Report from the Commission under Council Decision 93/389/EEC as amended by Decision 99/296/EC for a monitoring mechanism of Community greenhouse gas emissions
Date: 2002-12-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, EU statistics, activity report, environmental impact, environmental statistics, greenhouse gas, reduction of gas emissions

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 9.12.2002
COM(2002) 702 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

under Council Decision 93/389/EEC as amended by Decision 99/296/EC for
a monitoring mechanism of Community greenhouse gas emissions

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

2.

2.1.

2.2.

3.

3.1.

3.2.

Executive summary .................................................................................................. 3

EC Monitoring Mechanism and purpose of the report............................................... 6

The EC Monitoring Mechanism................................................................................ 6

Purpose of this report ............................................................................................... 6

Member States compliance with reporting requirements ........................................... 8

Compliance with reporting timescales ...................................................................... 8

Compliance with reporting requirements on actual progress ..................................... 9

3.2.1. Greenhouse gas emission inventories........................................................................ 9

3.2.2. Data gaps on CO2, CH4 and N2O ............................................................................ 9

3.2.3. Data gaps on fluorinated gases.................................................................................. 9

3.2.4. Data gaps on land use change and forestry (LUCF) .................................................. 9

3.3.

Compliance with reporting requirements on projected progress .............................. 10

3.3.1.

Projections.............................................................................................................. 10

3.3.2.

Policies and measures............................................................................................. 10

3.3.3. Uncertainties .......................................................................................................... 10

4.

4.1.

4.2.

Evaluation of actual progress.................................................................................. 11

Introduction............................................................................................................ 11

Progress in the European Union.............................................................................. 11

4.2.1.

Progress at EC level................................................................................................ 12

4.2.2.

Progress at Member State level............................................................................... 20

5.

5.1.

5.2.

5.3.

5.4.

5.5.

6.

6.1.

6.2.

6.3.

Evaluation of projected progress............................................................................. 22

Comparison of Member States with existing measures projections with the EC
burden sharing agreement ....................................................................................... 22

Summary of additional policies and measures for the member states ...................... 24

Community wide model based projections for the energy sector (Primes)............... 26

Key assumptions in Member States’ projections ..................................................... 29

Common and Co-ordinated Policies and Measures of the EC.................................. 29

GHG emission targets and reductions of Candidate Countries................................. 31

Targets ................................................................................................................... 31

GHG emission trends in Candidate Countries ......................................................... 32

GHG emission projections in Candidate Countries ................................................. 34

Annex I: Contributions of Member States to GHG emission reduction ................................. 35

Annex II: Glossary and abbreviations................................................................................... 38

2

1.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This is the third progress report under Council Decision 93/389/EEC as amended by
Decision 99/296/EC for a monitoring mechanism of Community CO2 and other
greenhouse gas emissions. It assesses the actual and projected progress of Member
States and the Community towards fulfilling their greenhouse gas emission
commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol. The Convention was aimed at returning
greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990 level by 2000, while the Kyoto Protocol
requires the EC to reduce greenhouse gas emission by 8% 2008-2012.

This report assesses the impacts of domestic policies and measures reducing
emissions only. Any projected shortfall in emission reductions therefore does not
take account of future EC and/or international emissions trading, nor does it include
reductions that can be achieved by the use of the Flexible Mechanisms Joint
Implementation (JI) and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The agreements on
sinks may allow Member States to potentially benefit from measures providing
approximately 1% reduction of greenhouse gases. This report does not include either
emission absorption by sinks, a policy option explicitly incorporated in the
Marrakech Accords.

Compliance on reporting

The report shows continued progress in Member States’ reporting on emission
inventories and domestic policies and measures under
the EC monitoring
mechanism. Data on emissions and removals from land use change and forestry
(LUCF) is not included in this progress report yet, because the IPCC Good Practice
Guidance for the LUCF sector is still under preparation.

Reporting on actual progress (greenhouse gas inventories) has improved over recent
years. Data is now provided in a standardised format and data gaps for all greenhouse
gases are becoming smaller. However, data provision on fluorinated gases (HFCs,
PFCs, SF6) is still insufficient and needs further improving. In addition, the timely
submission of data is still a problem for some Member States.

Reporting on projected progress improved compared to last year’s progress report.
including more
Data on policies and measures became more comprehensive,
consistent data on the type of measures taken and the status of implementation.
However, quantification of individual policies and measures as well as information
on methodologies used for projections is still incomplete requiring further efforts by
Member States in the future in particular regarding the application of the existing
monitoring mechanism guidelines to their full extent.

Actual progress of the EC

The EC as a whole has met its greenhouse gas stabilisation-target in 2000 under the
UNFCCC and emissions for that year are in line with the Kyoto target path for 2008-
12. Overall greenhouse gas emissions in 2000 decreased by 3.5 % compared to 1990
slightly less than in 1999 (-4%). CO2 emissions were 0.5% below 1990 levels while

3

CH4 and N2O emissions decreased by 16 % and 20 % respectively. GHG emissions
per capita for the EU-15 fell slightly between 1990 and 2000.

Contrary to developments between 1990 and 2000 EC emissions of CO2 and other
greenhouse gases from 1999-2000 rose with an increase of CO2 by 0.5% and overall
greenhouse gas emissions by 0.3%. It is too early to interpret this as a reversed trend
as it rather should be seen as a slight deviation in an overall downward trend of
emissions.

The generally positive situation in the EC is largely due to considerable emission
reductions in Germany and the UK. However, other Member States such as Finland,
Sweden, and France could improve their situation and now belong to the group of
Member States that are well below their Kyoto target paths in 2000. Despite progress
in these Member States others have done less well. More than half of the Member
States are still well above their Kyoto target paths. Of these, six Member States even
increased the distance to the target path between 2000 and 1999.

Emission trends in the transport sector remain of particular concern. All Member
States, except Finland, show large increases in transport emissions. The sector has
seen the biggest increase of actual greenhouse gas emissions between 1990 and 2000,
in particular of CO2 and N2O. Further projections of GHG emissions from the
transport
scenario (with existing
measures) a rise of about 28 % by 2010, compared to 1990. This, however, would be
than previous projections before undertaking the Kyoto
considerably lower
commitments. This achievement can be seen as an indication that actions undertaken
meanwhile, such as the agreement of car manufacturers on a reduction of CO2
emissions from fleet renewal, are starting to deliver.

indicate under a ‘business-as-usual’

sector

Projected progress of the EU

Progress based on Member States’ projections

Aggregate Member States’ projections suggest that existing policies and measures
will not be sufficient to reach the Kyoto target. The ‘business-as-usual’ scenario
(with existing measures) suggest that in 2010 EC emissions will have decreased by
only 4.7 % leaving a gap of 3.3% to the Kyoto target. The projected decrease is due
to reductions of CO2 (-2%), CH4 (-38%) and N2O (-23%), that more than compensate
for increases in the fluorinated gases (+72%) and include emission reductions
beyond their respective Burden-Sharing target (over-delivery) by some Member
States. While the Kyoto target of –8% will not be reached, the projected gap of 3.3%
is still an improvement over last year where a mere stabilisation of emissions at 1990
level had been projected.

All Member States except three have identified additional policies and measures to
achieve their respective Burden Sharing target. In a model scenario that incorporate
such additional measures seven Member States would exceed their 'Burden-sharing'
target by 2010, some of them to a considerable extent. At EC level this ‘over-
delivery’ by a number of Member States would result in emission reductions of -12%
below 1990 levels, thereby surpassing the Kyoto target by 4%.

4

It must be emphasised that projections are subject to considerable uncertainties in
relation to the methodologies used and the real effect of policies and measures. It is
important to recognise that many of these policies and measures are in the early stage
of development – sometimes these have not yet reached the final decision phase.
takes
Uncertainty is also related to the extent of real implementation, while it
considerable time before emission reductions materialise. In addition four Member
States have not yet adequately identified or assessed additional policies and
measures. Therefore, concern about the accuracy of all projections must be expressed
and caution in the interpretation of results is required

Deviations from the individual Member States targets are without implications for
compliance with the commitments under the Kyoto Protocol as long as the overall
EUU target is achieved. However, the EU Decision (2002/358/EC) on the ratification
of the Kyoto Protocol clearly obliges individual Member States – together with the
European community – to take the necessary measures to comply with their
respective Burden Sharing targets. The aggregated deficit of those Member States,
which might fail to meet their Burden Sharing target represent about 7.4% or 6% of
the 1990 emissions, depending on whether a scenario without or with additional
measures is considered. One can therefore conclude that a majority of Member States
will have to undertake considerable efforts to achieve their respective ‘Burden-
through improved and extended policies and measures
sharing’ target (either
including trading under a future EC scheme and/or
the flexible
mechanisms as set out under the Kyoto Protocol).

the use of

This year’s comparisons between EC-wide and aggregated Member State projections
have faced difficulties due to a difference in data sets available especially in the
energy sector. Indications that projections of energy-related CO2 emissions are
decreasing under the Member States’ scenarios while they are increasing under the
model covering the whole European energy market need to be further investigated.
This will require further verification of the models used and clarification with
Member States.

Candidate Countries

Candidate Countries are not part of the burden sharing agreement laid down under
Council Decision 2002/358/EC. Instead they are subject to individual –8 % targets
except Hungary and Poland, which both have a reduction commitment of –6%. In
1999 actual emissions of nine of the ten Candidate Countries suggest that they are on
track to meet their Kyoto target. Six Candidate Countries provided projections on
existing policies and measures. All of them project emissions in 2010 to be lower
than their Kyoto commitments under a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario.

Common and co-ordinated policies and measures

Common and Co-ordinated Policies and Measures of the European Community are
integral parts of the European Unions’ effort to achieve the common target. Progress
has been made in developing and adopting measures in the field of energy, transport
and industry as agreed under the first phase of the European Climate Change
Programme. Further measures in the area of agriculture and forestry are under
consideration and the Commission will come forward with a general progress report
of the ECCP in 2003.

