Report of the Netherlands 2002 ontinental air pollution...

Emission ceilings acidification andcontinental air pollution Report of the Netherlands 2002

www.vrom.nl

Publication of: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment> 8, Rijnstraat > 2515 XP > The Hague > www.vrom.nl/international

Ministry of VROM >Where the rural and urban environment as well government buildings really matter.Where policies are developed, implemented and enforced.Knowing that, in a small country like the Netherlands, it pays to think big.

vrom

02.

1107

/04-

03

Summary 05

1 Introduction 09

2 Emissions 112.1 SO2 132.2 NOX 152.3 NH3 192.4 VOC 202.5 Fine particulate matter 23

3 Environmental quality 253.1 Health 303.2 Nature 33

4 Conclusions 394.1 Emissions 394.2 Environmental quality 404.3 Research 41

Annex: Reviews of the Gothenburg protocol and the NEC Directive 431 Gothenburg Protocol 432 NEC Directive 453 RAINS model 46

Contents

04

Shipping is the least polluting form of transport on a per tonne of freight basis.

On the other hand it has the highest emissions per tonne of fuel used.

Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and of theCouncil of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings forcertain atmospheric pollutants (hereafter referred to as theNEC Directive) requires member states to report by 31December 2002 on how they intend to implement their nationalemission ceilings for 2010. The emission ceilings are intendedto attain certain levels of environmental quality for the protec-tion of human health and nature. The environmental qualitylevels for 2010 represent interim objectives on the path towardssustainable levels in the longer term.

This document comprises the report of the Netherlands asrequired by the EU. An evaluation was made of the objectives ofthe Dutch ‘Acidification and Continental Air Pollution’ theme, inpart to analyse how the Netherlands can meet its emission cei-lings. This evaluation was completed in 2001, and led to theinclusion of new national emissions objectives, emissions tar-gets and environmental quality objectives in the Fourth NationalEnvironmental Policy Plan (NEPP4). This report looks at howthe Netherlands can meet its international emission obligationsfrom the perspective of Dutch policy on acidification and conti-nental air pollution (the NEPP4 objectives).

This report will be sent not only to the European Commissionbut also, by way of information, to the House of Representativesof the Dutch Parliament. The report shows that policy agreed todate will not be sufficient to bring emissions within the ceilings.Additional policy will therefore be necessary. The present report considers the measures needed to bridgethis gap so that the international emission ceilings and thenational objectives can be met. The purpose of this report is notto actually set new policies. Decisions will be made in 2003 onhow the emission ceilings in the NEC Directive will be met,based on in-depth studies and consultations with the targetgroups. This process will commence shortly and will last untilthe end of 2003 when an ‘Implementation MemorandumEmission Ceilings for Acidification and Continental Air Pollution2003’ will be drawn up. This Implementation Memorandum 2003will be sent both to the European Commission and the House ofRepresentatives of the Dutch Parliament. There is still a greatdeal of work to be done on ensuring that the necessary instru-ments (legislation and implementing regulations, covenants,etc.) are in place and the additional measures are implemented.

1990 2000 2010 Forecast Prognose NEC- NEPP4-

excl. incl. Direc- objec-extra extra tive)a) tivemea- mea-

suresd) sures

SO2 202 92 70 46 50 46NOx 570 413 289 270 260 231NH3 232 152 132c) 114 128 100VOC 492 278 220 177 185 163(155)b)

a) The emission ceilings for the Netherlands in the UN/ECE Gothenburg Protocolare equal to those in the NEC Directive for SO2 and NH3 and 6 ktonnes higherfor NOx and for VOC.

b) The lower value of 155 ktonnes/year will apply if EU directives are implementedfor mopeds, scooters and motorcycles and for solvent-based products such aspaints and coatings, adhesives, cosmetics, etc.

c) This figure is 5 ktonnes higher than the forecast in the Milieubalans (RIVM‘Environmental Balance’) 2002. The difference is due to the inclusion in thisreport of the NH3 emissions from traffic.

d) The reduction in NOx emissions as a result of the introduction of NOxemissions trading for large industrial sources is included in this forecast.

The RIVM was asked to calculate for this report the results ofthe policy agreed to date in terms of the emissions and theenvironmental quality. It was also asked to do the same for aset of 12 (groups of) planned measures and options for addi-tional measures, as included in the Memorandum ‘Samevalues, new forms’ (see box). In estimating the potential reduc-tion the RIVM disregarded, at the request of DGM (Directorate-General for Environmental Protection of the Dutch Ministry ofHousing, Spatial Planning and the Environment), the issue ofwhether the measures are socially acceptable or implementa-ble. These criteria were applied by the Ministry after the RIVMhad made its calculations. As a result, adjustments were madein two areas to the potential emission reductions calculated byRIVM. Firstly, policy options 5 (kilometre-based charge for carsand heavy goods vehicles and reduction in speed limit) and 6(stack gas NOx removal for maritime shipping and shore-based

05

Summary

Table 1 Emissions for 1990 and 2000, forecast emissions in 2010 after

implementation of agreed policy, forecast emissions including additional

measures, the emission ceilings in the NEC Directive and the NEPP4 objectives

for the Netherlands (ktonnes/year)

generators in Dutch ports) were not included. And secondly, thereductions estimated by the RIVM were scaled down for a num-ber of measures, because it seemed unlikely that the potentialemission reductions could be achieved in full by 2010. As aresult the emissions reductions presented in this report for theadditional measures are lower than those presented by theRIVM in its report (Milieu- en Natuureffecten StrategischAkkoord CDA, VVD, LPF) on the calculated environmentalimpact of the policy agreement made between the coalitionpartners of the new government.

