTACHMENT 1: DRAFT TOR, TOC and WP (as agreed by TFB11)
Draft Terms of Reference for 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories
In response to the decision of IPCC XX and the invitation from the SBSTA at its 17th session
the IPCC will revise and update the 1996 revised IPCC Guidelines as outlined in the Table ofContents. This work will be completed in 2006, as noted in the work plan.
IPCC will base this work on, inter alia: The Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories, the IPCC Report on Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty
Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (2000), the IPCC Emission Factor
Database, and the Good Practice Guidance on Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (whencompleted). Experience and feedback using the existing reports (EMEP/Corinair Emission
Inventory Guidebook among others) and recent advances in science will also be taken into
account.
Key elements of the work will be•

Structure: The existing reports will be integrated to improve user-friendliness. Information
on each sector will be synthesised into single documents. There will also be a document on
cross-cutting issues, including reporting tables.

•

Content of cross-cutting guidance: The volume for cross-cutting issues will include general
methods on data collection issues; uncertainty assessment; methodological choice andidentification of key categories; time series consistency and recalculation; quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) and verification; and reporting tables.

•

Content of sectoral guidance: The volumes for each sector will include tiered
methodological approaches; decision trees; new and/or updated methods and emission
factors, where appropriate; cross-references and/or revisions as necessary to avoid double
counting or omissions of emissions and removals; sector-specific guidance on uncertainty
assessment and QA/QC; methods for new sources 1 ; and reporting and documentation
guidance.

•

Coverage: The 2006 Guidelines will cover the same greenhouse gases and precursors
included in the current guidelines and good practice guidance reports. New greenhousegases identified in the TAR will be included if they meet the following criteria: availabilityof a global warming potential; identified anthropogenic sources; a basis for methodologicaldevelopment; and a relative importance to the total emissions. A need for development for
new methods for ozone precursors is not anticipated as these are addressed under otheragreements and conventions. Appropriate linkages to these methodologies will be provided.

1

Criteria for new sources: a basis for methodological development including the ability to develop default
emission factors, feasibility of obtaining the necessary data to implement the methods, and significance of thesource within the sector.

12Draft Table of Contents for 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories
Overview
Volume 1: Cross-cutting Issues and Reporting Tables
This volume will integrate existing material2 relevant to cross-cutting issues listed below. A
more complete discussion on approaches to data 3 collection (e.g. sampling, use of expert
judgement in data collection) will be provided. Specific information on the topics listed below
will also be elaborated at the sectoral level.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Overview
Approaches to Data Collection
Uncertainties
Methodological Choice and Identification of Key Categories
Time Series Consistency and Recalculation
Quality Assurance/Quality Control and Verification
Reporting Guidance including Tables

Volume 2: Energy
29. This volume will integrate and update existing material2 relevant to the Energy Sector. As
appropriate, it will provide methodologies and default data to cover emissions of newsources (see criteria in TOR)4
•
•
•
•
•

Overview and cross-cutting issues
Reference Approach
Stationary Combustion
Mobile Combustion5
Fugitive Emissions

Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use
This volume will integrate existing material2 relevant to Industrial Processes and Solvent andOther Product Use Sectors. It will update as necessary the existing material on current source
categories. As appropriate, it will provide methodologies and default data to cover emissions of
new halogenated gases. It will also develop methodologies for selected new sources (see2

Existing material refers to the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines, Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty
Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (2000), Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF, the IPCC
Emission Factor Database, and any relevant material in literature and the sectors themselves. Methodologies
developed under international agreements and conventions (e.g. LRTAP) will be referenced and used where
necessary.
3

Data refers to activity data, emission factors and other data used in inventory compilation.

4

It is recognised that CO2 capture and storage is an important emerging issue in inventory development. The
coverage of CO2 storage in this report will be closely coordinated with progress on IPCC SR on CO2 capture andstorage. CO2 capture activities will be integrated as appropriate into the methods presented for source categories
where it may occur.
5

Emissions from international aviation and maritime transportation will be addressed here, taking into
consideration the relevant work of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International
Maritime Organization (IMO).

13

criteria in TOR):• Overview and cross-cutting issues• Chemical industry emissions• Metal industry emissions• Mineral industry emissions• Non-energy product and feedstock use of fuels• Ozone precursors from industrial processes• Other industrial process emissions• Solvent and other product use• Emissions of Fluorinated Substitutes for Ozone Depleting Substances
Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use
This volume will merge the material from the LUCF and Agriculture Chapters of the Revised
1996 IPCC Guidelines, GPG2000 and GPG-LULUCF. The GPG-LULUCF will report on aland-use basis. The emissions from agriculture have been integrated into this new framework
in order to resolve inconsistencies and avoid double counting. This integration should be donein a way that consistency of existing inventory data is ensured when reporting emissions andremovals from the sector using the new approach.. This volume will also update data, methods
and emission factors where feasible.
•••

Overview and cross-cutting issues
Consistent Representation of Lands
Agriculture
The following issues will be elaborated: changes in C stocks (5 pools), burning of
biomass/grassland/residues, rice cultivation, non-CO2 gases, fertilization/liming, organicsoils/peat lands, new gases, sources and sinks.
o Cropland and Grassland Remaining Cropland and Grasslando Land Converted to Croplando Land Converted to Grasslando Livestock• Forest lands
The following issues will be elaborated: changes in C stocks (5 pools), burning of biomass,
non-CO2 gases, fertilization/liming, organic soils/peat lands, new gases, sources and sinks.
o Forest land remaining forest lando Land converted to forest land•

Wetlandso Peatlands
Flooded lands•

Settlementso Settlements remaining settlementso Land converted to settlements•

Other land

•

Other
o HWP (taking into consideration any decision of the COP on this matter)

14

Volume 5: Waste
This volume will integrate and update existing material2 on the Waste Sector. As appropriate,
it will provide methodologies and default data to cover emissions from open burning of waste
in solid waste disposal sites, open dumps, consolidation of wastewater treatment and humansewage disposal methods, alternative waste treatment technologies (like anaerobic digestion)
and additional gases according to the criteria in TOR.
• Overview and cross-cutting issues• Solid Waste Disposal Sites• Wastewater Handling and Human Sewage• Waste Incineration--------

15

Draft Workplan for preparing the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories
PeriodSeptember 2003

Sequence and stages
Scoping Meeting

September 2003

TFB 11

November 2003
November 2003

IPCC XXIIPCC call for
nomination of authors

Early February
2004

TFB (bycommunication)

Approval of TOR, TOC and Workplan
Issue formal letter to Governments andintergovernmental bodies, inviting the author
nominations.
Finalise a slate of authors, and issue invitation to 1st
Authors meeting.

Mid March 2004

Integration of existingmaterial in IPCC GLsand GPG reports
CLA meeting andCross-cutting Authors
Meeting
Sector Authors
Meeting

A draft integrating material in IPCC 1996 Guidelinesand good practice reports will be made available to theauthors.
Prepare First Order Draft of cross-cutting issues;
provide guidance for inclusion of cross-cutting issues
and consistency in drafting the sectoral volumes
Prepare First Order Draft for the Agriculture, Forestry
and Other Land Use Sector

July 2004

Sector Authors
Meeting

Prepare First Order Draft for the Industrial Process andProduct Use Sector

September 2004

Sector Authors
Meeting

Prepare First Order Draft for the Energy Sector

Early November
2004
January 2005

September –October 2005
December 2005

Sector Authors
Prepare First Order Draft for the Waste Sector
Meeting
Consolidation Meeting Meeting to consolidate the Sectoral reports to First
Order Draft Report of 2006 GLs (CLAs and key
authors)
Experts Review
First review of the FOD report by experts for six weeks
7th Meeting
Meeting to consider experts comments and to prepare
Second Order Draft.
Governments/Experts Second review of the report by Governments andreview
Experts for eight weeks
8th Meeting
Meeting to consider Government comments.