5

2.

EC MONITORING MECHANISM AND PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

2.1.

The EC Monitoring Mechanism

The Monitoring Mechanism1 is an instrument to assess accurately and regularly the
extent of progress being made towards the Community’s commitments under the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol.
Progress is evaluated by the Commission, in consultation with the Member States,
and is based on National Programmes, (incl. updates) supplied by the Member States
as described in Article 5(1) and Article 2(2) of Council Decision 1999/296/EC and
other relevant information. The National Programmes should include (a) information
on actual progress and (b) information on projected progress,
in line with the
guidelines under the Decision.

For the purpose of facilitation and harmonisation of collection, reporting and
evaluation of data the Monitoring Committee, established under Council Decision
1999/296/EC, developed a set of guidelines2 covering both the collection and
evaluation of emission inventories and national programmes. The information that
Member States provided for this report already includes many of the elements in the
guidelines, but often to a limited extent. In support of this work the EEA prepared a
report comparing national (MS) projections with projections using EC-wide models
(EEA, 2002b).

Reporting under the Monitoring Mechanism is voluntary for Candidate Countries,
but will be mandatory once they have joined the EC. The Central and Eastern
European candidate countries are however
required to report greenhouse gas
emissions and national programmes to the UNFCCC and this report includes such
information.

2.2.

Purpose of this report

This report presents the results of the evaluation process under the EC Monitoring
Mechanism and assesses actual and projected progress of Member States towards
fulfilling the Community's commitments under
the UNFCCC and the Kyoto
Protocol. The report is prepared on the basis of two reports compiled by EEA,
Greenhouse gas emission trends
in Europe 1990-2000 (EEA, 2002a) and
Greenhouse gas emission projections for Europe (EEA, 2002b).

At the third Conference of the Parties (COP3) to the UNFCCC held in Kyoto in
December 1997, the Parties adopted the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC, which sets

1

2

The Monitoring Mechanism for anthropogenic CO2 and other greenhouse gases was established in June
1993, following the adoption of Council Decision 93/389/EEC. This was revised in Council Decision
99/296/EC to allow for the updating of the monitoring process in line with the inventory requirements.
Member States are required by 31 December each year to submit inventory data for the two previous
years and any updates of previous years (including the base year 1990 and for some Member States
1995 for fluorinated gases) and their most recent projected emissions for the years 2005, 2010, 2015
and 2020. Any updates to the National Programmes e.g. new policy measures should also be reported to
the Commission by 31 December. If no change has occurred, this should be formally indicated to the
Commission.
Guidelines: Part 1: Guidelines for Member States and EC Annual Inventories; Part 2: Methodology for
the Evaluation of Progress and for the Contents of National Programmes, Brussels, 1 September 2000.

6

different binding emission targets for a number of Parties including the European
Community. The EC and its 15 Member States ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002
thus committing itself to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 8 % by 2008-2012,
from 1990 levels. According to Council Decision 2002/358/EC3, in 2002, the EC and
its Member States agreed on different emission limitation and/or reduction targets for
each Member State according to economic circumstances. The overall target of –8%
has been distributed on a differentiated basis to individual Member States under an
‘EC burden sharing’ according to Council Decision 2002/358/EC. The targets range
from a relative reduction of –28% (Luxembourg) to permitted, limited increases of
GHG emissions of +27% (Portugal). The agreed targets are shown in Table 2.2.1.
Moreover, the European Commission4 has acknowledged the need for further future
emission reductions by proposing an EC target to reduce emissions by an average of
an additional 1% per year (as of 2012) up to 2020 and a global target of a 20-40%
reduction from 1990 levels by 2020.

Table 2.2.1 Member States’ commitments in accordance with article 4 of the Kyoto
Protocol and Council Decision 2002/358/EC 5

Member State

Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom

Commitment (% change in emissions of the six GHG basket
for 2008 to 20012 relative to 1990 base year levels)

-13
-7.5
-21
0
0
-21
+25
+13
-6.5
-28
-6
+27
+15
+4
-12.5

3

4

5

Council Decision of 25 April 2002 concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of
the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the joint
fulfilment of commitments thereunder (2002/358/CE), OJ L 130, 15.5.2002
Environment 2010: Our future, our choice, Communication from the Commission, COM (2001) 31
final. A sustainable Europe for a better world: A European Union strategy for sustainable development,
Communication from the Commission, COM (2001) 264 final.
In the Council decision on the approval by the EC of the Kyoto Protocol the different commitments of
the Member States are expressed as percentage change from the base year. In 2006 the respective
emission levels shall be expressed in terms of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. In this connection,
the Council of Environment Ministers and the Commission have in a joint statement agreed to take into
account i.a. the assumptions in Denmark's statement to the Council Conclusions from June 16-17 1998
relating to base year emissions.

7

The evaluation of progress towards these targets has two main components:

• Evaluation of actual progress

The evaluation of actual progress from 1990 to 2000 is based on emission inventories
of Member States and the Community and includes the comparison of base year
inventories with the latest available inventories to establish actual trends of emissions
and a comparison with emission objectives at Member State and Community level.6

• Evaluation of projected progress

Projected progress up to 2010 is assessed on the basis of adopted and future
(planned, or currently under discussion) policies and measures at both national and
Community level. Emission projections are provided by Member States in their
National Programmes, National Communications to the UNFCCC and documents
specifically produced and submitted under the Monitoring Mechanism. Additional
Community-wide projections are taken from the report Greenhouse gas emission
projections for Europe (EEA, 2002b). It includes an assessment of the consistency
and soundness of these projections and their key underlying assumptions and
parameters in the context of National Programmes.

Other issues addressed in this report concern compliance with reporting requirements
by comparing the most recent information that is available from the Member States
with the requirements under the Monitoring Mechanism and the Guidelines for
reporting adopted by the Monitoring Mechanism Committee on 1st September 2000.

The report then summarises the results of the evaluation of trends and projections of
Candidate Countries. Annex I provides an overview on actual and projected progress
of the EC Member States.

3.

MEMBER STATES COMPLIANCE WITH REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

3.1.

Compliance with reporting timescales

Compliance with reporting timescales (31st December each year) under
the
Monitoring Mechanism is still poor for most Member States. This is particularly so
for the reporting of projected progress. Seven MS submitted their GHG inventories
to the European Commission on time, i.e. by 31st December 2001. The other Member
States reported 2000 inventories by April 2002 and data on national policies and
measures even later.

6

Information is based on the EEA report ‘Greenhouse gas emission trends in Europe 1990-2000’(EEA,
2002a). Data exclude emissions and removals from land use change and forestry (LUCF).

8

3.2.

Compliance with reporting requirements on actual progress7

3.2.1. Greenhouse gas emission inventories

The evaluation of actual progress depends upon the availability of the relevant
national inventories from which a complete EC inventory covering all 15 Member
States is compiled. By 15 April 2002, all Member States reported data for 2000. A
data gap-filling procedure was applied in case of missing data (Luxembourg) and for
F-gas emissions before 1995 for member states who chose 1995 as the base year for
these emissions (Belgium, Portugal). By doing so, the EC was able to compile a
complete EC inventory for CO2, CH4, N2O and F-gases emissions for the complete
period from 1990 to 2000. Data was provided in accordance with the 1996
Guidelines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and, for most
the 5th
Member States,
Conference of the Parties (COP 5) in 1999. Data gaps result in not fully consistent
inventories and further progress is needed to reduce this data gaps.

the Common Reporting Formats (CRF) adopted at

3.2.2. Data gaps on CO2, CH4 and N2O

For CO2, CH4 and N2O a data gap-filling procedure has been applied for
Luxembourg (1991-1993).

3.2.3. Data gaps on fluorinated gases

Data gaps on the fluorinated greenhouse gases (HFCs, PFCs, SF6) as reported by
Member States by 15 April 2002 are significantly smaller than in previous years.
Belgium and Portugal did not report data on F-gas emissions for the years 1990 to
1994 (1995 is the base year for F-gas emissions in these two member states). In order
to provide data on F-gas emissions at EC level over the whole period, the level of F-
gas emissions in 1995 in Belgium and Portugal was used as a proxy of these
emissions from 1990 to 1994 in these countries. For Ireland and Luxembourg no data
on F- gas emissions were available.

3.2.4. Data gaps on land use change and forestry (LUCF)

Data on CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions used in this report do not include emissions
and removals from land use change and forestry. It
is only very recently that
outstanding methodological decisions on CO2 sinks under the Kyoto Protocol have
been agreed at COP7 in November 2001 ('Marrakech Accords'). Comprehensive
methods for estimating changes of carbon pools (sinks) under the Protocol are currently
being developed by IPCC. IPCC Good Practice Guidance for the LUCF sector is to be
published in 2003.

Data on carbon sinks were therefore not available and projections for the relevant
carbon pool changes during the first commitment period are therefore not yet included in the
report. The maximum potential of the contribution of sinks for achieving the target may be
significant for some Member States. However, this does not imply that Member States will

7

The information in this section has been taken from the report Greenhouse gas emission trends in
Europe 1990 – 2000, prepared by the European Environment Agency and its European Topic Centre on
Air and Climate Change (EEA, 2002a).

9

actually use the maximum potential as possible according to the methodological decisions
at COP7 nor that they will be able to do so.

3.3.

Compliance with reporting requirements on projected progress8

3.3.1.

Projections

The evaluation of projected progress requires information on all policies and
measures under consideration and also on the emission projections for the Member
States. Policies and measures under consideration include existing ones (in the
process of being implemented) and additional ones (for future implementation).
Projections include estimates of emission reduction effects of existing measures
(a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario) and projections on the effects of additional measures.

The quality of reporting for most Member States has improved in 2002 either
through the provision of a Third National Communication to the UNFCCC or
through improved reports to the Monitoring Mechanism.

