RAINS%20review%202004

1
RAINS review 2004
The RAINS model The approach
2
Cost-effectiveness needs integration

• Economic/energy development (projections)
• State of emission controls, available
  technologies, costs
• Atmospheric processes
• Environmental sensitivities

3
The RAINS modelScenario analysis mode
Energy/agriculture projections
Driving forces
Emission control options
Emissions
Costs
Atmospheric dispersion
4
A multi-pollutant/multi-effect framework
Primary PM
Health impacts- PM ?
Health impacts- PM ?




SO2 NOx VOC NH3
? ? ? ?
via secondary aerosols via secondary aerosols via secondary aerosols via secondary aerosols









Acidification ? ? ?
Eutrophication ? ?



- Ozone ? ?







Vegetation damage - Ozone ? ?


5
RAINS A modular approach
Environmental impacts
6
Integrated assessment in CAFE with the RAINS
model
Energy/agriculture projections
Driving forces
Emission control options
Emissions
Costs
Atmospheric dispersion
Environmental targets
Health and environmental impacts
7
Per-capita costs Scenario H1
8
Uniform or effect-based scenarios?
9
Cost-effectiveness vs. cost-benefit

• Cost-effectiveness
• Find least-cost solution to achieve exogenously
  given environmental policy targets.
• Decision makers set targets and decide about
  appropriate balance with costs
• Cost-benefit analysis
• The optimal balance between costs and measures is
  internalized by the model.
• No room for exogenous decision maker.
• Consensus on quantification of benefits required.

10
The cost-effectiveness approach
Models help to separate policy and technical
issues
Decision makers
Decide about Ambition level (environmental targets) Level of acceptable risk Willingness to pay
Models
Identify cost-effective and robust measures Balance controls over different countries, sectors and pollutants Regional differences in Europe Side-effects of present policies Maximize synergies with other air quality problems Search for robust strategies
11
System boundaries

• Driving forces of air pollution (energy use,
  transport, agriculture)
• are driven by other issues, and
• have impacts on other issues too.
• Critical boundaries
• Greenhouse gas emissions and climate change
  policies
• Agricultural policies
• Other air pollution impacts on water and soil
  (nitrogen deposition over seas, nitrate in
  groundwater, etc.)
• Quantification of AP effects where scientific
  basis is not robust enough

12

• Interactions between emission controls for air
  pollution and greenhouse gases
• A sneak preview of the RAINS extension to GHGs

13
Reference case (REF)

• Pre-Kyoto energy projections for 2020
• Air pollution control according to recent EU
  legislation (NEC Directive, LCP Directive,
  Auto-Oil, etc.)

14
Scenario 1

• CO2 control in the power sector
• Cost-effective measures to reduce CO2 emissions
  in the power sector by 15
• Subject to exogenous electricity demand
• Recent EU legislation for air pollutants

15
CO2 reduction measures applied in Scenario 1
16
Changes in emissionscompared to REF, EU-23
CO2Mt
SO2kt
PM2.5kt
NOxkt
Netherlands total emissions (grey) are shown for
reference
17
Emission control costs(billion /yr, compared to
REF)
Control of Scenario 1 Scenario 1

CO2 3.5
CH4 0
GHGs 3.5













SO2 -1.4
NOx -0.3
PM -0.6
Air pollutants -2.3

Total 1.2
18
Differences in premature deaths (cases/year,
compared to REF)
19
Scenario 2

• Multi-GHG control
• In each country, the equivalent CO2 reductions
  of Scenario 1 are achieved with CO2 and CH4
  controls
• Recent EU legislation for air pollutants

20
CO2 reduction measures applied in Scenarios 1
and 2
21
CH4 reduction measures applied in Scenario 2
22
Changes in emissionscompared to REF, EU-23
CO2Mt
SO2kt
CH4
PM2.5kt
NOxkt
Netherlands total emissions (black) are shown
for reference
23
Emission control costs(billion /yr, compared to
REF)
Control of Scenario 1 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 2

CO2 3.5 2.1
CH4 0 -1.2
GHGs 3.5 0.9

SO2 -1.4 -1.2
NOx -0.3 -0.2
PM -0.6 -0.4
Air pollutants -2.3 -1.8

Total 1.2 -0.9
24
Scenario 3

• Increased biomass use in households
• Shift to biomass use for domestic heating10 of
  light fuel oil is replaced by biomass

25
Changes in emissionscompared to REF, EU-23
CO2Mt
SO2kt
CH4
PM2.5kt
NOxkt
Netherlands total emissions (black) are shown
for reference
26
Differences in premature deaths(cases/year,
compared to REF)