February 2006

TFB 17

Endorse Final Draft Report

March 2006

Government
consideration
IPCC XXIVSBSTA24

Government consideration (four weeks)

April 2004
Late May/Early
June 2004

March – April 2005
June 2005

April 2006
May 2006

Activity
Elaborate draft TOR, TOC and Workplan for the
Revision including combination of sectors per meeting,size of meetings, level of participation, handling ofcommon elements in agriculture and LUCF, merging of
the GPG2000 and GPG-LULUCF, etc.
Consider and finalise draft TOR, TOC and Workplan
for submission to IPCC XXI.

Present report to IPCC Panel for Adoption/Acceptance.
Presentation to SBSTA

16

ATTACHMENTThe Expert scoping Meeting did not reach agreement on the treatment of aerosol issues in thecontext of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. The proposed
language below was tabled:
In the TOR (proposed as the last line in bullet on “Coverage”):“Aerosols will be addressed in the main body of the guidelines but an appendix, reviewing
the existing methodological literature will be developed as the basis for further
consideration.”In the TOC (proposed at the end of the document):
This appendix will review available literature on quantifying anthropogenic emissions of
relevant aerosols. A synthesis and preliminary consideration of methodological issues
will be provided.6

6

It is anticipated that the appendix will cover black carbon and organic carbon aerosols and potentially mineral dust.
Methodologies for sulfate aerosols are covered in other agreements and it is not anticipated that additional consideration isneeded for them.

17

ATTACHMENT 2: CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES – MINUTES OF THE BOG SESSIONSAND DETAILED DRAFT TOC
GeneralThe IPCC Guidelines contain rather limited information on the cross-cutting issues,
uncertainties are covered to some extent. In the GPG2000, the chapter on uncertainties was
expanded on, and chapters with guidance on methodological choice, QA/QC and verification
were added. In the GPG-LULUCF a chapter on sampling was added. There was a generalagreement that the information on cross-cutting issues in GPG2000 should be incorporated into
the new guidelines. Needed changes should build on user experiences.
It was recommended that the outline of GPG2000 should be kept, with general guidance in the
cross-cutting issues chapter and source-specific issues (QA/QC, verification and time seriesconsistency) covered in the sectoral guidance. In order to increase the quality and comparabilityof this information it was suggested to prepare guidance to the authors on these issues to beavailable from the beginning of the authors meetings.
In general, definition of different tiers should be more precise throughout the report – how do
the quality of the data and complexity of the method correlate. In addition, it was decided thatthe methods for cross-cutting issues would no more be called "tiers" to reduce confusion among
inventory compilers. Optionally they could be named, e.g., approaches.
Uncertainty estimates of default parameters should be given in each sector. Uncertainties
should be given for each tier. In principle, use of higher tiers should lead to lower uncertainties.
Sectoral BOGs should give expert judgments of uncertainties, and the method to produce
expert judgments should be consistent. Therefore the group of cross-cutting issues should also
give some guidance on this.
The group had a rather wide discussion about sampling. In the GPG-LULUCF, sampling is
included as a section in the chapter on cross-cutting issues. The group discussed about the needto include sampling also in the guidance for other sectors, but concluded that it is mostly a
special issue for LULUCF, and should be handled under the LULUCF/agriculture volume. If
the need for guidance on sampling is identified also in other sectors, guidance could be added.
A separate section on data collection would be added to the new guidelines. This section would
briefly introduce sampling to collect emission factors and activity data, and include guidance
also other data collection procedures like expert judgments and literature surveys.
Uncertainty
95% confidence interval is currently used as a measure for uncertainty. It was decided to be
kept also in the forthcoming guidance, because this notation enables treatment of sampling,measurements and expert judgment in a consistent manner. The Tier 1 trend method needs
further consideration and development. The group agreed that in the new guidelines, there will
be no need for further guidance on Tier 2 method. The "advanced" method can be any method,
not necessarily Monte Carlo. In the Netherlands, Tier 1 equations are at some extent modified
to give more accurate results. This approach could also be presented, and probably also amethod taking correlation into account in the Tier 1 method (Tier 1 b). The sources of
uncertainties (structural, natural variability etc) should be clearly identified to be able to reduce
uncertainties.
Parts of the chapter “conceptual basis for uncertainty analysis” should be incorporated into the18main uncertainty chapter as considered appropriate.
Key Categories
It was discussed, who are the main users of key categories: whether it is the parties or theconvention. The Convention uses Tier 1, but all the parties could use Tier 2, when default
uncertainty estimates will be available of each sector in the new guidance. The problem with
Tier 1 is that it in many cases gives CO2 sources in fuel combustion as the most important key
categories, though there is little to do to improve these estimates. Tier 1 and Tier 2 would be
kept with minor modifications. Current Tier 1 and Tier 2 are principally different methods andwill not give comparable results, which should be made clearer in the guidance.The thresholdconcept for key categories needs further consideration. For parties, the ranking of categories is
the most important aspect; strict distinction of keys and non-keys is mainly used by theConvention.
It is preferable to define only one method for identifying key categories; in the LULUCF-GPG
there will be methods for identifying key categories both with and without LULUCF sector, but
one single method would be more practical. The aggregation level is in principle left open for
inventory compilers, but clearer guidance is nevertheless needed. The use of other methods for
key category identification (e.g. sensitivity analysis after Monte Carlo simulation of
uncertainties) would also be good practice and this should be better highlighted and reflected in
the reporting tables.
QA/QC and Verification
The group discussed how much flexibility in the system would be recommendable, and what
demand there should be for reporting on QA/QC systems, completeness of the inventory andverification. It was agreed to keep the ambition level of GPG2000. An inventory improvement
plan would be recommended as part of quality system, as well as identification/reporting ofpotential key sources that are not included in the inventory. There should be more focus on
inventory improvements and issues related to completeness. If a country reports "IE" (included
elsewhere), it should be clearly documented where the source is included.
In case of verification, the text in LULUCF-GPG would be used as a basis for further
development. Verification of annual emissions and emission trends should be separated.
Practical approaches for particular sectors and for groups of sectors should be highlighted (forexample the reference approach for energy and potential emissions for HFCs). In addition, it
should be clarified what approaches are applicable at the national level.

19

Draft Detailed Table of Contents for Volume 1: Cross-cutting issues
Table of contents of GPG2000 and GPG-LULUCF was used as a basis for this table ofcontents. The group agreed that QA/QC and verification should be integrated to a single
section. A new section on data collection, including guidance for expert judgment, literature
review and sampling was planned to be added. The group agreed that the annex in GPG2000
on conceptual basis for uncertainty estimates should be partly included in the uncertainty
section.
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Data Collection
Introduction
Expert judgment
Literature Review
Sampling
1.3 Uncertainties
Introduction
Identifying Uncertainties
Quantifying Uncertainties
Methods to Combine Uncertainties
Technical Background Information
Examples
1.4 Methodological Choice and Identification of Key Categories
Introduction
General Considerations on Methodological Choice
Identification of Key Categories
Quantitative approach
Qualitative considerations
Application of the Results
Reporting and Documentation
Technical Background Information
Examples
1.5 Time Series Consistency and Recalculation
Introduction
Time Series Consistency and Methodological Change
Recalculations and Non-annual Data
Reporting and documentation
1.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control and Verification
Introduction
QA/QC Plan
General QC Procedure
Source/Sink category specific QC Procedures
QA Review Procedure
Verification
Verification Approaches
Guidance for verification