Whilst the reporting of projections has progressed, there are still some challenges to
overcome. There are a number of inconsistencies and reporting on measures needs to
be improved. Desaggregation of projections by gas and sector has improved and
consequently more analysis has been possible than in previous years. Reporting of
underlying parameters has also improved although only a limited number can be
compared between Member States.

3.3.2.

Policies and measures

including more
Reporting of policies and measures is more comprehensive,
consistent data on the type of measure and status of implementation. However,
quantification of individual policies and measures for some Member States is still
unavailable.

Projections generally suffer from a lack of quantification of the effects of individual
policies and measures as already discussed. This is of particular concern because this
makes the evaluation of projected progress difficult.

3.3.3. Uncertainties

A comparison between earlier Member State projections of CO2 for the year 20009
and actual emissions for 2000 shows that approximately half the Member State with
measures projections underestimated emissions in 2000 while a similar number
overestimated emissions. While there were large differences in the Member State
emissions projections, for the EC as a whole the previous with measures projection
for 2000 (based on Member State projections estimated about 1997-1998) was 1.6 %
below the actual emissions for 2000.

8

9

The information in this section has been taken from the report Greenhouse gas emission projections for
Europe, prepared by the European Environment Agency and its European Topic Centre on Air and
Climate Change (EEA, 2002b).
Previous projections for 2000 have been taken from the EEA Topic report No 8/1999 based on most
recent information available in 1999 (typically the latest national programmes and/or Second National
Communications to the UNFCCC dating from 1997 or 1998)

10

According to the monitoring mechanism reporting guidelines countries are requested
to present projections on a gas-by-gas basis. A few countries give splits of
projections by gas and by sector, but unlike the inventories there is no detailed
common format for reporting or common definition of sector. This also makes
comparison of projections difficult.

A number of Member States have provided information on the sensitivity of the
projections to changes in some of the key assumptions in the underlying socio-
economic scenarios as well as in the effectiveness of policies and measures.
However, at the moment there is not sufficient information from all Member States
to draw firm conclusions about the sensitivity to key assumptions in the aggregated
EC projections.

4.

EVALUATION OF ACTUAL PROGRESS

4.1.

Introduction

The purpose of this section is to contribute to the evaluation of progress of the
European Community and its Member States towards meeting their greenhouse gas
commitments under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol based on information
compiled by the EEA. The intention has been to perform a consistent and
comparable assessment of the contribution of each Member State towards meeting
the greenhouse gas targets of the EC as a whole. The analysis does not aim to
evaluate compliance of Member States with their targets, but rather their contribution
to the EC greenhouse gas emissions in 2000. An indication of progress towards the
Kyoto target is provided using the distance to target indicator (DTI). This compares
1999-2000 greenhouse gas emission data of the EC and its Member States with a
hypothetical
target based on the assumption of a year on year linear stepped
reduction in emissions to achieve the actual target in the period 2008-2012. By
calculating the deviations from this hypothetical target path in 2000, an indication of
the progress of the EC and its Member States in 2000 is provided. This indicator
takes account of actual emission data disregarding planned national policies or
projections based on these (i.e. the future use of the flexible mechanisms).

4.2.

Progress in the European Union

4.2.1.

Progress at EC level

Although trends for the different gases varied considerably, total greenhouse gas
emissions in the European Community10 decreased by 3.5% between 1990 and 2000
(Figure 4.2.1). This is nearly half the way towards the EC’s GHG emission target of
8% reduction in the period 2008 to 2012.

Assuming a linear target path for 1990 to 2010 (midpoint of the Kyoto Protocol
target period) for all Kyoto Protocol gases, total EC greenhouse gas emissions were
0.5 index points (the distance to target indicator) above this target path in 2000
(Figure 4.2.1). After an initial decrease in total greenhouse gas emissions in the early

10

Total GHG emissions for the EU are calculated by the aggregation of national GHG emissions reported
by Member States (MS) and are referred to as ‘EU 15’ or ‘EC’ emissions later in this report.

11

nineties, emissions more or less stabilised in the second half of the nineties/late
total EC greenhouse gas emissions were 4059.3 Mt CO2
nineties.
equivalents, which was 0.3 % above 1999 and 3.5% below 1990 levels.

In 2000,

The most important reasons for GHG emission rises in 2000 compared to 1999 were
the rise in coal use in electricity production and continuing increases in transport
related GHG emissions. Strong economic growth in 2000 also led to increased
energy use, whereas the relatively mild winter in most EU Member States partially
counteracted this development.

Figure 4.2.1 EC greenhouse gas emissions compared with targets for 2000 and 2008-
2012 (excl. LUCF)

120

110

x
e
d
n
I

100

90

80

100.0

99.5

96.5

92.0

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Greenhouse gas emissions

Target path 2010

GHG target 2010

CO2 target 2000

CO2 emissions

Note: the linear target path is not intended as an approximation of future EC emission trends, but is used to
evaluate EC greenhouse gas emissions in 2000 compared to the EC targets.

Source: EEA (2002a)

The trends for the different gases varied considerably. The share of CO2 and
fluorinated-gases
the
importance of CH4 and N2O declined (Figure 4.2.2).

in total greenhouse gas emissions

increased, whereas

CO2 is by far the most important greenhouse gas in the European Community,
accounting for 82 % of total GHG emissions in 2000. In the same year, EC CO2
emissions rose by 0.5 % from 1999 levels, but the general trend shows slightly
decreasing emissions compared to 1990 and C02 emissions were slightly below 1990
levels (-0.5 %). Large increases of CO2 emissions from transport were outweighed
by reductions from fossil fuel combustion in energy and manufacturing industries.
This means that the EC aim of stabilising carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by
2000 was achieved.

CH4 emissions account for 8 % of total EC greenhouse gas emissions and decreased
by 20 % between 1990 and 2000. The main reasons for declining CH4 emissions
were reductions in solid waste disposal on land, the decline of coal mining and
falling cattle numbers. N2O emissions went down by 16 % and are responsible for

12

8 % of total greenhouse gas emissions. The main reason for N2O emission cuts were
reduction measures in the chemical industry (adipic acid production) in recent years.

Fluorinated-gas emissions show opposing trends: whereas HFC emissions almost
doubled between 1990 and 2000 (+94 %), PFC emissions declined by 49 %. SF6
emissions were 6 % above 1990 levels in 2000. Despite the sharp increase of total
Fluorinated-gas emissions,
they account for only 2 % of total greenhouse gas
emissions in 2000. The recent development 1999 to 2000 shows that HFC emissions
increased by 16 %, whereas PFC and SF6 emissions decreased. The main reason for
rapidly growing fluorinated gas emissions in the EC is the phase out of ozone
depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons under the Montreal Protocol and
the replacement of these substances with HFCs. The decline of fluorinated gas
emission in 1999 compared to 1998 is due to HFC reduction measures in the HCFC
production in the UK and the Netherlands.

Figure 4.2.2 Greenhouse gas emissions according to gases (excl. LUCF)

x
e
d
n
I

160

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

0
9
9
1

1
9
9
1

2
9
9
1

3
9
9
1

4
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

6
9
9
1

7
9
9
1

8
9
9
1

9
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

0
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

Fluorinated-gases include HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions

Source: EEA (2002a)

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

F-gases

N2O

CH4

CO2

F-gases

N2O

CH4

CO2

Greenhouse gas
emissions

The main driving forces of CO2 emissions: CO2 emissions from fossil
fuel
combustion account for 77 % of total EC greenhouse gas emissions. The relationship
between CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and their main driving forces
can be demonstrated in a decomposition analysis by decomposing total emissions
into five emission shares driven each by one the factors: (1) population, (2) GDP per
capita, (3) energy intensity of GDP, (4) the share of fossil fuels in energy
consumption, (5) the shift within fossil fuels towards lower carbon fuels.

13

Figure 4.2.3 Percentage change of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and of
emission shares caused by their main driving forces (population, GDP per capita, energy
intensity of GDP, share of fossil fuels, shift towards lower carbon fuels) in the EC in the
1990s

t
n
e
c
r
e
P

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

1990-1999

1990-1995

1995-1999

Total CO2 from fuel combustion
GDP per capita
Share of fossil fuels

Population
Energy intensity of GDP
Fossil fuel shift

Note: The figure shows for each period the percentage change of real total CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
combustion (white bar) and the percentage change of fictive CO2 emissions caused by each driving force in the
assumed absence of the other driving forces. The five bars for fictive emission changes from driving forces add
up to the bar for total CO2 emission change (white bar) Source: EEA (2002a)

CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion decreased by 0.8 % between 1990 and
1999 (Figure 4.2.3). GDP growth is an important driving force and would have
caused substantial emission increases in the absence of the other factors But
improvements of energy intensity of GDP and the shift within fossil fuels towards
lower carbon fuels offset the emission increasing effect due to GDP growth. In
particular, the share of coal declined in favour of less carbon intensive natural gas
and the contributions from nuclear and renewable increased.

The comparison between the first and the second half of the 1990s shows that the
trend of CO2 emissions has changed: the reduction of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
combustion was only achieved in the first half of the 1990s, whereas emissions
increased in the second half of the decade. The pattern of driving forces has not
changed, but. GDP growth has been a larger driving force in second half of the 1990s
which leads to increasing total CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in that
period.

Sectoral analysis: In order to analyse the sectoral greenhouse gas trends in more
detail, the most important greenhouse gas source categories (key sources) have been
identified. For the EC as a whole, 22 key source categories have been identified
covering 97 % of total EC GHG emissions. The emission trends of the key source
categories vary widely.

Figure 4.2.4 shows the ranking of key source categories according to absolute and
relative changes between 1990 and 2000.

