Norwegian Emission projections

1
Norwegian Emission projections

• Facts and experiences

2
Outline

• Methologies and models
• Authorities involved
• Main characteristics and challenges
• LUCF projections
• (Reporting issues)

3
Methodology in use

• CO2 projections are based on a macroeconomic
  model called MSG
• An emission calculation model is included in MSG
• Projections for non- CO2 emissions are based on
  information from concerned sectors and consistent
  with macroeconomic projections
• Emission projections are (as a rule) fully
  updated every 4 years
• News
• Updated projections (2010/ 2020) will be
  published in a White paper in Nov. 2004

4
Emission calculation model

• Different pollutants (CO2, NOX, SO2 and VOC) are
  disaggregated by source and sector and specified
  in the model
• Emission are projected as a function of activity
  data and emission coeffisients.
• Emission coeffisients are calibrated to a base
  year, and emissions are projected by taking into
  account effects of environmental instruments or
  policies that are already implemented or decided
• Microinformation are used as guidance to adjust
  or overrule model projections

5
Emission model..cont.

• Statistics Norway develop and update the Emission
  calculation model in collaboration with The
  Norwegian State Pollution Control
• Emission calculation model are updated on the
  basis of historical emission data and takes into
  account the effects of adopted environmental
  policies, technological change etc.
• Update of model is done every fourth or fifth year

6
Authorities involved

• Ministry of Finance are responsible for the
  production and publishing of the official
  emission projections, and activity data fed into
  the MSG ( including energy data)
• The Norwegian State Pollution control are
  responsible for the production of emission
  projections of non- CO2 gases, and also for
  publishing emisson by source for all GHG- gases
• Ministry of Oil and Energy are responsible for
  the annual projections of the emissions from the
  Petroleum sector
• Ministry of Agriculture and The Norwegian State
  Pollution are responsible for the LUCF
  projections

7
LUCF projections

• In Norway there are no permanent institutional
  arrangement for making projection on GHG
  emission/removals from LUCF sector
• Ministry of Agriculture and The Norwegian State
  Pollution are responsible for the LUCF
  projections
• Norwegian forest has a long rotation period
  (70-120 years), thus the projection is mainly
  driven by past forest management practice which
  will result in continuing gross increment the
  next 10-20 years
• The projection is based on following assumptions
  - continuation of increase in gross increment
  - continuation of current harvesting rate - no
  changes in natural dieoff - no change in forest
  policy - soil carbon and non-CO2 GHGs not
  included

8
Main characteristics of the Norwegian model

• Emissions projections consistent with overall
  macroeconomic projections
• Combination of a top down and a buttom up
  approach
• Macroapproach to emissions mainly driven by
  energy use (CO2)
• Micro aproach
• non- CO2 emissions
• processing industry
• road traffic
• petroleum sector
• Micro level and micro information more relevant
  and available for 2010 than 2020

9
Challenges

• Intersection between macro and micro level
• How to ensure consistensy with macrolevel and
  activity data fed into the macro model, and
  emission projections when relying on a large
  degree of micro- information and information
  gathered from the branches themselves ?
• How to deal with voluntary agreements in
  projections and scenarios when measures and
  emisson reductions would be achieved anyway?
• How to interprete the different scenarios in the
  reporting guidelines ?

10
Challenges Land-Use Change and Forestry

• Difficult to project harvesting rate, since this
  is mainly driven by the international prices on
  timber
• Difficult to predict eventually increased in the
  natural dieoff (decay) when the rate of old
  forests increase due to reduces harvesting rate
• Difficult to predict changes in soil carbon stock
  due to changed harvesting rate
• Difficult to project effect of past measures
  (improved forest management)
• Difficult to predict carbon changes in marginal
  forests (forest in mountain areas and in northern
  parts of Norway)