1

Large Combustion PlantsEx-post assessment of the LCP DirectiveInitial ex-ante evaluation of the IED – Chapter III and BAT

Daniel Martin-Montalvo AlvarezIndustrial Pollution GroupAir and Climate Change Programme

www.eea.europa.eu

Table of contents - LCP assessment

1. Background of the work-package

2. Objectives 2015-2017

3.The policy evaluation perspective

4. Work plan, timing and constraints

Introduction – background of the workpackage

1. Legal background

• Large Combustion Plants Directive;• Industrial Emissions Directive;• Energy and Climate policy.

2. Related work done or ongoing• EC Emission Inventories’ reports;

• http://forum.eionet.europa.eu/x_reporting-guidelines/library/lcp_reporting/summary_report/

• EEA Reducing air pollution from electricity generating LCPs; • http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications#c14=&c12=&

c7=en&c9=all&c11=5&b_start=0&c13=electricity • Assessment of extent to which the thermal power sector in Member States and the EU has the

potential to facilitate the necessary transition towards long-term EU energy and climate objectives• Ongoing – expected to produce stable drafts by summer

3. LCP dataflow and cleaning of historical data• 2013 reporting – QA/QCed, in a database by July 2015• 2004-2013 integrated database – October 2015

Introduction – objectives of the task

OBJECTIVES OF THE WORK PACKAGE 2015-20171. Ex-post analysis

• Identify the policy effectiveness of the LCP Directive;• Special focus 2007-2014;• Additional effect of the IPPC processes – BREF 2006;• Modulating effect of the various derogations – NERPs, opt-outs, others;• Other variables and barrier effects.

2. Ex-ante analysis• Effect of IED provisions as minimum requirement;• Additional effect of the revised LCP BREF; • Modulating effect of the various derogations;• Other variables and barrier effects.

CONCRETE OBJECTIVES 2015

3. Methodology 4. Stakeholder meetings participation5. Factsheets with first assessment results

Introduction – the meaning of the objectives

1. Methodology• Concrete list of issues that will be analysed – scope and level of detail;• Specific data needs and calculation methods for each of the issues;• Intended to be used for outsiders;• Listing elements which are not possible to tackle due to any constraints and naming of

those;• Includes the identification of adequate stakeholders to consult on the methods (2015)

and in the results (2016-2017)

2. Factsheets with first assessment results• Aiming at testing some of the issues listed in the methodology;• Aiming at understanding levels of detail and type of language to be used in the 2016-

2017 report; • Defining the feasibility of the methods;• Understanding the working methods in terms of layout preparation and provision of

processed data• Enabling a proper peer-review of the methods;• Enabling an easier validation of the methods by the EIONET community.

Introduction – the policy evaluation perspective

1. Key is to include ideas on:

• Other possible means of policy intervention that could reinforce the desired dynamic of the LCP sector – e.g. market based instruments or voluntary schemes

• EU added value brought by the LCP Directive and estimated to be brought by the IED

• Identification of policy-induced changes and non-policy-induced changes in the LCP sector

• Provide good arguments on the usefulness and cost-effectiveness of the Seville process

2. This assessment will not only be a description of past trends and a delivery of numeric prospects

Key evaluation criteria

• Relevance: the extent to which the objectives correspond to needs (within the EU).

• Effectiveness: the extent to which the intervention caused the observed effects and whether or not these effects correspond to the objectives of the intervention.

• Efficiency: an assessment of whether costs associated with the input to an intervention were justified given the effects which have been achieved.

• Coherence: the extent to which a policy intervention complements and supports other policy interventions which may have similar objectives.

• EU added value: the additional value resulting from the EU intervention compared to what could be achieved by Member States at national or regional levels.

Based on draft European Commission evaluation guidance (2013).

Work plan – a three-year work package with Eionet on the loop

2015 – the year of the methods• September- October 2015 – Eionet

consultation/workshop to discuss methods and implementation trial

• December 2015 – Final Methodology paper

2016 – the year of the data processing and report drafting• September 2016 – Eionet consultation for the report

draft;

2017 – publication

EEA partnership for this task - an outstanding team

Leading partners

CONTACT DETAILS

Daniel Martin-Montalvo AlvarezDirect phone: +45 3343 5974

Skype: daniel.eeadaniel.montalvo@eea.europa.eu