20

Technical background information
ExamplesDocumentation, archiving and Reporting

21

ATTACHMENT 3: ENERGY – DRAFT DETAILED TOC, TOR AND OTHER INPUT
Draft Terms of Reference for the Energy Sector
Overarching• Improve user-friendliness• Uncertainty for different tiers• Worked examples for sample country (training package on web ?)• Key Source Analysis (change the level of detail)• Do we need to separate CO2 and non CO2 for stationary combustion ?
• Relation between reference and sectoral approach in Introduction Chapter
Activity data issues• Non-Energy Use• Definition of bunkers (International vs. Domestic)• Military activities for aviation and navigation
Emission factors• Update of Default Emission Factors• Ethanol and ethanol blends used for transportation• Should we include default EF for Tier 2 in the guidelines or refer to the EFDB if acountry specific value is not available?
• Biomass for stationary and mobile (CO2 reporting and Non-CO2)• Add EF for fugitive N2O emissions (check with UNFCCC)Inter-Sector Issues• Possible linkage between biomass fuel and LULUCF (CO2)• Feedstocks• Definition of ‘fugitive’ in energy sector (vs industry)• Waste as fuel (linkage to waste sector) > consistent EF
Others• SO2 scrubbing• Geothermal energy related emissions (check with UNFCCC)• Borderline fuels (peat, geothermal, etc)
• Method for emissions from closed/abandoned mines• Unburned fraction of methane from combustion (check with UNFCCC)• CO2 from decompostion of methane of fossil origin (check with UNFCCC)

22

Draft Detailed Table of Contents for Volume 2: Energy
2.1. Introduction(including definition)
2.2. Reference approach
2.3. Stationary combustion(Introduction, Definition, Reading Help)
2.3.1 CO2
(Decision Tree incl. Uncertainty)
2.3.1.1 Tier 1 (activity data, emission factor)
2.3.1.2 Higher tiers (activity data, emission factor)
2.3.2 Non-CO2(Decision Tree incl. Uncertainty)
2.3.2.1 Tier 1 (activity data, emission factor)
2.3.2.2 Higher tiers (activity data, emission factor)
2.4. Mobile combustion
2.4.1 Aviation
2.4.1.1 (Decision Tree incl. Uncertainty)
2.4.1.2 Tier 1 (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.1.3 Higher tiers (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.2 Road Transport (Decision Tree incl. Uncertainty)
2.4.2.1 Tier 1 (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.2.2 Higher tiers (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.3 Railways (Decision Tree incl. Uncertainty)
2.4.3.1 Tier 1 ( activity data, emission factor)
2.4.3.2 Higher tiers (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.4 Navigation
2.4.4.1 (Decision Tree incl. Uncertainty)
2.4.4.2 Tier 1 (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.4.3 Higher tiers (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.5 Other transportations
2.4.5.1 Tier 1 (activity data, emission factor)
2.4.5.2 Higher tiers (activity data, emission factor)
2.5. Fugitives
2.5.1 Overview
2.5.2 Fugitive Emission from Coal Mining and Handling
2.5.2.1 Tier 1?
2.5.2.2 Higher tiers?
2.5.2.3 Fugitive Emission from Oil and Natural Gas Activities
2.5.2.4 Tier 1?
2.5.2.5 Higher tiers?
-----

23

Illustrative table: New sources and possible double counting problems:
New source

Significancesourceof Methods available

Feasibledevelop?

to Flags
double counting?

Practicable to use
Peat production

Significanceunknown togroup

Abandoned mines

Maybe significant
in the UK andpossiblyothercountries;
Needs
todiscussed if
inclusion
appropriate

Cross linkages?

is FIN reported this Definition
the emissions, so a problems?
method is available If one party uses it
thencountry
specific method!
UK, GER & FR is Might be country Cross linkage withcurrently
specific. Definition LUCLUF?
estimatingthese of activity data.
emissions, so abe method is available
its but is still underis construction

Carbon capture

Is not a source orsink

Adjustfactor!

Carbon storage

Significance under Maybe no methods Timing
might Cross linkages withstudy
available
prevent a method to Industrial Processes
be included in 2006 and LUCLUF?
GLs

Use of candles

Probably
significant

Geothermal

Significance to beestablished (fossil
or not?)not

24

emission

ATTACHMENT 4: INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES AND PRODUCT USE – SUMMARYOF ISSUES DISCUSSED AND DRAFT DETAILED TOR AND TOC
Discussion on the ISO Standards and Liaison Opportunity
Kevin Boehmer of the Canadian Standards Association (working for ISO) joined the meeting to
update members on standards activities in the emissions sector. Specifically, he spoke about
ISO 14064 Parts 1, 2 & 3.
• The relevance of these three parts are as follows:(1) Organisational and Entity Quantification(2) Project Quantification(3) Validation and Verification• All documents are currently Working Drafts but will shortly become Committee Drafts
and will go for formal commenting procedures perhaps during the first quarter of theyear 2004.
• IPCC-NGGIP could have formal liaison status with the opportunity to comment ofWorking Drafts (however, no voting rights).
• Close liaison already established with WBCSD/WRI initiative. However, compatibility
cannot be guaranteed because of consensus process within committee membership.
• There has been limited access to drafts via the EU Emission Trading Guidelines process
and technical edits have been provided.
• Key Source concept has yet to be fully addressed.
• ISO aims to be policy sensitive but policy neutral.
• The standard for plant is expected to be mandatory or, at worst, ‘to encourage’. The
standard expects all sources to be identified or, if non-quantifiable, then estimates canbe provided but only with supporting rationale.
Discussion on the role of Greenhouse Gases Emission Estimating Consortium (GGEEC)• A brief history was given, acknowledging sponsorship from US EPA, JICOP, ADEME
and various industry partners.
• The approach being adopted is to use the global certainties of HFC, PFC and SF6
consumption to validate emission models (including emission factors and activity
levels) and to develop proxies for activity drivers based on socio-economic datasets (e.g.
domestic refrigerator ownership, number of dwellings etc. etc.). These are then used:(1)(2)

To validate existing Tier 2 models used by reporting parties
To provide a Tier 2 default model based on relevant activity drivers forsmall consumers (and emitters)• Although the sectoral models differ in nature, the project has facilitated the developmentof a common front-end software package in Visual C++ which generates data in aconsistent fashion and provides a user-friendly interface.
• In the context of the IPCC-NGGI 2006 Guidelines, the GGEEC project is expected todeliver ‘one way’ of reaching validated Tier 2 emissions estimates with minimum effort.
• It was stated that the main issue concerning linkage to the Guidelines themselves was toensure compatibility – particularly with respect to emission factors and basic
methodology. This should be achieved by involving the appropriate expertise in
Guideline development.

25• This led onto a wider discussion of the need to identify expertise and attract appropriate
authors into the process.
Draft Detailed Terms of Reference
1- Review existing information (WRI, ISO, WBCSD) and include or refer to it in the
document
2- Consolidate IPCC 96 and GPG in a single 2006 GL : extended scope to comprise both
Industrial processes and Solvents and other product use sectors
3- Updating should include New F-gases and Default emissions factor should be updated andfed into EFDB. It will not be practical to address all of the sources and gases of emissions
in this sector. The sources and gases covered should reflect both the relative importance ofthe source/gas and the current level of knowledge and methodological development.
4- Updating will require outside contributions coming from experts of different fields, require
additional innovative means (databases, workshops, utilizing outside events…)
5- Harmonization of definition of industrial process emissions and what should be reported inthis sector to avoid double counting to improve consistency and transparency.
6- Ensuring comparable data on industrial process emissions taking into account normal andexceptional emissions and consistent assumptions on source types (i.e. end of pipe and/or
diffuse).
7- Verification / QA / QC at different levels by type of processes at the global level, by type ofgases especially for F-gases

26

Draft detailed Table of Contents for Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use
3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4

Overview and cross-cutting issues
Definition of ‘process emissions’Classification of sources
Ensuring consistent selection of sources type (i.e. stack versus diffuse)
Treatment of abatement for industrial processes

3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
3.2.6
3.2.7
3.2.8

Chemical industry emissions
N2O Emissions from Adipic Acid and Nitric Acid Production
HFC-23 emission from HCFC-22 production
Fugitive emissions from HFCs, PFCs & SF6 production
Emissions from petrochemical industry (e.g. CO2, CH4….)
Emissions from ammonia production (e.g. CO2…)
Emissions from the oil refinery industry (e.g. CO2, CH4 ….)Emissions from titanium dioxide production (e.g. CO2….)
Emissions from hydrogen production (e.g. CO2……)

