Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Technical Assessment of IPCC Inventory Guidelines– Results of Questionnaire SurveyOverview
Side Event during UNFCCC SB42, 4 June 2015, Bonn, Germany
Kiyoto Tanabe
Technical Support Unit
IPCC Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Background• 9 years since 2006 IPCC Guidelines were produced!!
• Expert Meeting on Systematic Assessment of TFIProducts (25-27 August 2014 in Ottawa)– Assessed the TFI products including the 2006 IPCC Guidelines.

• Subsequently, TFI Bureau (TFB) concluded:– The 2006 IPCC Guidelines provide a technically sound methodologicalbasis of national greenhouse gas inventory, and therefore fundamental
revision is unnecessary.
– To keep the validity of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, certain refinements
may be required, taking into account scientific and other technicaladvances that have matured sufficiently since 2006.
– More in–depth technical assessments should be undertaken.

Aim• The work aims:– to assess where science and data availability have developed
sufficiently since the 2006 IPCC Guidelines to support therefinement or development of methodological advice for
specific categories and gases, with a view to identifying any
specific areas or issues to be prioritized.
– to conduct technical assessment on cross-sectoral issues,
such as those covered in Volume 1, including improvement ofuser-friendliness of other inventory tools with a view tocontributing to capacity development programmes.

Scope• Technical assessment on all the four sectors:– Available science and data
– Need and feasibility of methodological development/refinement• This assessment will take into account:– Existing guidance in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines and the 2013 Wetlands
Supplement– Associated facilities such as IPCC Inventory Software and the Emission
Factor Database• Focus will be placed on specific source/sink categories
and gases selected according to significance andprioritization criteria.

Significance & prioritization criteria• Significance of the source/sink and the gas within thesector on a global scale.
– Only for a limited number of particular countries - NO
– New information would likely lead to a definite improvement?

• Availability of relevant new scientific results.
• Sufficient data availability and maturity of scientificadvances since 2006 to provide a basis formethodological development or refinement, including:– Ability to develop new or updated default emission/removal factors– Feasibility of obtaining the necessary data to implement the methods• Emergence of new sources or gases

Approach• Undertaken through the combination of an on-line
questionnaire survey and expert meetings.
– On-line questionnaire survey (conducted in early 2015)– Expert Meeting on Energy, IPPU, Waste Sectors(29 June – 1 July 2015, Geneva, Switzerland)– Expert Meeting on AFOLU Sector(13 – 16 July 2015, Sao Paulo, Brazil)• Expert meetings will recommend to TFB on:– Categories for which science is sufficiently mature & data are available;– Where refinement would lead to a noticeable improvement;– Specific type of refinement or updating that is needed;– How these refinements should be made.

On-line questionnaire survey• Conducted from 30 January to 27 February 2015
• Sent to all the experts:– Who were nominated by governments and international organizations– Who have contributed to TFI work

• 243 experts have submitted their views.
Energy Sector
IPPU Sector
AFOLU Sector
Waste Sector
Other Sector
Cross-Sectoral
TOTAL

Number of respondents
764213743558243

Number of comments
206128380112
6155987

On-line questionnaire survey
Category(Select from dropdown list)
Fuel(Select from dropdown list)
Gas(Select from dropdown list)
Type of refinement ordevelopment(Select from dropdown list)
Comment

What refinements or developments are suggested?
How do they meet the criteria set out?

References that may be used for refinements

High priority issues• Issues that are considered high priorities have been
provisionally selected by TSU based on:– Applicability of refinement to a wide range of countries– Sufficient scientific basis for improvement– Ease of implementation of refined guidance– Impact (leading to great decrease in uncertainty?)– Frequency of the comment• These “High priority issues” are NOT meant to be a “todo-list”. They are suggested for discussion at the expert
meetings to consider necessary future work.
– Other issues may be raised and discussed at the meetings.

High priority issues (Cross-sectoral)• Cross-sectoral guidance/tools – 155 comments received
and 12 “High priority issues” identified provisionally.
• The “High priority issues” include:– Enhancement of guidance on cross-sectoral elements, e.g.:• Approaches to data collection (e.g. development of CS-EFs)• Uncertainty analysis• Verification• Estimation of indirect CO2 emissions– Improvement of user-friendliness or usefulness, e.g.:• More information on default values• Harmonization of reporting tables between IPCC and UNFCCC, etc.

– Establishment of a process to frequently update default EFs

Issues on each sector will be presented
by next speakers.

Thank you!
Please visit our website.
http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/