Table 1 takes account of calculations of emissions performed bythe RIVM (Netherlands Environmental Agency) on the basis of apolicy evaluation. The table shows that, for each of the pollu-tants, the policy adopted to date is insufficient to bring emis-sions within the ceilings specified in the NEC Directive or theNEPP4 objectives. Additional measures will therefore be neces-sary.The additional measures considered in this report are forecastto bring the emissions of three of the pollutants within the NECDirective ceiling, but the NOx emissions will miss the ceiling by10 ktonnes. The accelerated introduction of the EURO 5 stan-dards by the EU would help the Netherlands to meet its NOxceiling. The forecast emissions based on policy already adoptedare slightly above the NH3 emission ceiling. However after allo-wance is made for measures currently planned, emissions willbe brought within the ceiling. In the case of VOC the measuresconsidered only just bring emissions within the ceiling. An EUVOC product directive which regulates all the main householdproducts and tightens the emission standards for mopeds,scooters and motorcycles would be needed to ensure that theNetherlands can comply with its VOC ceiling. SO2 is the onlypollutant for which the additional measures will bring the 2010emissions within the NEPP4 objective.

Table 2 shows the results of the environmental quality calcula-tions carried out by the RIVM. The greatest threat to health ari-ses from ozone and fine particulate matter. It is estimated thatexposure to these pollutants will in 2010 result in the prema-ture death of several thousand people in the Netherlands. Theentire population will be exposed to concentrations of fine par-ticulate matter in excess of the indicative limit value for 2010.We have already reached a situation where no-one is any longerexposed to concentrations in excess of the guide value for

ozone. The fact that (serious) effects are nevertheless ascribedto ozone is attributable to the fact that there is no safe thres-hold below which the health effects are nil. The same applies tofine particulate matter. As far as NO2 is concerned, exceedan-ces of the limit values may still be occurring in 2010 and peoplemay still be being exposed to concentrations in excess of thelimit value. This is partly as a result of the reductions beingachieved for NOx. The EU Directive envisages that the remainingexceedances of the NO2 limit value can be dealt with by meansof local measures. When the health risks to the population arequantified using the actual exposure and the most recent dose-response data for the Netherlands, it can be seen that that therisks related to PM10 will gradually decline and that ozone-rela-ted risks will change little.There will be a reduction in the excess deposition of acidifyingagents and nitrogen to natural ecosystems and habitats.Because of the very high deposition rates from which we arestarting, these reductions will only have a limited impact interms of the percentage of the area of such lands with full pro-tection from excessive acid and nitrogen deposition for theNetherlands as a whole. However, the reduction in the excessdeposition is very large, and this is likely to lead to an incre-asing variety of flora and fauna (biodiversity). In the West andNorth of the Netherlands the percentage of ecosystems protec-ted will reach 50-60%. The deposition objectives of the NEPP4all come within reach. The same does not apply to all the inte-rim environmental quality objectives of the NEC Directive forthe Netherlands. The NEC Directive sets an objective of redu-cing by 50% the area over which sustainable levels of aciddeposition are exceeded in 2010 relative to 1990. This environ-mental quality objective of the NEC Directive will not be achie-ved. In 2010 20% of the area will be protected compared withless than 10% in 1990.

06

07

1990 2001 2010Forecast Forecast NEPP4

excl. extra incl. 12 emissionmeasures measures objective

DGMd)

HEALTHPopulation exposedb)

NO2, annual mean conc. ›40 µg/m3 3.9 mill. 0.4 mill. 3,000 0 0O3, ›25 days 10.8 mill. 0 0 0 0PM10, ›20 µg/m3 14.9 mill. 16.5 16.8 mill. 16.8 mill. 16.8 mill.Most serious health effectsO3, premature death 2800 3000 3000 3000PM10, premature death 1600 1200 1200 1200PM10, hospitalisation 2200 1700 1700 1700

NATUREAcid depositionMean (mol/ha.yr) 5100 3250 2550 2300 2300c)

Total excess deposition (Mmol/year) 4930 2330 1490 1190 1140Percentage protection ‹10 10 10 20 20 Nitrogen depositionMean (mol/ha.yr) 3310 2400 1900 1700 1650c)

Total excess deposition (Mmol/year) 2800 1580 990 740 680Percentage protection ‹10 10 20 20 20Ozone Excess exposure (AOT40, µg/m3.hr) 18,000 7,000 5,700 6,000 6,000

a) The forecast concentrations, depositions, exposures and effects have been calculated on the basis of the long-term mean meteorology. Where the actual meteoro-logy is different the figures will work out differently. In the last few years, for example, actual ozone concentrations have been significantly lower.

b) These are the numbers exposed to the background concentration. Those living next to motorways and in busy streets in towns will experience higher concentra-tions. It has been estimated, for example, that the number of people living next to motorways exposed to an annual mean NO2 concentration of more than 40µg/m3 in 2001 needs to be increased by 0.2 million to allow for this effect.

c) The objectives for acid deposition and nitrogen deposition have been recalculated to allow for improved estimates of emissions and depositions. The depositionobjectives were calculated from the NEPP4 emissions objectives and are interim objectives on the way towards an ultimate situation in which 95% of ecosystemsin the Netherlands are completely protected (NEPP4, pp. 83-85).

d) These figures are based on estimated emissions allowing for the full introduction of the 12 (sets of) measures as indicated by DGM. The difference with the emis-sions as forecasted inclusive of extra measures for SO2 , NOx, NH3 and VOC is 2,16, 10 and -5 ktonnes respectively.

Table 2 Calculated a) exposure of the Dutch population to concentrations greater than the limit values for 2010, the most serious health effects and (excess) exposure

of ecosystems in the Netherlands

1. Implement action plan for abating SO2 emissions fromindustry, the energy sector and refineries.

2. Reduction sulphur content of fuels for mobile machinery,tractors and diesel locomotives.

3. Reduction NOx emissions from inland waterway shipping.4. Euro 4/Euro 5 tax incentives for heavy goods vehicles.5. Non-technical measures for traffic (kilometre-based tax

for cars and heavy goods vehicles, speed limit reduction). 6. Reduction NOx emissions from maritime shipping and

shore-based generators in Dutch ports.7. Introduce NOx emissions trading for large facilities in

industry, the energy sector, refineries and the waste processing sector.

8. Tighten the Emission Limits (Combustion Plants) Decreeand the Dutch Emission Guidelines for gas engines andother combustion plants.

9. Tighten the Heating Equipment (Type approval) Decreeand increase the percentage of High- Efficiency combi-boilers.

10. Implement VOC reduction plan or introduce VOC emissions trading for industry, the energy sector andrefineries.

11. EU VOC Products Directive.12. Additional measures to reduce ammonia in agriculture

(incorporation of manure into the soil, modify cattle feed,measures in dairy stalls)

8

The European Commission is preparing a directive to reduce VOC emissions frompaints. European measures are also needed for other consumer products such ascosmetics, car products, cleaning products and adhesives.