3.3
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4

Metal industry emissions
Emissions from Iron & Steel industry (e.g. CO2, CH4, N2O, CO, NMVOCs…..)
SF6 Emissions from Magnesium Production
SF6, PFC & CO2 emissions from Aluminium Production
Emissions from production other non-ferrous metals

3.4
Mineral industry emissions
3.4.1 Emissions from cement production (e.g. CO2….)
3.4.2 Emissions from lime production (e.g. CO2….)
3.4.3 Emissions from soda ash production (e.g. CO2….)
3.5

Other non-energy product and feedstock use of fuels

3.6.
Ozone Precursors from industrial processes
3.6.1 NMVOC emissions from industrial processes
3.6.2 Other
3.7
Other industrial process emissions
3.7.1 PFC, HFC, SF6 emissions from semiconductor and flat panel display manufacturing
3.7.2 CO2 emissions from food & drink
3.7.3 CO2 emissions from limestone, dolomite and other carbonate use
3.8
3.8.1
3.8.2
3.8.3
3.8.4
3.8.5

Solvent and other product use
NMVOC from solvent use
NMVOC from other product use
Medical applications of N2O
Emissions of SF6 from Electrical Equipment
Use of SF6 in other products (e.g. running & jogging shoes, windows, tyres)

3.9
Emissions of Fluorinated Substitutes for Ozone Depleting Substances
3.9.1 Overview (covers production, use and disposal issues)
3.9.2 Aerosols

27

3.9.3
3.9.4
3.9.5
3.9.6
3.9.7
3.9.8

Solvents
Foam Blowing Agents
Refrigeration
Mobile Air-Conditioning
Fire Protection
Other Applications

3.10

References

NOTE:• The inclusion of Section 3.1.4 on abatement followed a discussion during which it wasagreed that Industrial Processes provided more opportunity than exist in other sectors to
identify the contribution of abatement as a separate entity. This was seen to aidtransparency and highlight abatement strategy contributions.
•

While recognising that separation of abatement might not be possible in all areas
covered by the chapter, it was agreed that this would be preferable as a basis forestablishing algorithms.

28

ATTACHMENT 5: AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND OTHER LAND USE (AFOLU)
Issues to be considered in the revision in relation to the TOR
Should be based on LUCF of 96 GLs and LULUCF GPG:
• Linkage should be clear;• Approaches and tier structure should be maintained;• Guidance on area allocation should be maintained (shifting cultivation, agroforestry)• User-friendliness in length and structure.
For each category updates should made for:• Activity data (default and regional wherever possible);• Convention factors (default and regional wherever possible); use of EFDB
• Methodology for gases identified in TOC (except those in square brackets)• For new gases/sources default activity data and conversion factors could be provided, if
the methodology is developed sufficiently• Tiers 1 to 3 (description to be provided)
Methodological choice:• Admit repetitions with Agriculture in calculation methods• Avoid double-counting and omissions• Cross reference between Agriculture and Forest Chapters for methodology in estimating
conversion of land uses and• Cross reference between Agriculture and Forest Chapters in estimating emissions andremovals from urban tress and other vegetation in settlements• Develop applicable methodology for new gases/sources and abatement strategies
Expertise required keep balance between• Inventory preparers and scientists;• Geographical representation;• Soil/forest experts• Experts in CO2 and non-CO2 gases
Issues to be considered in relation to the TOC:
- Emissions of NH3 could be considered within N balance.
- Reporting issues – new tables need to be developed and this may entail changes in the TOC.
These tables need to consider how Parties unable to separate activity data (e.g. N inputs andliming) by land use categories can continue to report emissions in a manner consistent withthe 1996 Guidelines- During the Plenary (18 Sep) it was suggested that the timing (annually vs. longer periods)
as well as the activity data (agricultural production and/or land use) should be considered indeveloping the new approach in such a way that the basic methods used in 1996 Guidelines
for estimating agricultural emissions (Chapter 5) could be continued to be used and theannual reporting of these emission should continue to be used.

29

Draft Detailed Table of Contents for Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and other Land Use
4.1 Introduction
4.1.1 Terminology issues (definitions, managed, land use, conversion etc….)
4.1.2 Methodological issues (mapping back, description of tiers and step by step approach,disaggregation of activity data, sampling, uncertainty analysis)
4.1.3 N-C cycles
4.2 Consistent representation of lands
4.2.1
National LU systems (Based on Chp2 GPG LULUCF) including guidance on
sampling
4.2.2
Allocation of lands to categories e.g. shifting cultivation, agroforestry, urban trees…
4.3 Agriculture
4.3.1 Croplands/grasslands remaining croplands/grasslands7
4.3.1.1
Changes in C stocks (5 pools including soil C, tillage, etc.)
4.3.1.2
N2O direct (N inputs, etc)
4.3.1.3
N2O indirect (N inputs, etc)
4.3.1.4
CO2 from liming
4.3.1.5 Rice cultivation (CH4 and N2O)
4.3.1.6 Filed burning of agricultural residues (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs); Notesugarcane burning reported here or other category?
4.3.1.7 Grassland burning (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs)
4.3.1.8 Other gases/new sources and sinks (e.g NH3?, CH4)
4.3.2 Lands converted to croplands
4.3.2.1 Changes in C stocks (5 pools including soil C, tillage, etc.)
4.3.2.2 N2O direct (N inputs, etc)
4.3.2.3 N2O indirect (N inputs, etc)
4.3.2.4 CO2 from liming
4.3.2.5 Biomass burning (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs)
4.3.2.6 Other gases/new sources and sinks (e.g NH3?, CH4)
4.3.3 Lands converted to grasslands
4.3.3.1 Changes in C stocks (5 pools including soil C, tillage, etc.)
4.3.3.2 N2O direct (N inputs, etc)
4.3.3.3 N2O indirect (N inputs, etc)
4.3.3.4 CO2 from liming
4.3.3.5 Biomass burning (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs)
4.3.3.6 Other gases/new sources and sinks (e.g NH3?, CH4)
4.3.4 Livestock
4.3.4.1 Livestock characterisation
4.3.4.2 Enteric Fermentation (CH4)
4.3.4.3 Manure Management (N2O, CH4, NH3?)
4.4 Forest Lands
4.4.1 Forest Land Remaining Forest Land4.4.1.1
Changes in C stocks (5 pools)
4.4.1.2
Forest burning (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs)
7

Emissions and removals from croplands and grasslands should be reported separately. Emissions from ricecultivation are reported under croplands.

30

4.4.1.3
N2O direct (N inputs, etc)
4.4.1.4
N2O indirect (atmospheric deposition, leaching, etc)
4.4.1.5
CO2 from liming
4.4.1.6
New gases/sources and sinks (NH3?, CH4)
4.4.2 Land Converted to Forest Land4.4.2.1
Changes in C stocks (5 pools)
4.4.2.2
Burning (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs)
4.4.2.3
N2O direct (N inputs, etc)
4.4.2.4
N2O indirect (atmospheric deposition, leaching, etc)
4.4.2.5
CO2 from liming
4.4.2.6
New gases/sources and sinks (NH3?, CH4)
4.5 Wetlands
4.5.1
Peatlands8
4.5.2
Flooded lands
4.6 Settlements (could include urban trees, parks, golf courses, …)
4.6.1 Settlements remaining settlements
4.6.1.1
Changes in C stocks (5 pools)
4.6.1.2
Burning (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs)
4.6.1.3
N2O direct (N inputs, etc)
4.6.1.4
N2O indirect (atmospheric deposition, leaching, etc)
4.6.1.5
CO2 from liming
4.6.1.6
New gases/sources and sinks (NH3?, CH4)
4.6.2 Land converted to settlements
4.6.2.1
Changes in C stocks (5 pools)
4.6.2.2
Burning (CH4, N2O, NOx, CO, NMVOCs)
4.6.2.3
N2O direct (N inputs, etc)
4.6.2.4
N2O indirect (atmospheric deposition, leaching, etc)
4.6.2.5
CO2 from liming
4.6.2.6
New gases/sources and sinks (NH3?, CH4)
4.7

Other lands

4.8
-

Other
HWP
Carbon implications with Energy, Waste (landfills)
Other C storage in products? Could go in other chapter of 2006 GL? Assess linkages
with Waste and Energy Sectors

Issues:- N accounting to ensure appropriate assignment to source categories (NH3, NOx,
volatilisation and split between direct and indirect)- Incorporate recent research on N2O emissions- Rice cultivation – develop methods to better reflect different management practices
under different ecosystems- Manure management – need to develop methane conversion factor (MCF) to betterreflect different management systems (e.g. crusts, deep litter, time in storage,
temperature, etc.)----8 Provide definition and guidance to avoid double counting with forest organic soils.