14

The most important key sources in 2000 were:

• Energy industries (CO2); share: 27%; change 1990-2000: -5%;

• Transport (CO2); share: 20%; change 1990-2000: +18%

• Small combustion (incl. households) (CO2); share: 15%; change 1990-2000: -8%

• Manufacturing industries and construction (CO2); share:15%; change 1990-2000:

-8%

Figure 4.2.4: Absolute and relative change 1990-2000 of EC key source categories
(million tonnes of CO2 equivalents and percent)

-125%

-100%

-75%

-50%

-25%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

125%

Percentage change

1.A.3. Transport (CO2)

2.F. Consumption of Halocarbons and SF6 (HFC)

8112%

Absolute change

Relative change

1.A.3. Transport (N2O)

4.B. Manure Management (CH4)

2.A. Mineral Products (CO2)

2.C. Metal Production (CO2)

2.B. Chemical Industry (HFC)

1.A.4. Other Sectors (CH4)

1.A.4. Other Sectors (N2O)

2.E. Production of Halocarbons and SF6 (HFC)

4.B. Manure Management (N2O)

1.B.2. Fugitive Emissions from Oil and Natural Gas (CH4)

2.C. Metal Production (PFC)

4.D. Agricultural Soils (N2O)

1.A.5. Other (CO2)

4.A. Enteric Fermentation (CH4)

1.A.4. Other Sectors (CO2)

1.B.1. Fugitive Emissions from Solid Fuels (CH4)

6.A. Solid Waste Disposal on Land (CH4)

1.A.1. Energy Industries (CO2)

1.A.2. Manufacturing Industries and Construction (CO2)

2.B. Chemical Industry (N2O)

-150

-120

-90

-60

-30

0

30

60

90

120

150

Absolute change in million tonnes of CO2 equivalents

Source: EEA (2002a)

15

Sectors with increases in emissions: Emissions (mainly CO2, but also N2O
emissions) from transport are the second largest single source of greenhouse gas
emissions in the EC accounting for about 21 % of total greenhouse gas emissions in
2000. Furthermore, emissions from transport have risen rapidly: between 1990 and
2000 CO2 emissions increased by 18 % or 128 million tons in EC. Transport includes
emissions from fossil fuel combustion in road transportation, national civil aviation,
railways, national shipping, and other transportation. The main reason for the strong
growth of CO2 emissions from transport is the increase in road transport volumes and
- associated with this - rising road fuel consumption. This occurs in almost all
Member States, but in particular in the cohesion states Ireland, Spain, Portugal and
Greece. Although only responsible for 0.6% of total emissions, N2O emissions from
transport increased by more than 100% as catalytic converters became standard
fittings in cars.11

The second key source category with substantially increasing emissions is HFC
emissions from the use of halocarbons in industrial processes. This accounts for 1 %
of total GHG emissions. HFC emissions increased by a factor of 80 or 29 million
tonnes. This is mainly due to the use of some HFCs as substitutes for ozone depleting
CFCs, which have been gradually phased out in the 1990s.

Sectors with reductions in emissions: The largest reductions in absolute terms were
achieved in nitrous oxide emissions from the chemical industry, responsible for 1.1%
of total GHG emissions, mainly in the UK, Germany and France. This was due to
specific measures in adipic acid production in these countries. Emissions decreased
by 59 million tonnes or 56%.

fuel
Second largest were reductions of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil
combustion in the manufacturing industries. These account for 15% of total GHG
emissions, mainly due to economic restructuring and improved efficiency in the
German manufacturing industry following reunification. Emissions decreased by 55
million tonnes or 8%.

Third largest were reductions of carbon dioxide emissions in the energy sector
(electricity and heat production), accounting for 27% of total GHG emissions. This
was largely due to fuel shifts from coal to gas in several Member States (above all in
the UK) and improved efficiency (above all in Germany). Emissions decreased by 55
million tonnes or 5%. Furthermore, the increased use of combined heat and power
(CHP) generation in several Member States, (particularly Germany) and an increased
share of nuclear and renewables in particular wind power generation in Germany,
Denmark and Spain were contributing factors.

Substantial reductions in methane emissions (26%) were achieved in solid waste
disposal on land (landfilling), which is responsible for 2.4% of total emissions. This
was mainly due to measures related to the implementation of the European Landfill
Waste Directive.

11

Catalytic converters reduce air pollution but produce N2O emissions as a by-product (due to chemical
interaction with sulphur in petrol). Improved catalytic converters and low sulphur fuels are expected to
reduce these N2O emissions in the future.

16

Methane fugitive emissions from solid fuels, contributing 0.5% to total emissions,
were reduced by almost 60% due to the decline of coal mining after cuts in coal
subsidies mainly in the UK, Germany and France.

The reduced emissions of methane from enteric fermentation and of nitrous oxide
from manure management are due to falling cattle numbers in various EC Member
States.

The reduced emissions of nitrous oxide from agricultural soils are the result of the
introduction of set aside of agricultural land as a consequence of the CAP reform.

Figure 4.2.5: EC Greenhouse gas emissions by sector in 2000 (%)12

Other (Energy)
16%

Industry (Processes)
6%

Industry (Energy)
15%

Transport
21%

Agriculture
10%

Waste
3%

Other
0.3%

Energy Industries
Fugitive Emissions
Industry (Energy)

Industry (Processes)
Other (Energy)
Transport
Agriculture
Waste
Other

Fugitive Emissions
2%

Energy Industries
27%

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

Table 4.2.1 provides more quantitative information by Member States on the increase or
decrease of greenhouse gas emissions for different gases and sectors.

12

Energy industries include public electricity and heat production, petroleum refining and the
manufacture of solid fuels. Transport includes road transportation, national civil aviation, railways and
navigation, and other non-road transportation (excluding emissions from international aviation and
navigation). Industry (processes) includes processes in manufacturing industries and construction
without fossil fuel combustion. Industry (energy) includes fossil fuel combustion (for heat and
electricity) in manufacturing industries and construction (such as iron and steel, non-ferrous metals).
Other (energy) includes fossil fuel combustion (for heat and electricity) from small commercial
businesses, public institutions, households and agricultural businesses. Fugitive emissions include
emissions from production, processing, transmission, storage and use of fuels, in particular coal mining.
Waste includes waste management facilities,
in particular landfill sites and incineration plants.
Agriculture includes domestic livestock (dairy and non-dairy cattle), in particular manure management
and enteric fermentation. Other includes an aggregate of sectors which individually constitute less than
1% of the total emission in 2000.

17

Table 4.2.1: Variations of greenhouse gas emissions 1990-2000 of EC and the Member
States in percent

Greenhouse gases
(without LUCF) 1)

EC15

AT

BE

-3.5%

+2.7%

+6.3%

CO2 (without LUCF)

-0.5%

+6.1%

+7.7%

CH4 (without LUCF)

N2O (without LUCF)

-20.0%

-15.9%

-16.8%

+9.0%

-4.9%

+1.7%

DK 2)

-1.7%
(-9.8%)

+0.4%
(-10.3%)

-1.6%

-16.2%

FI

FR

DE

GR

-4.1%

-1.7%

-19.1%

+21.2%

-0.3%

+2.0%

-15.4%

+23.0%

-36.0%

-14.6%

-9.8%

-16.7%

-45.3%

-32.2%

+22.0%

+3.5%

HFCs 1)

PFCs 1)

1)

SF6

1.A.1 Energy
industries (CO2)

1.A.2 Manufacturing
industries (CO2)

1.A.3 Transport
(CO2)

1.A.4 Other Sectors
(CO2) [Small
combustion]

Greenhouse
(without LUCF) 1

gases

+93.6%

+89.2%

+142.1%

+208.3% +164305.7%

209.6%

+146.0%

+27.1%

-49.5%

+61.0%

-

+2894.6%

+4064.5%

-47.6%

-3.1%

+78.8%

+6.1%

-4.8%

-42.4%

-100.0%

-15.7%

-4.3%

-44.8%

-3.6%

-76.5%

+7.0%

+3.8%

-8.1%

-44.9%

-18.3%

-

+27.1%

-8.5%

+25.5%

-2.1%

+3.9%

+11.1%

-4.5%

-29.0%

+6.4%

+18.5%

+41.8%

+22.4%

+15.9%

-0.8%

+15.6%

+12.7%

+20.2%

-2.6%

-1.9%

+8.6%

-16.5%

-23.4%

+3.1%

-16.4%

+59.7%

IE

IT

LU

NL

PT

ES

SE

UK

+24.0%

+3.9%

-45.1%

+2.6%

+30.1%

+33.7%

-1.9%

-12.9%

CO2 (without LUCF)

+39.1%

CH4 (without LUCF)

N2O (without LUCF)

-0.3%

+6.3%

+4.7%

-4.0%

+2.0%

+91.5%

-23.1%

-30.2%

+6.4%

-46.8%

-4.0%

-60.9%

-

-

-

+8.7%

+43.2%

+34.9%

+1.8%

+4.1%

+29.4%

+16.1%

-24.0%

+2.8%

-34.5%

-18.0%

0.0%

-48.3%

-9.4%

+10.8%

+122.9%

-80.0%

+14.7%

+40.9%

+35.0%

-0.4%

-13.8%

-3.6%

-31.6%

-35.8%

+5.2%

-7.0%

-33.4%

-35.4%

-38.7%

-38.9%

+35.9%

-16.3%

-

+112.6%

+198.7%

-

-

-

+44.8%

+23.7%

-5.5%

-67.0%

+2.7%

+14.3%

+30.7%

+6.6%

-8.1%

+103.9%

+19.1%

+66.7%

+20.7%

+75.0%

+47.6%

+4.4%

+5.5%

+6.6%

+0.4%

-0.8%

-4.9%

+39.2%

+32.7%

-28.5%

+5.1%

HFCs 1)

PFCs 1)

1)

SF6

1.A.1 Energy
industries (CO2)

1.A.2 Manufacturing
industries (CO2)

1.A.3 Transport
(CO2)

1.A.4 Other Sectors
(CO2) [Small
combustion]

1) The percentage change in this line refers to the change base year - 2000. For the fluorinated gases most
Member States have reported F-gas data with a base year other than 1990 (namely 1995), as allowed for under
the Protocol. As the EU as a whole has not yet chosen a base year for the F-Gases, the analysis of EC15 emission
trends in this report assumes 1990 as the base year for all gases for the EU.
2) For Denmark data that reflect adjustments for variations in electricity trade in 1990 are given in brackets.
Note: “-“ means that base year emissions were zero or no data was available.