The 12 (groups of) measures for which the RIVM was asked to calculate the possible emission reductions and their effectson human health and ecosystems in the Netherlands

Emission ceilings After the UN/ECE Gothenburg Protocol1 to the Convention onLong-Range Transboundary Air Pollution was signed on 1 December 1999, the EU agreed national emission ceilings forsulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ammonia (NH3) andvolatile organic compounds (VOC) for the year 2010 (see Table 1.1). These emission ceilings are included in the ‘NationalEmission Ceilings’ Directive2 (NEC Directive).

Report to the European CommissionThe NEC Directive requires member states to draw up nationalprogrammes in order to achieve the national emission ceilingsin the Directive by 2010. “Member states are required to reporton their 2001 emissions no later than 31 December 2002, fore-cast emissions for 2010 and the national programmes. Thenational programmes shall include information on adopted andenvisaged policies and measures and quantified estimates ofthe effect of these policies and measures on emissions of thepollutants in 2010”.This document is the Dutch report to the European Commissionand the European Environment Agency, as required under theNEC Directive. With the document also the Netherlands

Parliament is informed of progress in implementing the inter-national emission ceilings and the national NEPP4 objectives.On the basis of policy adopted to date (i.e. up to mid-2002)these emission ceilings and objectives will not be achieved. Thepresent report considers how this gap can be bridged so thatthe international emission ceilings and the national objectivescan be met. This document will not therefore actually adopt anynew policies. The government will make decisions in this regardin 2003 and will submit its proposals to Parliament in an,‘Implementation Memorandum Emission Ceilings forAcidification and Continental Air Pollution 2003’.

The 4C project In order to put together this report, the 4C project (FourCeilings, Foresee) was devised. An inventory was made of policyalready adopted, planned policy and possible further policyoptions. The RIVM was then asked to calculate the effects of apackage of 12 (groups of) planned and optional measures (seebox) on the emissions and on environmental quality. The resultsof the RIVM calculations were used to predict whether it will bepossible with the help of additional policies to abate the emis-sions in 2010 to below the emission ceilings in the NEC Directive.

9

1.Introduction

1980 1990 2000 2001 2010 RIVM Gothenburg NEC NEPP4

Forecasta) Protocol Directive objective

SO2 481 202 92 89 70 50 50 46 NOx 596 570 413 410 289 266 260 231 NH3 234 232 152 148 132 128 128 100 VOC 569 492 278 271 219 190 185 163(155)b)

1 The procedure for ratifying the Gothenburg Protocol has not yet been comple-

ted. On receipt of the advice of the Council of State, the consent of Parliament

will be sought for the ratification of the Protocol. This is expected in May 2003.

2 Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 23 October

2001 concerning national emission ceilings for certain pollutants, OJ L309/22,

27 November 2001.

Table 1.1 Emissions for 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2001, forecast emissions in 2010 after implementation of agreed policy, the emission ceilings of the Gothenburg Protocol and the National Emission Ceilings (NEC) Directive and the NEPP4 objectives for the Netherlands (ktonnes/year)

a) Forecast made by the RIVM for this report, based on the ‘Reference Scenario’, and calculations carried out for the Parliament considering the issue of ammonia in late 2001 / early 2002. The NH3 emissions are 5 ktonnes higher than given in the 2002 Milieubalans (Environmental Balance). The difference was caused by the lackof an estimate of ammonia emissions from traffic. In 2000 these emissions were estimated by the RIVM to be 3 ktonnes.

b) The lower value of 155 ktonnes/year will apply if directives are implemented in the EU for mopeds, scooters and motorcycles and for solvent-based products such aspaints and coatings, adhesives, cosmetics, etc.

Structure of reportThis report is intended not only for the European Commissionbut also for the Netherlands Parliament. Its scope is thereforerather broader than would be strictly necessary if its sole purpose were to report to the European Commission on theNEC Directive. The report is structured as follows. Chapter 2 (Emissions)begins by explaining briefly how, partly in response to theGothenburg Protocol and the NEC Directive, new objectives andtargets for the Netherlands were formulated for the ‘acidifica-tion and continental air pollution’ theme. These objectives andtargets, which were included in the NEPP4, serve as bench-

marks in looking at the emissions resulting from policy alreadyagreed and the extent to which these emissions could be redu-ced if extra measures are taken. Chapter 3 looks at the expec-ted environmental quality and the way it would be affected bythe package of 12 measures. The environmental quality is ofcourse directly linked with the emissions, and affects the healthof people and the quality of nature. The environmental quality iscompared with the environmental quality objectives set in theNEPP4 in relation to human health and nature, and the environ-mental quality objectives in the NEC Directive. Chapter 4 summarises the legislation, covenants and other policy instruments planned and already being implemented and whichare analysed in this report. The chapter also draws a number ofconclusions with regard to the environmental quality and further research needed. An Annex is included to inform theNetherlands Parliament of the forthcoming evaluation ofEuropean air pollution policy. It considers the reviews of theGothenburg Protocol and the NEC Directive due in 2004/2005.These reviews are already actively being prepared. The emis-sions requirements will be evaluated in these reviews, and willhave regard to the desirability of reaching the NEC environmen-tal quality objectives for 2010. The ECE and the EU are collabo-rating closely together to extend the existing approach to airpollution in Europe, with its focus on cost-effectiveness, toinclude fine particulate matter and climate change.

10

1. Implement action plan for abating SO2 emissions fromindustry, the energy sector and refineries.

2. Reduction sulphur content of fuels for mobile machinery,tractors and diesel locomotives.

3. Reduction NOx emissions from inland waterway shipping.4. Euro 4/Euro 5 tax incentives for heavy goods vehicles.5. Non-technical measures for traffic (kilometre-based tax

for cars and heavy goods vehicles, speed limit reduction). 6. Reduction NOx emissions from maritime shipping and

shore-based generators in Dutch ports.7. Introduce NOx emissions trading for large facilities in

industry, the energy sector, refineries and the waste processing sector.