31

ATTACHMENT 6: WASTE – ISSUES DISCUSSED AND DETAILED DRAFT TOR
AND TOCINTEGRATION OF EXISTING MATERIALSIn relationship with the integration of the existent material, the BOG considered moreconvenient than this it is carried out directly by the TSU. Also recommended to make thisintegration in a single volume taking into account the following aspects:
•
•
•
•

•

To maintain, as much as possible, the structure of the IPCC Guidelines and the
GPG2000.
To reduce the available material eliminating the topics repeated in the three volumes of
the IPCC Guidelines and the GPG2000.
To concentrate the treatment of the topics on specific sections without repeating them inthe diverse sections of the material (this aspect is fundamentally related with the crosscutting issues, reporting and documentation etc).
To base an important part of the work with the Guidelines on supplementary materials
such as a new software of the IPCC for the 2006Guidelines and the EFDB. The BOG
considered that this new software should facilitate the report of the emissions both fromthe Annex I Parties and the Non-Annex I Parties considering their specificcommitments, but on a general common base of report. The software -al less for thesimplest methods - would also include the worksheets of the inventory with
explanations for their filled, avoiding their inclusion in the volume of the guidelines.
The single volume proposed has two main parts. The first one, with a common structure,includes all the methodological aspects necessary for the estimate of the emissions ineach IPCC sector. The second part, will be dedicated to the aspects of reporting,documentation and the cross cutting issues of the GPG. These parts are complemented
with supplementary materials, for example information on the software, the EFDB etc.

SCOPE OF GASESThe BOG considered the possibility to expand the scope of gases taking into account theadvances of the science. It was considered that the 1996Guidelines and GPG2000 give
methodologies and/or good practice guidance for the main direct and indirect greenhouse gases
emissions in the Sector Waste. The new sources proposed for the sector don't contribute withnew gases to the IPCC Guidelines. They contribute with emissions of direct and indirect GHG
of the IPCC Guidelines not considered previously in the sector Waste (basically from the open
burning of solid waste in SWDs and the extension of the scope of gases/particles related with
the incineration of waste –NOx, CO, NMVOC, SO2, and particles.
The most important extension in the scope is related with the emissions of particles from thewaste incineration and the open burning of waste in solid waste disposal sites (SWDs). The
emissions of particles from the waste incineration are very dependent of the abatement
technology used and It is very probable that the estimation methodology and the emission
parameters incorporate this aspect. This expansion decision is dependent on outcome fromemerging issues BOG.
SCOPE OF SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIESThe proposal for inclusion of missing/new source categories is related to the recommended
scope of gases/particles, the scientific information available for the development ofmethodologies and the importance of the sources. The initial proposed missing/new categories

32

and subcategories in the sector are the following:
Solid Waste Disposal Sites• Emissions from Open Burning of Waste in Solid Waste Disposal Sites
Burning of solid waste is a widespread practice in many developing countries. Their causes
are varied. Depending on the characteristics of the waste the following main pollutants canbe emitted: fossil CO2, CO, CH4 (of smaller importance), NOx (of smaller importance),
NMVOC, Acid gases (SOx, HCl), and particles. The simpler methodology is based on the
product of activity data and emission factors. The available emission factors are not very
robust, but facilitate an initial approach of the emissions. It is desirable to have a Tier 2
methodology although it was not still identified by the BOG.
Suggested option: To use the Tier 1 approach and to work to reduce the lack of activity
data for this source category• Emissions from Open Dumps
This is another typical source of the sector waste in many developing countries (also relatedwith the previous source). The open dumps are more favorable for aerobic degradation andmay cause much lower emissions from solid waste disposal than in industrialized countries.
Suggested option: Some of the IPCC default values should be reviewed and updated. Due
the limited information for this source, this issue requires of updating.
Wastewater Handling• Was indicated the necessity of considering new types of industrial sources for which iscarried out the estimate of methane emissions.
• The analysis also focused in the necessity of updated the organization of the categories
related with the emissions of N20 that facilitates a comprehensive analysis of this gas,
especially in the Sectors Agriculture and Waste
Suggested option: Maintain the current structure with improvement of consistency.
Incineration
The BOG didn't identify missing/new sources here. However, is required the updating of theemissions identified in a previous section. The emissions from the incineration of waste infacilities with energy recovery and their use as substitute fuel in industrial plants are consideredin the Energy Sector.
Suggested option: Maintain the estimate of emissions from the open burning of agricultural
waste in the Sector Agriculture
STRUCTURAL CHANGESTaking into account the elements described in 2.1 for the integration of the material, in the
Table 1 –corresponding to the TOC of the sector- is presented the structure changes proposed
for the Sector Waste. Only are presented the levels of the structure related with the categories
of sources. These y are subdivided in the subcategories included in the IPCC Guidelines plus
the two new subcategories proposed in 2.3. To facilitate the comparison of the structuralchanges, in the first two columns of the table are included the TOC of the sector waste in the
IPCC Guidelines and the 2000GPG.
METHODOLOGICAL UPDATES
A summary of the analysis made on issues relevant for the methodologies in the sector waste
and how these would need to incorporated in the 2006Guidelines is presented below.
Solid Waste Disposal Sites

33

•

Was analyzed the problem that represents for the sector, the great differences that are
obtained in the estimation of methane using the default method and the FOD method, as
well as the difficulties that represents the application of this last for many developing
countries due to the absence of historical data related to the disposition of solid wastes.
Another aspect on this issue is the absence of default values for many of the factors
required for the application of the FOD method.
Suggested option. With the objective of, at least, to have two tiers for this category it isconsidered convenient to explore the possibility to improve the default method using asimplified model, and to facilitate the use of the FOD method submitting default values
for emission parameters for countries, regions, climates, economic conditions etc.

•

Also was identified the necessity of obtaining a clear definition of the terms commercial
waste and industrial waste. This aspect is also closely related with the problem that is
generated when the industrial wastes are deposited in the municipal SWDs and theemissions are estimated from the waste generation per capita. The DOC content of thesewastes differs much from that of average MSW (the same for the deposition of
construction and demolition waste and sludge).
Suggested option: In MSW is necessary to consider and to improve the definitions ofsome waste types not included in the default values of the Guidelines. Also for thissource category it is required an updated and improvement of the quality of the dataand emission factors used.

Wastewater Handling• Was identified the necessity of incorporating a methodology for the estimation of N2Oemissions from the handling of industrial wastewaters. Equally the deliberations
focused on the necessity of improving the very simplified methodology for the estimate
of direct N2O emissions human sewage.
Suggested option: To combine household and sewage treatment technologies and todevelop new industrial wastewater treatment methodology.
• Important for this source category it is also the improvement of the level of scientificunderstanding of some treatment technologies among them the latrines, the septic tanks
and others.
Suggested option: To develop tier 1 methodologies for latrines + septic tanks
Incineration• Possible double counting or omission of emissions associated to the burning or
incineration of non fuel products manufactured from fuels.
Other recommended aspects were the following:••

An emphasis should be made on improving the coverage of regional needs, in particularregional emission factors.
To improve the topic of samplings in the Sector Waste. The indications on this matter
can improve the quality of the available activity data and emission factors in the sector.