18

4.2.2.

Progress at Member State level

In 2000, six Member States (Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Sweden and,
the United Kingdom) were on track towards reaching their Kyoto-targets, i.e. they
were below their Kyoto target paths. Nine Member States were well above their
Kyoto target paths (Spain, Ireland and Portugal by more than 10 index points). Six
Member States even increased the distance to the target path in 2000 compared to
1999 and only two (Netherlands and Denmark) reduced this distance. The following
countries were heading towards overshooting their burden sharing target in 2000:
Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and
Spain (Table 4.2.2 and Figure 4.2.6).

In 2000, only eight Member States reduced total greenhouse gas emissions compared
to 1999. Sweden joint in 2000 the other six Member States that reduced emissions
below their base year levels.

The favourable situation for the EC emissions in 2000 was largely a result of
considerable cuts in emissions in Germany and the UK, which together accounted for
around 40% of total EC greenhouse gas emissions. In 2000, these two Member States
achieved total greenhouse gas emission reductions of 325 million tons of CO2
equivalents (compared to 1990). Main reasons for the favourable trend in Germany
are increasing efficiency in German thermal electricity production and the economic
restructuring in the five new Länder after the German reunification. Accordingly,
German CO2 emissions from energy and manufacturing industries declined by 18 %
and 29 % respectively between 1990 and 2000. The reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions in the UK was partly the result of the liberalisation of the energy market
and subsequent changes in the choice of fuel used in electricity production from oil
and coal to gas, and partly due to significant reductions in emissions of non-CO2
greenhouse gas emissions including implementation of N2O abatement measures in
the chemical industry. In both Member States the special circumstances mentioned
above account for about 50 % of emission reductions for all six greenhouse gases,
whilst specific policies and measures account for the remaining 50 %.13

In 2000, there was a further slight decrease in greenhouse gas emissions in Germany,
whereas in the UK there was a small increase due to a rise in coal use for power
production.

Italy and France are the third and fourth largest emitters with a share of 13 % each.
In 2000, Italy's greenhouse gas emissions were 0.7 % above 1999 and 4 % above
1990 levels with increases primarily in the transport sector and electricity production.
France reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 1.1 % in 2000, compared to 1999
levels, and was 2 % below 1990 levels. France also achieved large reductions in N2O
emissions from the chemical industry, but CO2 emissions from transport increased
considerably between 1990 and 2000.

The fifth largest emitter in the EU, Spain accounts for 10 % of total EC greenhouse
gas emissions. Between 1990 and 2000, emissions rose by 34 % and in 2000, they

13

Fraunhofer Institut für Systemtechnik und Innovationsforschung (ISI), Science Policy and Technology
Policy Research (SPRU) Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW), 2001

19

were 4 % higher than in 1999. As in Italy, the main causes of these increases are
transport and electricity production.

Figure 4.2.6 gives an overview of Member States greenhouse gas emissions in
relation to their linear target paths for 2008-201214.

Table 4.2.2: Greenhouse gas emissions in CO2 equivalents (excl. land-use change and
forestry) and Kyoto Protocol targets for 2008-2012

Targets 2008–12
under Kyoto Protocol
and EU "burden
sharing"
(%)

Distance-to-target
indicator (DTI)
(index points)

MEMBER STATE

1990
(million tonnes)

2000
(million tonnes)

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

EU-15

77.4

143.1

69.4

77.1

551.8

1222.8

104.8

53.4

522.1

10.8

210.3

65.1

286.4

70.6

742.5

79.8

151.9

68.5

74.0

542.3

991.4

129.7

66.3

543.5

5.9

216.9

84.7

386.0

69.4

649.1

4207.6

4059.3

Change
1999–2000
(%)

Change
1990–2000(1)
(%)

0.0%

0.5%

2.7%

6.3%

-6.0% -1.7% (-9.8%)

-13.0%

-7.5%

-21.0%

0.0%

0.0%

-4.1%

-1.7%

-19.1%

-21.0%

21.2%

24.0%

3.9%

25.0%

13.0%

-6.5%

-45.1%

-28.0%

2.6%

30.1%

33.7%

-1.7%

-12.9%

-3.5%

-6.0%

27.0%

15.0%

4.0%

-12.5%

-8.0%

-2.9%

-1.1%

-0.2%

4.8%

1.5%

0.7%

-0.6%

-0.4%

-1.1%

4.1%

-1.6%

0.4%

0.3%

9.2

10.0

8.8 (0.7)

-4.1

-1.7

-8.6

8.7

17.5

7.2

-31.1

5.6

16.6

26.2

-3.9

-6.7

0.5

1) The percentage change in this column and the analysis of the MS refer to the change base year - 2000. For the
fluorinated gases most Member States have reported F-gas data with a base year other than 1990 (namely 1995),
as allowed for under the Protocol. As the EU as a whole has not yet chosen a base year, the analysis of EC15
emission trends in this report assumes 1990 as the base year for all gases for the EU.

Source: EEA (2002a)

Luxembourg, Sweden and the United Kingdom were below their CO2 targets for
2000 (Table 4.2.3).15 All other Member States were well above their CO2 target paths
for 2000 (Belgium, Ireland, the Netherlands and Spain by more than 10 index points
(percent)). Four Member States do not have targets for CO2 for 2000.

14

15

Some MS have stressed that during the Kyoto Commitment Period not only domestic policies and
measures but also Flexible Mechanism may be used in order to fulfil the commitment. In some MS,
activities under the Flexible Mechanisms have already started, but effects of these do not appear in the
MS greenhouse gas inventories.
In addition, Denmark achieved its target, if adjustments for electricity trade are taken into account.

20

Table 4.2.3: CO2 emissions in million tons (excl. LUCF) and targets for 2000

MEMBER STATE (million tonnes)

1990

2000
(million tonnes)

Change
1999–2000
(%)

Change
1990–2000
(%)

UNFCCC and
national targets for
2000
(%)

Distance-to-target
indicator (DTI)
(index points)

Target reached in

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

EU-15
Source: EEA (2002a)

62.3

118.0

52.6

62.5

394.1

1014.5

84.3

31.5

441.1

10.2

159.6

44.1

227.2

56.1

583.7

66.1

127.0

52.9

62.3

401.9

857.9

103.7

43.8

461.8

5.4

173.5

63.2

306.6

55.9

542.7

3341.8

3324.8

0.1%

1.1%

-7.7%

-2.8%

-1.2%

-0.2%

5.2%

4.8%

0.6%

-0.6%

0.9%

-1.4%

3.9%

-1.1%

1.2%

0.5%

6.1%

7.7%

0.4 (-10.3%)

-0.3%

2.0%

-15.4%

23.0%

39.1%

4.7%

-46.8%

8.7%

43.2%

34.9%

-0.4%

-7.0%

-0.5%

0.0%

-5.0%

-5.0%

No target

No target

No target

15.0%

20.0%

0.0%

0.0%

-3.0%

6.1

12.7

5.4 (-5.3%)

No target

No target

No target

8.0

19.1

4.7

-46.8

11.7

2000

no

no
no (yes)

No target

No target

No target

no

no

no

yes

no

No target

No target

No target

12.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

22.9

-0.4

-7.0

-0.5

no

yes

yes

yes

Figure 4.2.6: Distance-to-target indicators (in index points = percent) for the Kyoto
Protocol and burden sharing targets of EU Member States

Spain

Ireland

Portugal

Belgium

Austria

Denmark

Greece

Italy

Netherlands

France

Sweden

Finland

United Kingdom

Germany

26.2

17.5

16.6

10.0

9.2

8.8

8.7

7.2

5.6

-1.7

-3.9

-4.1

-6.7

-8.6

Luxembourg

-31.1

EU-15

0.5

-40.0

-30.0

-20.0

-10.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

Note: The distance-to-target indicator (DTI) measures the deviation of actual emissions in 2000 from the (hypothetical)
linear target path between 1990 and 2010. Distance to target in percent (the bars) show the deviations between a hypothetical
target (in 2000) and what actually has been achieved (in 2000), under the assumption that reductions in percent of 1990 levels
would take place linear. The DTI gives an indication on progress towards the Kyoto and Member States’ sharing targets. It
assumes that the Member States meet their target entirely on the basis of domestic measures. See Section 5.1 and Annex II
for explanations of the DTI.

Source: EEA (2002a)

21

5.

5.1.

EVALUATION OF PROJECTED PROGRESS

Comparison of Member States with existing measures projections with the EC
burden sharing agreement

This section compares the latest ‘with measures’ projections undertaken by Member
States for the year 2010 with their EC burden sharing commitments.