8. Tighten the Emission Limits (Combustion Plants) Decreeand the Dutch Emission Guidelines for gas engines andother combustion plants.

9. Tighten the Heating Equipment (Type approval) Decreeand increase the percentage of High- Efficiency combi-boilers.

10. Implement VOC reduction plan or introduce VOC emissions trading for industry, the energy sector andrefineries.

11. EU VOC Products Directive.12. Additional measures to reduce ammonia in agriculture

(incorporation of manure into the soil, modify cattle feed,measures in dairy stalls)

3 Potentieel effect op emissie SO2 NOx, NH3, VOS en PM10 en kosten van doorDGM aangedragen beleidsopties (Potential effect of policy options suggestedby DGM on the emissions of SO2 NOx, NH3, VOS en PM10, and their costs), RIVMreport (Dutch) no. 725501008, 2003. (www.rivm.nl).

4 Gezondheids- en natuureffecten van verschillende milieuambities in 2010(Health and ecosystem effects of different environmental ambitions, RIVMreport (Dutch) no. 725501007, 2003. (www.rivm.nl).

The 12 (groups of) measures for which the RIVM was askedto calculate the possible emission reductions3 and theireffects on human health and ecosystems4 in the Netherlands

In this chapter we consider the expected emissions of thevarious pollutants on the basis of policy already agreed and thereduction that is likely to be achieved towards meeting the NECceilings through planned and other possible measures. Weshall also consider to what extent the various target groups areon course to meet their targets (Sections 2.1 - 2.5). We shallbegin, however, by looking briefly at the NEPP4 emissionsobjectives and targets, the Policy overview of the theme acidifi-cation and continental air pollution, the recent Memorandum‘Same values, new forms: Environmental policy 2002-2006’ andthe consequences of the new guidelines on the internationalreporting of emissions.

Emission ceilings, emissions objectives and targetsWell before the Netherlands committed itself, through theGothenburg Protocol and the NEC Directive, to internationalemissions ceilings for 2010, it embarked on an evaluation of itsacidification objectives. One of the purposes of this evaluationwas to consider what commitments could be undertaken at theinternational level. The evaluation also examined the steps theNetherlands would have to take to meet these commitments. Inorder to ensure that the mandatory international ceilings coulddefinitely be met, a safety margin was incorporated in the emis-sion objectives. The national emissions objectives in the NEPP4were therefore set at a level 10% below the international emis-sion ceilings. The national emissions objective for NH3 was setat a level more than 10% below the international emission cei-ling, because the deposition rate for this substance after it isemitted is relatively high compared with other acidifying andeutrophying air pollutants, and it therefore causes the mostdamage to ecosystems in the Netherlands. The overall emis-sions objectives were disaggregated to the ‘target group’ level,to give ‘emissions targets’ (see Table 2.1). The emissions objec-tives and the targets for 2010 are included in the NEPP4. Unlikethe emission ceilings in the Gothenburg Protocol and the NECDirective, which are mandatory, the NEPP4 objectives and tar-gets are objectives which the parties have to endeavour tomeet.

Policy overview The NEPP4 could not of course give all the background to theevaluation of the acidification objectives and the new objectivesfor the theme acidification and continental air pollution. This was the purpose of the ‘Policy overview of the theme acidifica

SO2 NOx NH3 VOS

Industry 2Energy } 30 } 65 } 60RefineriesHouseholds 1 7 7 26 (25)Services and Construction 1 3 26 (23)Agriculture 1 6 86 2Transport 13 150 5 49 (45)

Total 46 231a) 100b) 163 (155)c)

a) For the ‘agriculture’ and ‘services and construction’ target groups, policy isaimed at broadly halving emissions relative to their 1995 level. The NOx emis-sions for these target groups may have been underestimated, and will be recal-culated. This could result in a total target for these two groups of up to 14 kton-nes instead of the present 9 ktonnes.

b) The NH3 objective may need to be corrected as a result of research beingundertaken into the ‘NH3 gap’. The NH3 emissions from traffic are subject tofurther research.

c) In order to meet this VOC objective, EU directives for products containing VOC(paints and coatings, adhesives, cosmetics, etc.) and for motorcycles, scootersand mopeds will be needed. In the absence of such directives the targets forhouseholds, services and construction, and transport will be 26, 26 and 49ktonnes respectively, compared with 25, 23 and 45 ktonnes if directives areenacted. The VOC target for the industry, refineries and energy sectors hasbeen set at 60 ktonnes. The evaluation of the VOC emissions targets may resultin a target of at most 65 ktonnes.

tion and continental air pollution: Towards sustainable levels forhuman health and nature’ 5, published in October 2001.

‘Same values, new forms’On 4 November 2002 the State Secretary of the Ministry ofHousing, Spatial Planning and the Environment presented thememorandum ‘Same values, new forms: environmental policy2002-2006’, on behalf of the various Ministers/State Secretariesresponsible for the NEPP4, to the House of Representatives. Inthis document the government indicated the actions it intendsto carry out during the coming years to fulfil its environmental

11

2. Emissions

Table 2.1 Emissions targets by target group for 2010 (ktonnes) for the ‘acidifica-tion and continental air pollution’ theme

5 (in Dutch) Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment 17529/187

ambitions within the framework of the Coalition Agreement ofthis government. The Memorandum also contains the gover-nment’s response to the Milieubalans 20026.In this Milieubalans the RIVM concluded that the policy so faradopted was not sufficient to achieve the emission ceilings forSO2, NOx, and VOC for 2010 laid down in the EU/NEC Directive.The ceiling for NH3 looks attainable. Existing policy is alsoinsufficient to meet the EU air quality limit values for NO2 andfine particulate matter everywhere in the Netherlands. TheRIVM7 considers that the agreements set forth in the CoalitionAgreement have little effect on the forecasts for acidifyingemissions in 2010. The effects of many of the measures, suchas the withdrawal of the kilometre-based charge and thepostponement of the closure of the Borssele atomic power sta-tion, largely cancel each other out.Additional policy needs to be formulated for all 4 NEC Directivepollutants. In December 2002 the government will publish areview of possible further measures to meet the emission cei-lings: this document ‘Emission ceilings acidification and conti-nental air pollution: Report of the Netherlands 2002’ . In 2003the government will decide on the measures it intends to adopt.Its decisions will be submitted to Parliament in the form of an‘Implementation Memorandum Emission Ceilings forAcidification and Continental Air Pollution 2003’. The gover-nment also indicated in the memorandum ‘Same values, newforms’ that it would be looking again at how the emission objec-tives are distributed between the various target groups.