INCORPORATION OF ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGIES IN THE
METHODOLOGIESThe 1996 Guidelines and GPG2000 provide mainly methodologies for unabated or
uncontrolled emissions. The introduction of measures and technologies to reduce emissions
should be reflected in the national inventories. Among the aspects that require of a special

34

consideration are the following:• Abatement of emissions which are very dependent on technologies.
• The linkage of measures done at company/entity level and national inventories.
The areas of the Sector Waste, identified in the BOG, where abatement of emissions needs tobe addressed specifically and reflected in the TOR and TOC are described below.
Solid Waste Disposal Sites• Composting• Anaerobic Digestion• Flares + Gas Engines• Pyrolysis Gasification• Plasma Technology• Recycling• Combined Waste Handling/Treatment
Suggested option: To consider the abatement technologies when preparing an assessment andto incorporate in the guidelines appropriated information on emission factors and otheremission parameters related with the different abatement technologies applied in the sector.
IMPROVING USABILITY
The BOG considers that the structure changes proposed for the TOC of the sector and theinclusion and use of complementary supports, as a new software and the EFDB, is improved
the usability of the guidelines and its use is simplified.
INTER-BOG AREAS
In addition, participants identified the following inter-bog areas than might also be consideredin the revision. The suggested options for considerations are included in brackets.
• Incineration: (Waste; Energy)• Landfill gas utilization (Energy) vs flaring (Waste)• Landfill carbon stored• Sludge incineration (Energy; Waste)• Sludge dispersion in agricultural soils (Agriculture/LULUCF)• Manure burning/Incineration (Energy; Agriculture/LULUCF; Waste)• Open burning of agricultural wastes (AgricultureLULUCF)• Carbon stored in the wood products (LUCF)
OTHER ISSUES
Also the participants focused in the aspect related with the CO2 emissions corresponding toatmospheric oxidations of emissions of CO, NMVOC and CH4 from the Sector Waste.
Suggested option: Not considered necessary at this time.

35

DRAFT TOR OF THE WASTE SECTOR
The BOG considered that the elements provided in the epigraphs 1, 2 and 3 constitute the TOR
in the work required for the revision of the Sector Waste in the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines.
Also were identified the following aspects to be included in the TOR:
• Transparency (methodologies, data, and reporting).
• Practicability fort the users for country specific processes, practices and reporting.
• Verifiable methodologies, identifying cross-cutting issues and possible double counting
and omissions.
• Cross-links to Energy, Agriculture/LUCF, and Industrial Process sectors.
DRAFT TOC OF THE WASTE SECTOR
In the Waste sector are included three major source categories. Each major source category is
divided into subcategories. In the sector, al included all GHG emissions from solid waste
disposal on land, wastewater handling and waste incineration. Main sources are usually CH4
from solid waste disposal and CH4 from wastewater.
The draft TOC proposed by the Sectoral BOG for consideration by the plenary is presented in
the table at the end of this attachment. In this TOC the elements exposed previously were taken
into account.
NECESSARY EXPERTISE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORKThe BOG considered the necessity of the participation of experts with experiences in thefollowing fields:• CH4 oxidation + surface emissions• N2O wastewater• Inventory• Modeler (FOD + )• Emissions Processes• Data – Expert Judgment• Emissions Factors – Expert Judgment• Waste incineration expert (energy group)• N-cycle (Agriculture + LUCF)• Expert in waste management in developing countries

36Vol.3 RM 6. Waste
6 Waste
6.1 Overview
6.2 Methane Emissions from Solid Waste
Disposal Sites
6.3 Methane Emissions from Wastewater
Handling
6.4 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Human
Sewage
6.5 Emissions from Waste Incineration
6.6 References

Vol.2 WB Modules & Worksheets
6 Waste
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Land Disposal of Solid Waste
6.3 Methane Emissions from Wastewater
Handling
6.4 Methane
EmissionsfromIndustrial
Wastewater and Sludge Streams
6.5 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Human
SewageVol.1 RI
Sectoral Reporting Table for Waste
Annex 3 A3.6 Summary of the 96 GLs of
Industrial Processes sector
5.1

CH4 Emissions from Solid Waste Disposal
Sites
5.1.1 Methodological Issues
5.1.2 Reporting and Documentation
5.1.3 Inventory Quality Assurance/Quality Control(QA/QC)
5.2 Emissions from Wastewater Handling
5.2.1 Methodological Issues
5.2.2 Reporting and Documentation
5.2.3 Inventory Quality Assurance/Quality Control(QA/QC)
5.3 Emissions from Waste Incineration
5.3.1 Methodological Issues
5.3.2 Reporting and Documentation
5.3.3 Inventory Quality Assurance/Quality Control(QA/QC)
References

Chapter 5 Waste

Chapter A WasteA
Waste
A.1 Introduction
A.2 Emissions from Solid Waste Disposal Sites
A.2.1 Description
A.2.2 Methodological Issues
Simpler Methodology. Tier 1
Detailed Methodology. Tier 2
A.2.3 Activity Data
A.2.4 Emission Parameters
A.3
CH4 and N2O Emissions from Wastewater
Handling
A.3.1 Description
A.3.2 Methodological Issues
Simpler Methodology. Tier 1
Detailed Methodology. Tier 2
A.3.3 Activity Data
A.3.4 Emission Parameters
A.4 Emissions from Waste Incineration
A.4.1 Description
A.4.2 Methodological Issues
Simpler Methodology. Tier 1
Detailed Methodology. Tier 2
A.4.3 Activity Data
A4.4 Emission Parameters
References

Volume 5: Detailed Draft TOC for the Sector Waste in the 2006 Guidelines. Reporting, documentation and cross-cutting issues are included
in second part of the volume. The same structure for each sector.

APPENDIX 1
Summary of Outputs from the BOG4: Waste (New sources)
GHG/particle Methodolo
Default
Source Category
s
gy
Data
Available Available

GHG/particles

Methodology
Available

Default
Data
Available

Open burning of solid CO2; CH4;
waste in SWDs
CO; NOx;
COVDM;
SO2;
particles
Open dumps
CH4

Y (tier 1)

Y ( EFnotrobust)New Source Category?

?

Experience
AvailableDevelopm
ent
Possible

Experience
AvailableLimitedDevelopm
ent
Possible?

?

1

1- To included a simpler methodology (EF x AD) and explore the possibility of introduce a
detailed methodology

List of Participants
IPCC Expert Scoping Meeting :Revision of the "Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories"
16 - 18 September 2003
WMO Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland*Member of the Task Force Bureau Inventories

ARGENTINA
Dario GOMEZ
Comision Nacional de Energia Atomica
Avda. General Paz.1499, (B1650KNA)
Tel : (54 11) 6772 7130
Fax : (54 11) 6772 7130
dgomez@cnea.gov.ar

BRAZIL
José Domingos Gonzalez MIGUEZ
Ministry of Science and Technology
Esplanda dos Ministerios Bloco E Room 244
70067-900 Brazilia-DF
Tel : (55 61) 317 7923
Fax : (55 61) 317 7657
miguez@mct.gov.br

ARMENIAMartiros TSARUKYAN
Ministry of Nature Protection
Department of Atmosphere Protection
Government Building 3, Republic Square, Yerevan
Tel : (374 1) 53 81 87
Fax : (374 1) 53 81 87
martiros@nature.am
AUSTRALIA
Penny REYENGA
Emissions Analysis Team
Australian Greenhouse Office
P.O.Box 621, Camberra ACT 2601
Tel : (61 2) 6274 1371
Fax : (61 2) 6274 1439
penny.reyenga@greenhouse.gov.au

BRAZIL
Thelma KRUG *Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research
Avenida dos Astronautas 1758, Jardim da Granja
12297-010 Sao Jose dos Campos, SP
Tel : (55 12) 3945 6895
Fax : (55 12) 3941 4410
thelma@dir.iai.int
BRAZIL
Newton PACIORNIKMinistry of Science and Technology
Praia do Flamengo 200s / 2401
22210-901 Rio de Janeiro
Tel : (55 21) 2555 0308
Fax : (51 21) 2555 0306
newton@finep.gov.br