Table 5.1.1: Comparison of Member States’ ‘with measures’ total emissions
projections (excluding LUCF) compared with the Kyoto commitments16

Base year
from
projection
(MtCO2)17

Base year from
EEA report
(2002) (MtCO2)

EC Burden
sharing18

Commitment
implied by
burden sharing
(MtCO2)

Scenario with
existing p&ms
(MtCO2) in
2010

Scenario with
existing p&ms
% change in
2010

Gap
(MtCO2)
19

gap (in %
of 1990)

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

Finland

France

77.2

145.0

76.0

77.1

77.4

143.1

69.4

77.1

545.0

551.8

-13.0%

-7.5%

-21.0%

0,0%

0.0%

-10.0

-10.9

-16.0

0.0

0.0

8.9

22.4

-13.4

12.8

49.3

11.5%

15.4%

-18.9

-24.5%

-33.3

-22.9%

-17.6%

-2.6

-3.4%

16.6%

-12.,8

-16.6%

9.0%

-49.3

-9.0%

Germany

1225.0

1222.8

-21.0%

-257.2

-412.9

-33.7%

+155.6

+12.7%

Greece

Ireland

Italy

99.3

53.8

543.0

Luxembourg

12.4

Netherlands

212.0

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

UK

64.8

207.0

70.4

744.7

104.8

53.4

522.1

10.8

210.3

65.1

286.4

70.6

742.5

25.0%

13.0%

-6.5%

-28.0%

-6.0%

27.0%

15.0%

4.0%

-12.5%

Total EC

4152.6

4207.6

-8.0%

24.8

7.0

-35.3

-3.5

-12.7

17.5

31.1

2.8

-93.1

-355.8

28.7

21.4

44.0

-2.8

13.0

37.6

100.0

0,5

-103.8

-194.2

28.9%

39.8%

-3.9

-3.9%

-14.4

-26.8%

8.1%

-79.3

-14.6%

-22.9%

-0.6

-5.1%

6.1%

-25.7

-12.1%

58.1%

48.3%

-20.1

-31.1%

-69.0

-33.3%

0.7%

+2.3

+3.3%

-13.9%

+10.7

+1.4%

-4.7%

-161.6

-3.3%

16

17

18

19

The ‘with measures’scenarios for some Member States might be different because the cut-off date for
inclusion of policies varies.
Base year emissions are those quoted in Member States’ projections. In view of the annual inventory
updates, the base year values used in the projections quoted often do not match the most recent 1990
estimates. Base year estimates may change due to enhanced methodology, which aim at more accurate
and more complete inventory data.
The EU Burden sharing target of -8.0 % is used although calculations of Member States summed-up
account for –8.6%.
This is the gap between the commitments under the EU burden sharing agreement and the projected
emissions in 2010 and is calculated using the base year emissions from the projections to maintain
consistency. Minus figures signify that the commitment is not achieved, plus figures mean an projected
'over-delivery'.

22

This comparison is useful in revealing the ‘gap’ between what current domestic
policies and measures are expected to deliver and the Member States and EC’s
commitment under the Kyoto Protocol.

targets varies
The contribution of existing policies and measures to national
significantly across Member States,
reflecting the different degree of policy
development between countries. Germany, Sweden and the UK in particular make a
large contribution to the overall savings20 and project themselves to achieve their
burden sharing targets. Moreover, these countries expect in their projections an 'over
delivery' with measures that have been introduced since the Kyoto Protocol was
agreed in 1997 (See plus figures of the gap in Table 5.1.1.). 'Over-delivery' by some
Member States, however, will not prevent other Member States from being in breach
of their commitments under Decision 2002/358/EC which requires them to take the
necessary measures to meet their Burden Sharing targets.

CO2 is projected to decrease only slightly by 2 % (mainly because reductions in most
sectors are compensated due to increases in the transport sector) (Table 5.1.2).
Further decreases are projected for CH4 and N2O by 38 % and 23 % respectively over
the period 1990 to 2010. Information for the fluorinated gases is less comprehensive
and so it is difficult to draw firm conclusions. However, for those countries that have
provided data, a significant increase of 34.3 Mt CO2 equivalent or 72 % is projected
by 2010 compared to the base year.

Compared to last year’s EC with measures projections for 2010 which gave a half
percent point fall in emissions the assessment for the EC based on this year’s
projections from the Member States presents no actual improvement. Belgium,
France and Spain assessed their projected emissions for 2010 significantly higher
recently than in their last year’s reports, but Germany, Netherlands, Sweden and UK
assessed lower projected emissions.

The EC, as a whole, would achieve 4.7% GHG reductions below 1990 levels with
existing measures projections. This leads to a shortfall of 3.3% (161.6 MtCO2) by
2010. 2002/358/EC. These projections indicate that the aggregated deficit of Member
States, failing to meet their Burden Sharing target represents about 7.4% of the 1990
emissions.

The projections are subject to considerable uncertainty arising from both uncertainty
in the assumptions made in the projections and in the degree to which the policies
and measures will finally deliver the assumed reductions. Due to the continuing
uncertainty related to the implementation of policies and the methodologies used,
concern about the accuracy of the figures mentioned above must be expressed. For
some Member States this uncertainty has been discussed in their national
programmes/information, but for most the information is not sufficient to provide
any quantification of the uncertainty. Overall
the unequal contribution by MS
towards their burden sharing commitments and the degree of uncertainty related to

20

For a discussion of these savings see “Greenhouse gas reductions in Germany and the UK -
Coincidence or policy induced? An Analysis for International Climate Policy” (Fraunhofer Institut für
Systemtechnik und Innovationsforschung (ISI), Science Policy and Technology Policy Research (SPRU)
Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW) Karlsruhe, Brighton, Berlin; April 2001).

23

the projections as such raises concerns over the accuracy of the identified 3.3 % gap
between the projected emissions and the Kyoto target.

Table 5.1.2: Member State ‘with measures’ projections split by greenhouse gas

Change in emissions between Base Year and
2010 (MtCO2 equivalent)

Change in emissions between Base Year and
2010 (%)

CO2

CH4

N2O

Fluorinated
gases

CO2

CH4

N2O

Fluorinated
gases

Austria

Belgium

Denmark21

Finland

France

10.4

21.7

-10.7

13.9

59.2

Germany

-320.5

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

UK

Total EC

28.7

19.8

10,4

-3.0

32.0

31,1

80.9

1.8

-40.3

-64.6

-2.8

-3.6

-0.9

-2.6

-16.6

-65.2

0.0

-0.7

-9.8

0.0

-13.0

1.9

0.0

-2.1

0.0

2.2

-2.2

-0.1

-11.7

-43.4

0.0

0.6

-5.9

0.0

-2.0

2.7

0.0

0.2

-34.5

-23.8

-149.8

-83.4

1.2

2.1

0.6

1.6

18.4

16.2

0.0

1.6

0.0

0.1

-3.0

0.0

0,0

0.5

-5.1

34.3

17%

18%

-18%

22%

15%

-32%

29%

63%

2%

-26%

20%

71%

36%

3%

-7%

-2%

-25%

-26%

-16%

-43%

-26%

-59%

0%

-5%

-20%

9%

-48%

15%

0%

-31%

-45%

0%

18%

-21%

-1%

-13%

-49%

0%

7%

-12%

12%

-12%

35%

0%

3%

-36%

-38%

-23%

72%

420%

161%

2294%

242%

146%

0%

636%

0%

547%

-38%

1%

0%

103%

-30%

72%

5.2.

Summary of additional policies and measures for the member states

The previous section has suggested existing measures identified by Member States
will decrease emissions by 0.6% in 2010 compared to 1990 levels which leaves a gap
of 7.4% to the EC’s target under the Kyoto Protocol. The objective of Member
States’ current climate change programmes is to close this gap through the
development and future implementation of additional policies and measures.

21

Change between base year and 2008-2012

24

Table 5.2.1.: Comparison of
projections and their Kyoto commitments and the identified additional measures

the gap between Member States22

‘with measures’

Gap between
with
measures
and burden
sharing
obligations
(MtCO2)

Total additional
measures
(MtCO2) and
remaining gap
(-) or 'over-
delivery' (+) in
brackets23

Additional measures (MtCO2)24

CO2

CH4

N2O

Fluorinated
gases

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

UK

Total EC

-18.9

-33.3

-2.6

-12.8

-49.3

14.5 (-4,4)

13.8 (-19.5)

1.9 (-0.7)

14.1 (+1.3)

58.3 (+9.0)

+155.6

12.5 (+168.1)

11.6

13.8

1.9

11.7

29.2

0.0

-3.9

-14.4

-79.3

-0.6

-25.7

-20.1

-69.0

+2.3

0.0 (-3.9)

14.6 (+0.2)

11.1

81.0 (+1.7)

0.0 (-0.6)

3.0 (-22.7)

0.0 (-20.1)

42.0 (-27.0)

42.0

0.0 (+2.3)

+10.7

-161.625

63.6 (+74.3)

63.6

319.3 (+157.7)

215.0

1.3

0.0

0.0

0.7

0.1

0.0

2.1

0.0

0.0

7.8

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.9

14.1

0.0

1.4

0.0

0.0

0.8

14.9

12.5

0.9

0.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

16.0

0.0

30.1

Eleven Member States have provided quantification of their additional policies and
measures (Table 5.2.1). Four Member States (Portugal, Greece, Luxembourg and
Sweden) did not provide quantification of these measures. Sweden projects existing
policies and measures to be sufficient. For those countries that have identified
additional savings by greenhouse gas, most of these savings are expected to come
from further reductions in CO2.

With additional measures Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Sweden and the
UK project to achieve their burden sharing targets. For the EC as a whole, the
achievement of targets by these Member States and the remaining gaps by the other
Member States (See minus figures of the remaining gap in Table 5.2.1) result in a

22

23

24

25

Only the eleven Member States have provided quantification of their additional measures.
This over delivery is based on the total of with measures and with additional measures
This includes additional measures, i.e. those which are already implemented but not effective or where
there is a firm implementation plan, and proposed measures without firm implementation plans
The EU Burden sharing target of -8.0 % is used although calculations of Member States summed-up
account for –8.6%.

25

6.0 % GHG reduction in with additional policies and measures projections which
means a shortfall of around 2% (1,8%) (99 MtCO2) by 2010.

Several Member States, project ‘over-delivery’ above their burden sharing target.
(See plus figures of the remaining gap in Table 5.2.1). Emission reductions would
amount to about 319 Mt CO2-equivalents by 2010. This would result in EC GHG
emission reductions of about 12% by 2010 compared to 1990 levels (Table 5.2.2.)
and would exceed the Kyoto target of –8% by 4%. 'Over-delivery' by some Member
States will not prevent other Member States from being in breach of their
commitments under Decision 2002/358/EC.

It should also be noted that in many countries the additional policies and measures
to a larger degree of
are in the early stages of development and are subject
uncertainty.