Guidelines for reporting emissionsThe RIVM, the CBS and TNO have long been reporting emis-sions in the Netherlands using the ‘Netherlands territory’method. This involves identifying all emissions fromNetherlands territory and summing them. There is a logic tothis approach in that these are the emissions which can be inf-luenced by the Netherlands. They are also the emissions which,together with transboundary air pollution and natural backg-round levels, determine Dutch air quality and deposition.International reporting needs to conform to internationallyagreed guidelines. International agreement was recently achie-ved on harmonised methods of reporting emissions of acidifyingsubstances, continental air pollutants and the gases responsi-ble for climate change. There are a number of differencesbetween the emissions calculated according to the Netherlandsterritory method and the emissions based on the international

guidelines in the transport sector, particularly for maritimeshipping in inland waters, but also for air transport and inlandwaterway shipping. The main difference is that according to theinternational guidelines the emissions from maritime shippingare not included in the national totals. This is particularlyimportant for SO2 and NOx, because maritime shipping wasincluded in the national NEPP4 objectives and the disaggrega-ted figures for the target groups. In the Policy overview, theemissions from maritime shipping for SO2 and NOx for 2010were estimated to be 9 and 27 ktonnes respectively. This wouldseem to constitute grounds for revising the targets for SO2 andNOx. This will only be done next year, however, in the 2003Implementation Memorandum, as announced in ‘Same values,new forms’.The emissions, forecasts and targets which appear in thisreport are all based on the Netherlands territory method.During the coming year, a study will be made of the precise dif-ferences between the Netherlands territory method and theinternational guidelines. The intention is that the new interna-tionally accepted guidelines for emissions inventories will beintroduced in the Netherlands in 2003.The changes to emissions inventories next year will involveremoving the emissions from maritime shipping. If as a resultother sources will be allowed to increase correspondingly, pol-lutant concentrations and deposition rates in the Netherlandswill increase. This will mean greater damage to human healthand to ecosystems. Also, EU quality standards will be more dif-ficult to achieve.

Discrepancies with the RIVM calculationsIn Sections 2.1 to 2.5 we shall look to see to what extent thetarget groups are on course to meet their targets for each pol-lutant. Use has been made for this purpose of calculations bythe RIVM of the expected reductions resulting from a packageof measures (see box, Chapter 1) specified by DGM(Directorate-General for Environmental Protection of the DutchMinistry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment). Thereductions calculated for two of the options in this package, i.e.option 5 (non-technical traffic measures) and option 6 (reduc-tion in emissions from maritime shipping) have not been inclu-ded. The reason for omitting option 5 is that it is at this moment

12

6 RIVM, ISBN 9014088671, Bilthoven, 20027 RIVM: Beoordeling Strategisch Akkoord CDA, VVD en LPF, 2002

uncertain how matters in regard to non-technical traffic meas-ures (kilometre-based charges, speed limit of 100 km/hr andkilometre-based charge for goods traffic on the German model)will develop. The reasons for excluding the calculated reduc-tions for maritime shipping are an initiative by the EuropeanCommission to tackle the use of high-sulphur fuels inshore andin harbours, and the fact that with effect from next year a largeproportion of the emissions from maritime shipping will not beincluded in Dutch emissions. There are a number of othermeasures, particularly for NOx and VOC, which involve ambi-tious, though technically feasible, reductions in emissions, forwhich the RIVM assumed replacement of all existing installa-tions by 2010. It seems unlikely that these large cuts in emis-sions can be achieved in full. For these two pollutants a lowerlimit (maximum reduction) and an upper limit (minimum reduc-tion) have therefore been assumed for the emissions.The RIVM did not make a forecast of the NH3 emissions for traf-fic. The forecast emissions in 2010 are taken as 5 ktonnes, thesame as the target. Furthermore, the emission reduction resul-ting from the introduction of low-emissions housing for cattlehave not been included, partly because during the passage of

the livestock farming and housing (ammonia emissions) decreethrough Parliament in late 2001 / early 2002 it was agreed thatthis sector would be excluded, and partly because the incre-mental effect of this measure is not very cost-effective.

2.1 SO2

Recent trendsSince 1990 SO2 emissions have fallen by 54% (by 81% since1980). This is mainly due to switching to lower-sulphur fuels,reductions in the sulphur content of fuels and the scrubbing offlue gases (flue gas desulphurisation) (see Table 2.2). The regulations which implement these policies are the EmissionsLimits (Combustion Plants) Decrees (‘BEES A’ and ‘BEES B’),the Environment & Industry Target Group Policy, the DutchEmission Guidelines, orders in council pursuant to Section 8.40of the Environmental Management Act for a number of indus-trial sectors, modifications to environmental permits made bythe provinces and municipalities, reductions in emissions fromtraffic resulting from EU legislation and the Sulphur Content ofFuels Decree.

13

1980 1990 2000 2010 Forecast Forecast NEPP4

excl. extra incl. extra targetpolicy policy

Industry (includingrefineries, Energya) 433 168 65 52 30 30 Transport 32 29 24 15 13 13 Agriculture 5 1 0 1 1 1 Services andConstructionb) 6 3 2 1 1 1 Households 7 1 1 1 1 1

Total 481 202 92 70 46 46

a) Including waste processing sector.

b) Including waste water collection and processing plants.

Table 2.2 Emissions (1980, 1990 and 2000), forecasts and targets for 2010 for SO2 (ktonnes)

14

Emissions from maritime shipping, both inshore and at sea, account for 13% of

acid deposition and nitrogen deposition in the Netherlands.

