CO2Monitoring in the Ceramic Industry in the scope of EU ETS

1
CO2-Monitoring in the Ceramic Industry in the
scope of EU ETS

• Katharina Liepach, German Brick and Tile
  Association
• Member of TBE ,
• Member of Cerame Unie
• Köln, 12th May 05

2
Specifics of the ceramic industry

• rough estimation across the EU Member States
  ceramic installations cover 10 of all
  installations and emitt less then 1 of the CO2
• gt many installations, only little emissions
• many SMEs

3
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• First, all possible sources are listed
• calcination of limestone/dolomite in the raw
  material
• limestone for reducing air pollutants
• conventional fossil kiln fuels
• alternative fossil-based kiln fuels and raw
  materials
• biomass kiln fuels (biomass wastes)

4
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• other fuels
• organic material in the clay raw material
• additives used to induce porosity, e.g. sawdust
  or polystyrol
• waste gas scrubbing

5
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• In the following paragraphs only the calcination
  process is covered in depths.
• The rest is missing.

6
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• How should the emissions coming form
• organic material in the clay raw material and
• pore forming agents
• be determined is not dealt with.

7
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• The maximum permissible uncertainty
• of 2.5 when determining the CO2 emissions
  coming form the calcination process is is too
  low.
• MRG, page 21, table 3
• Informative table with typical overall
  uncertainties associated to the determination of
  CO2 emissions from an installation or activity in
  an installation for individual fuel or material
  streams of different magnitudes

8
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• MRG, page 21, table 3
• process emissions from solid raw materials,
  (limestone, dolomite)
• Installations with less than 100 ktonns CO2 per
  year
• 10

9
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• Why 2,5 in Annex X?
• Most installations emitt less than 50 ktonns per
  year, so an overall uncertainty of 12,5 for the
  emissions coming from the raw material is
  resonable.

10
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• Conclusion
• In general the MRG focus on large installations.
• Many information are missing for the ceramic
  industry.
• The uncertainty is too low.

11
Ceramic Annex Annex X

• Thus
• There is the risk that the monitoring will be
  highly expensive for the individual installations
  across the member states. Cost and effect could
  be absolutely disproportional.