Table 5.2.2.: Accounting for the EC of GHG emission savings and gap according to
Member States’ ‘with additional measures’ emission projections

Base year emissions of EC

Kyoto commitment of EC

Emission target implied by burden sharing of MS

Savings to be achieved

Savings from existing measures of MS

Savings from additional measures of MS

Savings total

Over delivery / Gap

Mt CO2

4152,6

-8%

3796,8

-355,8

as reported by MS

Calculated results
without over delivery

-194,2

-319,3

(-4,7%)

-25,6

(-0,6%)

(-7,7%)

-231,0

(-5,6%)

-513,5

(-12,4%)

-256,6

(-6,2%)

+157,7

(+4,4%)

-99,2

(-1,8%)

5.3.

Community wide model based projections for the energy sector (Primes)

Model based projections for 2010 (Primes model) from the forthcoming EC-wide
study on the energy baseline scenario (= EC wide ‘with measures’ projection of the
energy sector only incl. Transport) show a considerably different picture of the future
emissions26. The new Primes baseline for the EC project an increase in energy related
CO2 emissions of 4 % between 1990 and the year 2010 These projections are based
on updated assumptions (e.g. energy import prices, GDP, industrial production by
branch) and also take into account the most recent statistical data. On the other hand,
the aggregate 'with measures' projections result
in a decline of CO2 emissions
(including those not related to energy) by 2 %.

26

Information of CEC DG TREN, September 2002

26

This means that the latest aggregated Member State projections result in declining
CO2 emissions -6 % percentage points below the results of the new Primes model
run. According to a preliminary analysis the reason for this difference lies in
different concepts and can be traced back to a major difference in one Member state.
Following the concepts of Eurostat energy statistics the PRIMES projections include
emissions from international aviation, whereas the sum of national projections
excludes these emissions and in particular also those for flights between Member
states. The most notable difference between the Primes projections and national
emission trajectories concerns the expected cuts of emissions in Germany, while the
other Member States combined have only minor differences in their projections to
the Primes results, bearing in mind that due to e.g. different coverage of CO2
emissions (energy related vs total CO2), date of establishing the projections, etc.
there are also small differences for other Member states. To examine the reasons for
these differences further details would be needed (e.g. breakdown of CO2 emissions
by sector and underlying assumptions for all Member states). Such data are currently
is
not available for all Member states from their submissions in a format that
comparable with the detailed PRIMES result that will be been published soon.

Figure 5.3.1 Comparison of the aggregated with measures projections for CO2
emissions with EC-wide model results

Sum national inventories (2000)
Primes (preliminary baseline, 2002)
With measures projections (EU 15)

100

100

100

101

99,5

104

98

110

105

100

(Base
year =
100)

GHG
emissi
ons

95

90

85

80

75

1990

2000

2010

1)There is no disaggregated emissions projection for Greece.

Note:
2) PRIMES modelling includes emissions from international aviation according concepts of energy statistics
which are excluded in national projections Source: EEA (2002b)

27

The key factors which influence the development of the CO2 emissions in the new
Primes run are plotted as indicators (1990 = 100) in Figure 5.3.2. CO2 emissions
were slightly decreasing until 1995 but started to increase again thereafter and are
projected to exceed the 1990 level by 4% in 2010. This result is a product of several
overlying trends. All factors that can be influenced by energy or climate policy are
projected to improve:

• the carbon intensity will decline by 13 % due to inter alia increasing share of

renewable energies;

• the conversion efficiency measured in unit of total primary energy needed for the
consumption of one unit of final energy is also projected to improve by 5 %
(which can be seen at the declining trend of the respective line);

• the overall energy intensity measured by the units of final energy needed to
produce one unit of GDP is projected to improve due to structural change in the
economy and efficiency measures in final consumption by 19 %.

However, not all of these improvements are result of energy and climate policy
because a part of these developments are business as usual that would also occur
without policy interventions. Although the business as usual developments can not
be separated at this stage it
is obvious that energy and climate policy have a
substantial effect on the development of CO2 emissions.

Figure 5.3.2: Driving forces of CO2 emissions in the new Primes baseline projection
(comparable to the "with measures" projections)

CO2 emissions

Population

Economic development (GDP per capita)

Conversion efficiency (TPES/TFC)

Energy intensity (TFC/GDP)

Carbon intensity (CO2/TPES)

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

80

147

106
104

95

87

81

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

Note:

The results from the new Primes run are preliminary and may be subject to change

Source: NTUA 2002

28

Nevertheless, CO2 emissions are projected to increase by 4 % until 2010 because,
both population and GDP will grow too. Population has grown slightly faster than
energy related CO2 emissions in the 1990s and is expected to grow at the same pace
as CO2 emissions up to 2010, which leads to a stabilisation of per capita CO2
emissions in this decade after a slight decline in the last decade. GDP per person, –
according to the new primes run – is expected to be 56 % higher in 2010 than it was
in 1990, which represents an average annual growth of 2.2%. This shows the upward
pressure for CO2 emissions and the challenge for climate policies. It should not be
these
understood from these results that climate policy is powerless against
developments. In contrast, climate policy has to be as effective as possible to
overcompensate the underlying growth trends of CO2 emission. The latest Primes
results show, that under baseline conditions this is not the case yet.

5.4.

Key assumptions in Member States’ projections

The differences between Member State and the EC-wide projections are in part due to
different assumptions regarding the policies and measures in force and in part to
different parameter assumptions and modelling methodologies. However, detailed
information on the projected contribution of key parameters such as GDP,
international oil price, population and traffic growth was only available from few
Member States.

5.5.

Common and Co-ordinated Policies and Measures of the EC

This section gives a brief summary of policies and measures at the Community level
- common and co-ordinated policies and measures (CCPMs) - since the last progress
report in 2001. The CCPMs are complementing actions taken by Member States.
Aiming to help identify the most environmentally and cost effective measures to
meet
the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP) was
established. This programme dovetails with the 6th EAP and the Strategy for
Sustainable Development.

the EC target,

The Communication from the Commission "on the implementation of the first phase
of the European Climate Change Programme" highlighted a package of measures,
which the Commission intends to bring forward in 2002 and 2003. They are grouped
in four sections: crosscutting, energy,
transport and industry. Those measures
represent a cost-effective reduction potential of some 122 - 178 Mt CO2 eq.

The ECCP is continuing to support and facilitate the concrete implementation of the
priority measures identified in the first phase. The following table gives an overview
of the progress in this field, status October 2002.

29

Table 5.5.1: Progress in Common and Co-ordinated Policies and Measures

Proposed measure

Cross-cutting issues

Proposal on emission trading

Effective implementation of IPPC (integrated
Pollution Prevention and Control Directive)

Status of implementation

Adopted by the Commission
In co-decision

Work on an IPPC reference document on
generic energy efficiency techniques to start
in 2003;
Ongoing work on various sector-specific
BAT reference documents
Revision of published BAT reference
documents to start in 2003

Linking project based mechanisms to emissions
trading

Preparatory work in ECCP working group
Proposal envisaged first half 2003

Review of the monitoring mechanism

Proposal envisaged before the end of 2002

Energy

Directive on taxation of energy products (pre-ECCP)

Under discussion at the Council Adoption
envisaged by end of 2002

Directive on energy performance of buildings

In co-decision

Directive on the promotion of electricity from
renewable energy sources (pre-ECCP)

Adopted by Council and Parliament

Proposal for Minimum energy efficiency requirements
for end-use products

Preparation in progress
Proposal envisaged before the end of 2002

Proposal for a Directive on energy demand

Preparation in progress
Proposal envisaged first quarter 2003

Proposal for a Directive on combined heat and power

Commission proposal adopted

Initiatives on increased energy efficient public
procurement

Preparation in progress

Public awareness campaign and campaign for take-off

Elaboration of the initiative prepared in
ECCP WG 3 sub-group;
Initiative will be launched in 2003

Transport related

ACEA/JAMA/KAMA voluntary agreement to reduce
fleet average CO2 emissions to 140g/km by
2008/2009 (pre ECCP)

Monitored through yearly report

30

Shifting the balance between modes of transport

Package of actions, in accordance with the
White Paper on a Common Transport Policy

Proposal for improvements in infrastructure use and
charging

Working paper in preparation

Promotion of the use of bio-fuels for transport

Commission Communication and proposals
for Directives adopted by the Commission

Communication form the Commission regarding
taxation of passenger cars

Adopted by the Commission

Proposal on special tax arrangements for diesel fuel
used for commercial purposes and on the alignment of
excise duties on petrol and diesel fuel

Adopted by the Commission

Proposal on a regulation on the granting of
Community financial assistance to improve the
environmental performance of the freight transport
system

Industry

Adopted by the Commission

Proposal for legislative action on fluorinated gasses

Preparation in ECCP WG 5 and cost-benefit
analysis; Proposal envisaged first half 2003

investigating policies and measures to
In addition the Commission is further
complement Member States’ efforts
in developing cost-effective measures.
Following the Marrakech accords, which comprise concrete rules for the inclusion of
sinks under the Kyoto Protocol,
two new ECCP working groups have been
established, dealing with the enhancement of carbon sequestration in forests and
agricultural soils. The new ECCP working groups have been established in close
collaboration with Research DG and take into account latest results of EC supported
research projects. A number of specific actions, identified under the first phase of the
ECCP, that needed further study in terms of emission reduction potential and cost-
effectiveness, are being developed (e.g. initiative on RES-heat, E2MAS energy audit
and management scheme, Motor Challenge Initiative, fiscal measures for passenger
cars). The Commission is planning to present a comprehensive report on ECCP
related activities in the first half of 2003.

6.

GHG EMISSION TARGETS AND REDUCTIONS OF CANDIDATE COUNTRIES

6.1.

Targets

The accession of several European countries to the European Union is expected in
near future. For a frictionless integration of these countries into the EC Climate
Change policy, it is of interest to learn about their progress towards GHG emission
reductions. Nevertheless, Candidate Countries have individual targets under the
Kyoto Protocol and are not grouped together with the EC 15. Candidate Countries
to the group of countries undergoing the process of
belong, within UNFCCC,
transition to a market economy, but are also Annex I parties. A preliminary
assessment has been carried out for the Central and Eastern European Candidate

31

Countries. Malta, Cyprus and Turkey were not included mainly because of a lack of
data. The 10 Middle and Eastern European Candidate Countries have different
targets under the Kyoto Protocol. Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia have a target of an 8% reduction from
the base year,27 while Hungary and Poland have a target of a 6% reduction (Figure
6.1.1).