15

TargetsSubstantial additional efforts will have to be made by the indus-try (including refineries) and energy target groups to reducetheir emissions to 30 ktonnes. A study8 carried out for theMinistry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment,nevertheless, shows that there are a number of possible options.The mean costs amount to 4€/ kg SO2. Various instruments couldbe used to reduce the emissions from the industry and energysectors to 30 ktonnes by 2010. DGM reviewed three options:• tighten existing regulations;• give the competent authorities the power to set an emission

ceiling for individual companies in their environmentallicence;

• introduce a system of emissions trading.During the course of the next year the options will be studied ingreater detail and the implementability of measures and instru-ments will be assessed.For the services, construction, agriculture, transport and hou-seholds target groups the NEPP4 targets seem feasible,though there is little safety margin. The sulphur content of pet-rol and diesel used on the roads will be reduced to very lowlevels well before 2010 by virtue of the EU Directive on thequality of petrol and diesel fuels. There is at the moment(November 2002) a broad consensus between the Council, theCommission and the European Parliament about a proposal tothis effect. It is likely that the sulphur content of diesel formobile machinery and agricultural tractors will be reduced toless than 50 ppm well before 2010. Similarly by 2010 the sulp-hur content of the diesel used by vessels on inland waterwaysand for domestic fuel oil is expected to be reduced below thelimit of 1000 ppm which is due to apply from 2008. The only sig-nificant source of emissions then remaining will be maritimeshipping within Dutch waters. On 20 September 2002 theEuropean Commission presented a proposed directive whichwould reduce the sulphur content of fuel oil used by shipping inthe North Sea, the Baltic and the English Channel to 1.5%. Thesulphur content of the fuel used by maritime ships at thequayside will be reduced to 2000 ppm, and with effect from2008 to 1000 ppm. If this directive is adopted, the NEPP4 targetof 13 ktonnes can easily be met. Even if it is not the targetshould just about be achieved.

Emission ceiling and NEPP4 objectiveIn conclusion, considerable efforts will be needed if the NECemission ceiling of 50 ktonnes and the NEPP4 emissions objec-tive for SO2 of 46 ktonnes in 2010 are to be met. The policyoptions do appear to be sufficient to allow these objectives tobe met, however. The elimination of the emissions of maritimeshipping from the national total will reduce the policy gap,making these two objectives to meet with less effort .

2.2 NOx

Recent trendsNOx emissions have fallen by 27% since 1990, as a result of thephase-out of old combustion installations, the introduction oflow and ultra-low NOx burners, catalytic converters in cars andimproved central heating boilers (see Table 2.3). Much of therelevant regulation is the same as for SO2, described in section2.1. In addition, the Heating Equipment (Type approval) Decreehas made a significant contribution to reducing emissions.

Targets For the industry (including refineries) and energy targetgroups a distinction needs to be made between facilities with atotal capacity greater than or equal to 20 MWth and those with atotal capacity less than 20 MWth. A system of NOx emissions trading is being prepared for the larger facilities, to be introdu-ced in 2004. The target agreed for this group is 55 ktonnes.Based on the growth in energy use in accordance with the reference scenario, the RIVM calculated emissions of 74 and 61ktonnes for mean emissions performance standards of 50 and40 g NOx/GJ respectively. It is uncertain how energy use byindustry will evolve as we approach 2010. For the moment it isalso assumed by the RIVM that the target of 55 ktonnes forindustry (incl. energy) as a whole will be achieved. A decision asto whether, and by how much, the mean emissions performancestandard of 50 g/GJ will have to be lowered in order to meet thetarget of 55 ktonnes in 2010, will be taken in 2006. In relation tofacilities with a capacity less than 20 MWth in industry, but alsoin the agriculture, services and construction target groups, gasengines are responsible for most of the emissions.

8 DHV: Reductiepotentieel en kosten van SO2 emissies bij de industrie, raffinaderijen en centrales (Potential for reducing SO2 emissions from industry,refineries and power stations, and costs), 2001.

16

Inland navigation was responsible for 15% of NOx emissions in 2000. This propor-

tion will increase to 25% by 2010.

17

A study was started in 2002 which is examining the scope forfurther reductions in NOx emissions from gas engines.Measures are being looked at involving both engine modificationand treatment of the tail gases in terms of the technology, costsand reductions. The effect of NOx reduction measures on thelevel of methane emissions resulting from incomplete combus-tion (‘methane slip’) will be considered. Because of the interac-tion between NOx measures and the elimination or reduction ofmethane slip, these issues will have to be tackled in an integra-ted manner. Apart from technical modifications, alternatives togas engines will also have to be considered, such as gas turbi-nes or, ultimately, fuel cells. It will be made clear during 2003what reductions can be achieved with which measures or alter-natives. For facilities smaller than 20 MWth in the industry andenergy sector the RIVM calculates possible emissions in 2010 of9 ktonnes NOx and, for the other target groups together, 7 kton-nes. These emissions must be regarded as the lowest possiblebecause it is assumed that by 2010 all installations will meetquite ambitious emission standards. Because it usually takesseveral years for regulations to be modified and take effect, it ismore realistic to assume a smaller emission reduction. Anemission reduction 50% lower than assumed by the RIVM has

therefore been adopted for these sectors. This gives emissionsof 15 ktonnes for small facilities in the industry and energy sec-tor and 11 ktonnes for the other target groups. The mean costsof these measures will be between 2 and 6€ / kg NOx.A decision will be taken in 2003 about the instruments to beused to achieve these reductions. The most obvious would be totighten the standards in the BEES B, the NER and the typeapproval of central heating boilers (air pollution) decree. Thestandards for oil-and coal-fired process installations, cookersand boilers will also need to be tightened.In the case of the transport target group, technical measuresfor road traffic are almost entirely a matter for the EU. In recentyears agreement has been reached on standards up until 2008.A further tightening of standards will only impact on emissionsafter 2010. One possibility open to member states, and there-fore to the Netherlands, is to provide incentives for the earlyintroduction of measures. The RIVM calculates that a reductionof 2 ktonnes could be achieved if incentives were introduced forheavy goods vehicles to adopt EURO 4 or EURO 5 standards(costs 5€/kg NOx). The accelerated introduction of the EURO 5standards by the EU would make it easier to meet the target. Inland navigation is a major source of NOx emissions. The fact

1990 2000 2010Forecast Forecast Target

excl. extra incl. extra NEPP4policy policy

Industry (includingrefineries, Energya) 182 100 75 64-70 65 Transport 346 268 183 178 150 Agriculture 10 12 6 3-5 6 Services andConstructionb) 11 12 9 4-6 3 Households 21 20 16 6-11 7

Total 570 413 289 255-270 231

a) Including waste processing sector.b) Including waste water collection and processing plant.c) The reduction in NOx emissions as a result of the introduction of NOx emissions trading for large industrial sources is included in this forecast.