AUSTRIA
Bernhard SCHLAMADINGER
Institute of Energy Research
Joanneum Research
Elisabethstrasse 5, A-8010 Graz
Tel : (43 316) 876 1340
Fax : (43 316) 876 91340
bernhard.schlamadinger@joanneum.at

BULGARIA
Hristo VASSILEV
Energy Institute JS Co.
17 Leonardo do Vincr Str., 1142 Sofia
Tel : (359 2) 944 4644
Fax : (359 2) 963 4038
vassilev@eninbg.com

BENIN
Sabin GUENDEHOU
Benin Centre for Scientific and Technical Research
03 P.O.Box 2048, Cotonou
Tel : (229) 059 391
Fax : (229) 323 671
guensab@yahoo.fr-1-

CANADA
Pascale COLLASLand Use and Land Use Change Section for GHG Division
Environment Canada
351 St-Joseph Blvd., 19th floor, Gatineau, P.Q.K1A 0H3
Tel : (1 819) 994 0888
Fax : (1 819) 953 3006
pascale.collas@ec.gc.ca

CHILE
Sergio GONZALEZ-MARTINEAUX *Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias
Casilla 439/3, Santiago
Tel : (56 2) 7575 115
Fax : (56 2) 7575 120
sgonzale@platina.inia.cl

FINLAND
Kristina SAARINEN
Finnish Environment Institute
P.O.Box 140, 00251 Helsinki
Tel : (358 9) 4030 0456
Fax : (358 9) 4030 0491
kristina.saarinen@environment.fi

CHINA
Zhenlin CHEN
Department of International Cooperation
China Meteorological Administration
No.46, Zhongguancun Nandajie, Beijing 100081
Tel : (86 10) 6840 6662
Fax : (86 10) 6217 4797
cdccc@cma.gov.cn

FRANCE
Denis CLODIC
Centre d'Energétique
Ecole des Mines de Paris
60 boulevard Saint Michel, 75006 Paris
Tel : (33 1) 4051 9249
Fax : (33 1) 4634 2491
denis.clodic@ensmp.fr

CHINA
Huaqing XUCenter for Energy, Environment and Climate Change
Energy Research InstituteNational Development and Reform Commission
B-1405, Guohong Building, Muxidi Beili,
Beijing 100038
Tel : (86 10) 6390 8455
Fax : (86 10) 6390 8457
xuhqing@public3.bta.net.cn

FRANCE
Jean-Pierre FONTELLE
Centre Interprofessionel Technique d'Etudes de la
Pollution Atmospherique (CITEPA)
10, rue du Faubourg Poissonnière, 75010 Paris
Tel : (33 1) 4483 6883
Fax : (33 1) 4022 0483
jean-pierre.fontelle@citepa.org

CUBA
Carlos LOPEZ
Institute of Meteorology
Loma de Casablanca, Regla CP 11700
Habana 17, Ciudad de La Habana
Tel : (537) 867 0711
Fax : (537) 338 010
cmlopezca@yahoo.com

GERMANY
Rainer BARITZ
European Comission - Joint Research Center
Via Enrico Fermi 62, I-21020 Ispra (VA)
Italy
Tel : (39 332) 78 5870
Fax : (39 332) 78 5022
rainer.baritz@jrc.it
GERMANY
Jochen HARNISCH
Ecofys energy & environment
Landgrabenstrasse 94, D-90443 Nuernberg
Tel : (49 911) 994 4677
Fax : (49 911) 994 4678
E-mail : j.harnisch@ecofys.de

CZECH REPUBLIC
Pavel FOTT
Czech Hydometeorological Institute
Na Sabatce 17, 143 06 Prague 4
Tel : (420 2) 4403 2456
Fax : (420 2) 4403 2468
fott@chmi.cz

GHANA
William Kojo AGYEMANG-BONSU
Environmental Protection Agency
P.O.Box M326, Accra
Tel : (233 21) 664 697
Fax : (233 21) 662 690
wbonsu@epaghana.org

FINLAND
Suvi MONNIVTT Technical Research Centre
Tekniikantie 4 C, FIN-02044 VTT
Tel : (358 9) 456 5075
Fax : (358 9) 456 6538
suvi.monni@vtt.fi-2-INDIA
Kirit S. PARIKH *Integrated Research and Action for Development(IRADe)C-50 Asian Games Village Complex
Khelgaon, New Deli 110049
Tel : (91 11) 2649 5522
Fax : (91 11) 2649 5523
kirit@irade.res.inJAPAN
Kazuyuki YAGIGreenhouse Gas Team, Department of Global Resources
National Institute for Agro-Environmental Sciences
3-1-3 Kannondai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8604
Tel : (81 29) 838 8234
Fax : (81 29) 838 8199
kyagi@affrc.go.jp
MALAWI
Kenneth J. GONDWE
Malawi Industrial Research and Technology
Development Centre
P.O.Box 357, Blantyre
Tel : (265 1) 658 197
Fax : (265 1) 623 912
gondwekj@yahoo.co.uk

ITALY
Daniela ROMANONational Environmental Protection Agency
Via C. Pavese 305, 00144 RomeTel : (39 06) 5007 2541
Fax : (39 06) 5007 2531
romano@apat.it
JAPAN
Masahiro AMANO
School of Human Sciences
Waseda University
2-579-15 Mikajima, Tokorozawa, Saitama 359-1192
Tel : (81 42) 947 6740
Fax : (81 42) 948 4314
amano@waseda.jp
JAPAN
Naoyuki HASEGAWA
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport
Environment Divison, Policy Buearu
2-1-3 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8918
Tel : (81 3) 5253 8262
Fax : (81 3) 5253 1549
hasegawa-n27r@mlit.go.jp
JAPAN
Taka HIRAISHI *C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
2108-11, Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura,
Kanagawa 240-0115
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
hiraishi@iges.or.jp
JAPAN
Hideaki NAKANECenter for Global Environmental Research
National Institute for Environmental Studies
16-2 Onogawa, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8506
Tel : (81 29) 850 2491
Fax : (81 29) 850 2920
nakane@nies.go.jp-3-

MAURITIUS
Soobaraj Nayroo SOK APPADU *Meteorological Services
St. Paul Road, Vacoas
Tel : (230) 696 5626
Fax : (230) 686 1033
meteo@intnet.mu
NETHERLANDS
Jos G.J. OLIVIER
Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency(NMP-RIVM)
P.O. Box 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven
Tel : (31 30) 274 3035
Fax : (31 30) 274 4464
jos.olivier@rivm.nl
NETHERLANDS
Tinus PULLESTNO Environment, Energy and Process Innovation
PO Box 342, 7300 AH Apeldrron
Tel : (31 55) 549 3762
Fax : (31 55) 549 3252
m.p.j.pulles@mep.tno.nl
NETHERLANDS
Eveline TRINESTREENESS Consult
Laan van Meerdervoort 126, 2517 BD, The Hague
Tel : (31 70) 346 8530
Fax : (31 84) 222 6347
Eveline@TrinesOnline.com

NETHERLANDS
Andre VAN AMSTEL
Environmental Systems Analysis
Wageningen University
Ritzema Bosweg 32a, P.O. Box 8080, 6700 DD Wageningen
Tel : (31 317) 484 812
Fax : (31 317) 484 839
andre.vanamstel@wur.nl

RUSSIA
Michael GYTARSKY
Institute of Global Climate and Ecology (IGCE)
20-B Glebovskaya Str., Moscow 107258
Tel : (7 095) 169 2198
Fax : (7 095) 160 0831
Mike.Gytarsky@ru.net
SLOVAKIA
Katarina MARECKOVASlovak Hydrometeorological InstituteDepartment of Air Quality
Jeseniova 17, 83315 Bratislava
Tel : (421 2) 6231 6316
KMareckova@rec.org

NETHERLANDS
A.C.W.M. VAN DEN BERGHE
Waste Management Council (AOO)
P.O.Box 19015, 3501 DA Utrecht
Tel : (31 30) 234 8800
Fax : (31 30) 234 2260
guus.van.den.berghe@aoo.nl