Figure 6.1.1 Kyoto Protocol targets for Candidate Countries

)
.

q
e
-
2
O
C
s
e
n
n
o

t

n
o

i
l
l
i

M

(

s
n
o

i

i

s
s
m
e
G
H
G

Base year

Targets 2008-12

600,0

500,0

400,0

300,0

200,0

100,0

0,0

%

-8

%

-8

%

-8

Republic

Estonia

Hungary

%

-6

%
-8
Latvia

Lithuania

%

-8

%

-6

%

-8

%

-8

%

-8

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

Bulgaria
Czech

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

6.2.

GHG emission trends in Candidate Countries

The Candidate Countries (CC) do not have a common target for emission reductions.
Each country has to reach its targets individually as defined in the Kyoto Protocol.
However, an aggregate analysis has been performed in this section for information
purposes so that overall trends in the CC 10 can be compared with the trends in the
EC.

All candidate countries aimed to stabilise emissions by 2000 within UNFCCC
(Figure 6.2.1). Total greenhouse gas emissions for the ten Candidate Countries
declined by 32 % between the base year and 1999. The base year for this group of
countries was assumed to be the average of the base years of the individual candidate
countries. In 1999, the distance-to-target indicator for the whole region was -30.2
the Candidate Countries, however, varies
index points. The performance of
considerably (Figure 6.2.2). Nine countries were below their Kyoto target path, with

27

Countries with base years other than 1990 are Bulgaria (1988), Hungary (average 1985-1987) and
Poland (1988).

32

distance-to target indicators ranging from -13 index points in Hungary to -59.7 in
Latvia. Only Slovenia was above its target path, with +2.9 index points.

Figure 6.2.1: Candidate countries greenhouse gas emissions compared with Kyoto
target for 2008-2012 (excl. fluorinated gases and LUCF)

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

x
e
d
n

I

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

92.9

66.3

65.5

0
9
9
1

1
9
9
1

2
9
9
1

3
9
9
1

4
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

6
9
9
1

7
9
9
1

8
9
9
1

9
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

1
0
0
2

2
0
0
2

3
0
0
2

4
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

6
0
0
2

7
0
0
2

8
0
0
2

9
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

1
1
0
2

2
1
0
2

Greenhouse
gas
emissions

Target path
2010

GHG target
2010

CO2
emissions

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

Figure 6.2.2: Distance-to-target indicators (in index points) for the Kyoto Protocol of
candidate countries

-13.0

2.9

Slovenia

Hungary

Czech Republic

Slovakia

Poland

Romania

Bulgaria

Lithuania

Estonia

Latvia

CC10

-23.6

-25.6

-26.4

-34.5

-30.2

-47.0

-50.1

-51.2

-60.0

-70.0

-60.0

-50.0

-40.0

-30.0

-20.0

-10.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

Note: see section 5.1 for an explanation of the distance to target indicator.

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

33

6.3.

GHG emission projections in Candidate Countries

Candidate Countries do not report formally to the monitoring mechanism, so the
discussion in this section is based on third National Communications under the
UNFCCC. Six countries (Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Poland and
Slovakia) had submitted 3rd National Communications by August 2002.

The Czech Republic presented two projections, a reference scenario (labelled low in
the figure above) and a scenario assuming high economic growth. All with existing
policies and measures projections project emissions in 2010 to be lower than the
Kyoto commitments (Figure 6.3.1). For Latvia and Estonia,
the emissions are
projected to be significantly lower than in 1990.

In part, the projected reductions are the result of the economic restructuring that has
already occurred in these countries. However, all countries have policies and
measures in place to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These measures are primarily
aimed at energy use and waste but there are a limited number of measures in other
sectors. The whole range of types of measures is used, although the use of voluntary
agreements is limited. Additional policies and measures have also been identified in
five countries although existing policies and measures are projected to be sufficient.

Figure 6.3.1:With measures projections for Accession Countries (2010 relative
to 1990

S lo v a k ia

P o l a n d

L a t v ia

H u n g a r y

E s to n ia

C z e c h R e p u b l ic - b a s e

C z e c h R e p u b l ic - h i g h

1 6 ,7

3 1 , 4

7 3 ,3

9 2

9 4

8 5 , 4

9 2

9 4

9 2

9 2

9 2

6 8 , 6

7 5 , 6

C o m m i t m e n t
W it h m e a s u r e s

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

9 0

1 0 0

E m i s s i o n s r e l t o 1 9 9 0 ( 1 9 9 0 = 1 0 0 )

34

Annex I: Contributions of Member States to GHG emission reduction

In the following figures on emission trends and projections domestic measures are taken into
account only. The use of Kyoto Flexible Mechanisms is not yet included in the Monitoring
Mechanism and “carbon sinks” are not taken into account.

Figure A.1 and A2: GHG emission trends and projections for Austria and Belgium

Austria Trends

Austria With measures projections

Austria With additional measures projections

Austria Target

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

Belgium Trends

Belgium With measures projections

Belgium With additional measures projections

Belgium Target

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Figure A.3 and A.4: GHG emission trends and projections for Denmark and Finland

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

Denmark Trends

Denmark With measures projections

Denmark With additional measures projection

Denmark Target

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

i

i

(
s
n
o
s
s
m
e
G
H
G

Finland Trends

Finland With measures projections

Finland With additional measures projections

Finland Target

130

120

110

100

90

80

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Figure A.5 and A.6: GHG emission trends and projections for France and Germany

France Trends

France With measures projections

France With additional measures projections

France Target

)
0
0
1

=
r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

Germany Trends

Germany With measures projections

Germany With additional measures projections

Germany Target

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

110

100

90

80

70

60

35

Figure A.7 and A.8: GHG emission trends and projections for Greece and Ireland

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

140

130

120

110

100

90

Greece Trends

Greece With measures projections

Greece Target

Ireland Trends

Ireland With measures projections

Ireland With additional measures projections

Ireland Target

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Figure A.9 and A.10:GHG emission trends and projections for Italy and Luxembourg

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

Italy Trends

Italy With measures projections

Italy With additional measures projections

Italy Target

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

Luxembourg Trends

Luxembourg With measures projections

Luxembourg Target

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Figure A.11 and A.12: GHG emission trends and projections for The Netherlands and
Portugal

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

Netherlands Trends

Netherlands With measures projections

Netherlands With additional measures projections

Netherlands Target

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

160

150

140

130

120

110

100

Portugal Trends

Portugal With measures projections

Portugal Target

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

36

Figure A.13 and A.14: GHG emission trends and projections for Spain and Sweden

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

150

140

130

120

110

100

)
0
0
1

=

r
a
e
y

e
s
a
B

(
s
n
o
i
s
s
i
m
e
G
H
G

130

120

110

100

90

80

Spain Trends

Spain With measures projections

Spain With additional measures projections

Spain Target

Sweden Trends

Sweden With measures projections

Sweden Target

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

Figure A.15: GHG emission trends and projections for United Kingdom

)
0
0
1
=
r
a
e
y
e
s
a
B

(

i

i

s
n
o
s
s
m
e
G
H
G

United Kingdom Trends

United Kingdom With measures projections

United Kingdom With additional measures projections

United Kingdom Target

120

110

100

90

80

70

0
9
9
1

5
9
9
1

0
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

0
1
0
2

Source: EEA (2002a), EEA (2002b)

37

Annex II: Glossary and abbreviations

Actual progress

Projected progress

ECCP

EC burden sharing

Monitoring mechanism

Sink

Source

CCPMs

CHP

COP

CRF

Actual progress is assessed by the comparison of base
year inventories with the latest available inventories to
establish actual
trends of emissions and by a
comparison with emission objectives at Member State
and Community level. The evaluation is based on
emission inventories of Member States and the
Community.

Projected progress is assessed by the evaluation of
adopted (current) and further additional (planned, or
currently in discussion) policies and measures at both
national and Community level and by a comparison of
projected emissions in 2010 with emission objectives
at Member State
and Community level. This
evaluation is based on emission projections of Member
States and the Community

European Climate Change Programme, a programme
whose goal is to identify and develop all the necessary
elements of an EU strategy to implement the Kyoto
Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol
to the UNFCCC sets different
binding emission targets for a number of Parties
including the European Community (EC). The EC
agreed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 8 %
by 2008-2012, from 1990 levels. This overall target
has been distributed on a differentiated basis to
individual Member States under an ‘EC burden
sharing’ mechanism according to Council Decision
2002/358/EC.

The monitoring mechanism is an instrument to assess
accurately and regularly the extent of progress being
made towards the Community’s commitments under
the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol

Means any process, activity or mechanism which
removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of
a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere

Means any process or activity which releases a
greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of a
greenhouse gas into the atmosphere

Common and Co-ordinated Policies and Measures at
European Community/ Union level

Combined Heat and Power

Conference of the Parties of UNFCCC

Common Reporting Format
inventories

for greenhouse gas

38

DTI

EEA

GDP

GHG

IPCC

LUCF

P&Ms

UNFCCC

TPES

TFC

levels

in 2008-2012, under

Distance to target indicator; the target path is a straight
line from base year emission level (1990) to burden
sharing target
the
assumption that reductions in percent of 1990 levels
would take place linear and accounting for domestic
measures only; the DTI figures in percent show the
deviations between this hypothetical target in a recent
(what should have been achieved) and the
year
emission level
(what has been
reached).

in the same year

European Environment Agency

Gross Domestic Production

Greenhouse gas

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Land Use Change and Forestry

Policies and Measures

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change

Total primary energy supply

Total final consumption
The difference of TPES and TFC equals energy use in
energy industry

39