Table 2.3 Emissions (1990 and 2000), forecasts and targets for 2010 for NOx (ktonnes)

18

Cattle farming (dairy and beef) accounts for over half the NH3 emissions fromagriculture in the Netherlands.

19

that the other sources are implementing large reductionsmeans that this sector will account for an increasingly largeproportion of the residual emissions: from 14% in 2000 to 25%in 2010. The Central Commission for the Navigation of theRhine (CCNR) is the regulatory body for this sector. Tighterstandards will reduce emissions in 2010 by 1 ktonne, and ameasure to encourage modification in the engines of inlandnavigation vessels would, according to the RIVM, achieve a furt-her 2 ktonnes reduction. This brings the forecast emissions fortransport down to 178 ktonnes, far short of the target of 150ktonnes. The reasons for this discrepancy include the high rateof growth in inland navigation and in the number of deliveryvans, almost always diesel-engined. The high growth in inlandnavigation can be partly offset by the proposed scheme for sub-sidising the purchase of cleaner engines and the retrofit ofexisting engines with exhaust gas treatment systems. However,there are uncertainties in this regard about whether such ascheme is consistent with the European rules on environmentalaid and about the likely take-up by the target group. It may be possible to moderate the growth in the number ofdelivery vans by tightening the tax criteria for delivery vans.There is also a risk that there will be a shift towards diesel-engined cars. TNO has estimated that an increase in the pro-portion of diesel-engined cars from 20% to 40% would increasethe NOx emissions from transport in 2010 by 3 ktonnes.Another obstacle to meeting the target may come from incre-ased knowledge of the emissions from heavy goods vehicles.There are indications that the emissions from heavy goods vehi-cles in the EURO 2 and 3 categories may in the past have beenunderestimated by several tens of percentage points. Thesevehicles may turn out to have higher emissions in practice thanunder test conditions. This could add 10 to 20 ktonnes to theactual emissions. Another uncertainty relates to what theimpact will be on emissions of this possible discrepancybetween test conditions and practice over the coming years forvehicles compliant with the EURO 4 and 5 standards. In the case of the households target group, tighter standardsunder the Heating Equipment (Type approval) Decree and anincreased penetration of High-Efficiency combi-boilers arebeing studied. The RIVM calculated that the residual emissionsfrom this target group could be reduced to 6 ktonnes if theemission standards for new boilers were made much tighterand a 90-100% replacement rate of central heating boilers byHigh-Efficiency boilers were achieved. This must be regarded as

a lower limit for emissions (optimistic case). The upper limitcould be taken to be a reduction of 50% of this size, resulting inemissions of 11 ktonnes. The unit cost of these measures isestimated to be 6€/ kg NOx.

Emission ceiling and NEPP4 objective.We conclude that the NEC emission ceiling of 260 ktonnes in2010 cannot be achieved without extra policy. The measuresconsidered in this report may only reduce emissions to 270ktonnes, 10 ktonnes higher than the international emission ceiling. It is at present uncertain what the reduction in the totalNOx emissions will be due to the exclusion of emissions frommaritime shipping, and the extent to which this reduction maybe offset by the possibility that emissions, particularly fromgoods traffic, have been underestimated. It looks as though theNEPP4 objective of 231 ktonnes will remain way out of reach.

2.3 NH3

Recent trendsNH3 emissions have fallen by 35% since 1990, as a result ofreductions in the number of cattle, measures to abate emis-sions such as the covering of manure storage facilities, thedirect incorporation of manure into agricultural land and theuse of low-emissions livestock housing (see Table 2.4). Therelevant regulations include the Ammonia and LivestockFarming (Interim Measures) Act (now replaced by the Ammoniaand Livestock Farming Act) the slurry ponds regulations (by virtue of Sections 8.40 and 8.44 of the Environmental anage-ment Act), the Use of Animal Manure Decree (by virtue of theSoil Protection Act, since replaced by the Use of FertilisersDecree). Ammonia emissions have also fallen as a spin-off frompolicy on agricultural nutrients (‘MINAS’ standards).

TargetsThe emissions from the industry target group have fallen by40% since 1990. The main sources are the fertiliser industryand the primary metals industry. The NEPP4 target (2 ktonnes)is expected to be achieved by pursuing the Environment &Industry Target Group Policy .It appears that the NEPP4 targetfor the transport target group (5 ktonnes) can be attained withsome margin to spare. It is unlikely that improved knowledge ofemission factors for NH3 will alter this conclusion.

1990 2000 2010 Forecast Forecast Target


Industrya) 5 3 4 2 2 Transport 1 3 5c) 5 5 Agriculture 220 139 115 99 86 Services andConstructionb) 1 1 1 1 0 Households 6 7 7 7 7

Total 232 152 132 114 100

a) including waste processing sector.b) including waste water collection and processing plants.c) No emissions were calculated for transport in the Milieubalans 2002 because

the emission factors were not available.