SRI LANKA
B.V.R. PUNYAWARDENA
Natural Resources Management Center
Department of Agriculture
P.O.Box 52, Peradeniya
Tel : (94 8) 388 355
Fax : (94 8) 388 333
nrmcdoa@sltnet.lk

NEW ZEALAND
Helen PLUME *New Zealand Climate Change Office
P.O. Box 10362, Wellington
Tel : (64 4) 916 7627
Fax : (64 4) 916 7615
helen.plume@mfe.govt.nz
NORWAY
Eilev GJERALD
Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT)
P.O.Box 8100 Dep, N-0032 Oslo
Tel : (47 22) 573 450
Fax : (47 22) 676 706
eilev.gjerald@sft.no
NORWAY
Audun ROSLAND *Norwegian Pollution Control Authority
P.O. Box 8100 Dep, N-0032 Oslo
Tel : (47 22) 57 3547
Fax : (47 22) 67 6706
audun.rosland@sft.no
NORWAY
Kristin RYPDAL
Centre for International Climate and Environmental
Research (CICERO)
P.O.Box 1129, Blindern, N-0318 Oslo
Tel : (47 22) 602 988
Fax : (47 22) 858 751
kristin.rypdal@cicero.uio.no

-4-

SUDAN
Nagmeldin Goutbi ELHASSAN
Climate Change Unit
Higher Council for Environment & Natural Resources(HCENR)
P.O.Box 10488, Gama Street, Khartoum
Tel : (249 12) 252 578 / (249 11) 787 616
Fax : (249 11) 787 617
goutbi@yahoo.com
SWEDEN
Klas ÖSTERBERG
Department of Natural Resources
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Naturvardsverket, 10648 Stockholm
Tel : (46 8) 698 1321
Fax : (46 8) 698 1042
klas.osterberg@naturvardsverket.se
THAILAND
Sirintornthep TOWPRAYOON
The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment
King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi
Bangkok 10140
Tel : (662) 470 8309 / 470 8310 (ext. 4133)
Fax : (662) 872 9805
sirin@jgsee.kmutt.ac.thTHAILAND
Vute WANGWACHARAKUL
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics
Faculty of Economics
Kasetsart University
Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900
Tel : (66 2) 942 8649
Fax : (66 2) 942 8047
fecovww@ku.ac.th
UK
Paul ASHFORD
Caleb Management Services Limited
Grovelands House, Woodlands, Bradley Stoke
Bristol, BS32 4JT
Tel : (44 1454) 610 220
Fax : (44 1454) 610 240
Paul_CalebGroup@compuserve.com
UK
Robert GREGORY
Golder Associates (UK) Ltd
Attenborough House, Browns Lane Business Park
Stanton on the Wolds, Nottinghamshire NG12 5BN
Tel : (44 115) 937 1111
Fax : (44 115) 937 1100
rgregory@golder.com
UK
Jim PENMAN
Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Global Atmosphere Division
Ashdown House, 123 Victoria St
London SW1E 6DE
Tel : (44 20) 7944 5225
Fax : (44 20) 7944 5219
Jim.Penman@defra.gsi.gov.uk
UKJohn WATTERSON
Culham Science Centre
National Environmental Technology Centre
Building E5, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon
Oxfordshire, OX14 3ED
Tel : (44 1235) 46 3188
Fax : (44 1235) 46 3005
john.d.watterson@aeat.co.uk-5-

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Jamidu H.Y. KATIMA *Chemical & Process Engineering Department
Univesity of Dar es Salaam
P.O. Box 35131, Dar es Salaam
Tel : (255 22) 241 0754
Fax : (255 22) 241 0114
jkatima@cpe.udsm.ac.tz
URUGUAY
Walter OYHANTCABAL
Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries
Agricultural Climate Change Projects Unit
Constituyente 1476, piso 3, Montevideo
Tel : (598 2) 412 6360
Fax : (598 2) 412 6372
woyha@mgap,gub.uy
USWilliam IRVINGUS Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20460 (6204N)
Tel : (1 202) 564 9065
Fax : (1 202) 565 6673
irving.bill@epa.gov
US
Dina KRUGER *US Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Tel : (1 202) 343 9039
kruger.dina@epa.gov
US
Elizabeth SCHEEHLE
US Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. (6202J)
Washington, DC 20460
Tel : (1 202) 343 9758
Fax : (1 202) 565 2134
scheehle.elizabeth@epa.gov
US
Tom WIRTH
US Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW (MC-6202J)
Washington, DC 20460
Tel : (1 202) 343 9108
wirth.tom@epa.gov

ZAMBIA
Julius P. DAKA
Environmental Council of Zambia
P.O.Box 35131
LusakaTel : (260 1) 254 023 / 254 059
Fax : (260 1) 254 164
jdaka@necz.org.zm
INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
AFEAS
Daniel VERDONIK
Hughes Associates, Inc3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817
Baltimore, MD 21227
US
Tel : (1 410) 737 8677
Fax : (1 410) 737 8688
danv@haifire.com
IIASA
Wilfried WINIWARTERInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis(IIASA)
Schlossplatz 1, A-2361 Laxenburg
Austria
Tel : (43 2236) 807 596
Fax : (43 2236) 807 533
winiwarter@iiasa.ac.at

IPIECA
Karin RITTER
International Petroleum Industry Environmental
Conservation (IPIECA) &American Petroleum Institute (API)1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 900
Washington, D.C. 20005
US
Tel : (1 202) 682 8472
Fax : (1 202) 682 8031
ritterk@api.org
ISO
Kevin BOEHMERWorking Group 5 on Climate ChangeISO5060 Spectrum Way, Suite 100
Mississauga, Ontario
Canada L4W 5N6
Tel : (1 416) 747 2231
Fax : (1 416) 747 2473
kevin.boehmer@csa.ca

INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONSEC
Anke HEROLD
Oeko-Institut e.V.
Novalisstrasse 10, 10115 Berlin,
Germany
Tel : (49 30) 2804 8686
Fax : (49 30) 2804 8688
a.herold@oeko.de

IEA
Karen TREANTON
Energy Balances, Prices and Emission Section, Energy
Statistics DivisionInternational Energy Agency (IEA)
9 rue de la Federation, 75739 Paris Cedex 15
FranceTel : (33 1) 4057 6633
Fax : (33 1) 4057 6649
E-mail : karen.treanton@iea.org-6-

UNFCCC
Roberto ACOSTA
UNFCCC Secretariat
Martin-Luther-King Strasse 853175 Bonn, Germany
Tel : (49 228) 815 1419
Fax : (49 228) 815 1499
racosta@unfccc.int

UNFCCC
Stylianos PESMAJOGLOUUNFCCC Secretariat
Martin-Luther-King Strasse 8
D-53175 Bonn, Germany
Tel : (49 228) 815 1315
Fax : (49 228) 815 1499
E-mail : spesmajoglou@unfccc.int

IPCC SECRETARIAT
Renate CHRISTIPCC Secretariat
C/O World Meteorological Organization
7 bis Avenue de la Paix,C.P.2300, CH-1211
Switzerland
Tel : (41 22) 730 8574
Fax : (41 22) 730 8025
E-mail : christ_r@gateway.wmo.ch
IPCC NGGIP TSU
Riitta PIPATTI
C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura,
Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
pipatti@iges.or.jp

Kiyoto TANABE
C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura,
Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
tanabe@iges.or.jp

Leandro BUENDIA
C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura,
Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
buendia@iges.or.jp

Fabian WAGNER
C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura,
Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
wagner@iges.or.jp

Todd NGARA
C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura,
Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
ngara@iges.or.jp

Ayako HONGO
C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura,
Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
hongo@iges.or.jp

Kyoko MIWA
C/O Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Miura, Kanagawa
240-0115, Japan
Tel : (81 46) 855 3750
Fax : (81 46) 855 3808
miwa@iges.or.jp-7-