There is a risk that the future use of selective catalytic reduc-tion (SCR) in diesel engines will increase the NH3-emissions.In the case of the agriculture target group, the LivestockFarming and Housing (ammonia emissions) Decree is expectedto enter into force in the first half of 2003. The RIVM estimatesthe emissions from agriculture in 2010 after these regulationshave been implemented will be 115 ktonnes. During the pas-sage of these draft regulations through parliament togetherwith legislation to restructure the intensive livestock farmingsector in late 2001 / early 2002, changes were agreed wherebydairy stock would be taken outside the scope of these regula-tions providing the sector achieved the desired reduction inemissions through changes in cattle feed resulting in lowerexcretion of nitrogen (as measured by the milk urea content).The RIVM calculates that these measures, which generally payfor themselves in economic terms, will reduce emissions by 10ktonnes. Further low-emissions application of manure intoagricultural soil is also a cost-effective way of reducing NH3emissions. The use of a slurry applicator to spread animalwaste on all grassland (cost approximately 1€/kg NH3) and thespreading and working into the soil in a single pass of manureon arable land (savings offset costs) will reduce emissions,according to the RIVM, by 11 ktonnes. The fact that a slurry

applicator cannot be used on peat soils will limit the reductionachieved: a reduction of 6 ktonnes is therefore assumed.After taking account of these two measures, the emissions fromthe agriculture sector are expected to be 99 ktonnes in 2010. Itshould however be noted that the emissions could end upsomewhat higher as a result of a shift of chickens from batte-ries to deep-litter housing (increase 2 ktonnes). The NH3 emis-sions forecast for 2010 depends on the result of the Dutchrequest for a derogation under the EU Nitrate Directive, theabolition of livestock quotas and milk quotas and the expansionof the EU in 2004. The RIVM estimates in its assessment of theCoalition Agreement that the outcome of these matters couldaffect emissions by 10 ktonnes up or down.No further policy has been examined for the households targetgroup. The emissions target is the same as forecast emissions.It is not easy to reduce emissions further because other thanthose from cleaning products they result for the most part fromhuman bodily functions.

Emission ceiling and NEPP4 objectiveWe conclude that the NEC emission ceiling of 128 ktonnes willbe narrowly missed. With the implementation of the measuresmentioned above and already planned (further low-emissionsapplication and modifications to dairy cattle feed), the emis-sions in 2010 should be reduced to 114 ktonnes. This is exactlyhalfway between the international emission ceiling of 128 kton-nes and the NEPP4 objective of 100 ktonnes.

2.4 VOC

Recent trendsVOC emissions have fallen by 43% since 1990. This has beenachieved by reducing leaks, using vapour balancing and vapourrecovery systems, process innovation, improving efficiency, pro-duct-oriented measures (solvents) and end-of-pipe technolo-gies (catalytic converters, tail-gas incinerators etc.) (see Table2.5). Regulations and instruments which have been adoptedinclude the KWS2000 programme, the Dutch EmissionGuidelines, orders in council pursuant to Section 8.40 of theEnvironmental Management Act for certain industrial sectors,environmental permits issued by the provinces and municipali-ties, emissions standards for traffic, workplace health and saf-ety regulations and product standards (paints and coatings,

20

Table 2.4 Emissions (1990 and 2000), forecasts and targets for 2010 for NH3 (ktonnes)

1990 2000 2010 Forecast Forecast Target


Industry (incl. refineries), Energya) 178 94 86 60 60 Transport 202 116 55 52-55 49 (45) Agriculture 2 2 1 1 2 Services andConstructionsb) 73 37 39 26 26 (23) Households 37 29 38 28-35 26 (25)

Total 492 278 220 167-177 163 (155)c)



c) This objective can only be met with the help of EU directives which tackle

products containing VOC (paints and coatings, adhesives, cosmetics, etc.) and

mopeds, scooters and motorcycles.

adhesives, but also for wood-burning stoves and multi-fuel sto-ves (Wood-burning and Multi-fuel stoves (Type Approval)Decree)).

TargetsIn the case of the industry (including refineries) and energyand the services / construction target groups there appears tobe plenty of scope for reducing emissions to within the respec-tive targets of 60 and 26 (23) ktonnes by 2010. This was madeevident by a study9 carried out for the Ministry of Housing,Spatial Planning and the Environment in consultation with thesectors. The RIVM endorses this conclusion. As for the projectKWS2000, a covenant-based approach has again been chosenfor post-2000: the VOC reduction plan. A total reduction of 30%has been agreed with industry. Each and every sector will haveto exert itself to help achieve this reduction. Almost all sectors

have agreed to draw up a plan in this connection. These planswill indicate how, when and by how much emissions can bereduced, and demonstrate that companies are ready to imple-ment the plans. The reduction plans received to date do not yetbring the targets shown within striking distance. A firm imple-mentation plan for the sectors concerned will be ready by mid-2003. The mean unit costs of the necessary measures is esti-mated by the RIVM to be about 3€/ kg VOC.Emissions from the transport target group are likely to exceedthe NEPP4 target by between 5 and 10 ktonnes. Possible furt-her measures include improved maintenance of private cars bytesting and regulating VOC emissions in the annual technicalinspection for motor vehicles and restricting or banning thetuning up of mopeds. The planned future registration of mopedsshould facilitate enforcement. The effects of these two meas-ures are difficult to quantify at the moment.As far as the households target group is concerned, Dutchemissions will depend in part on the provisions of the EU VOCproduct directive currently in preparation. A first draft of thedirective was presented by the European Commission at the endof 2001. The draft directive for the moment targets only VOCemissions from paints. The RIVM calculates that the VOC product directive in its present form will lead to a reduction of 3ktonnes. Another major source of VOC emissions is cosmeticsand personal care products (approximately 30%). Cleaning pro-ducts (13%), auto care products (15%) and adhesives (6%) arealso substantial sources of emissions. Since these products areoften produced in other countries, the opportunities to takemeasures in the Netherlands are limited. The EU VOC productsdirective, once enacted, will provide an appropriate frameworkwithin which an international approach to these emissionscould be taken. The Netherlands will therefore seek to have thisdirective extended into a framework directive for VOC emissionsin household products.Dutch legislation regulating workplace health and safety prohi-bits professional decorators from using paints with a high sol-vent content indoors. The introduction of the present EU pro-duct directive for paints in conjunction with the effect of themeasures to protect workplace health may result in a furtherdecrease in the emissions from households. The RIVM quanti-fied this knock-on effect as being in the range 0 - 7 ktonnes.The total for the households target group is therefore 28-35ktonnes. Although it is difficult to convert potential switching ofthis kind into a hard reduction, it would be cost-effective. The

21

Table 2.5 Emissions (1990 and 2000), forecasts and targets for 2010 for VOC (ktonnes)

9 STORK: VOC-Reductiepotentieelonderzoek- een quick scan (Broad survey of possibilities for abating VOC emissions), 21 March 2000.

22

Open fire places and multi-fuel and wood-burning stoves are a large source offine particles and VOC.

mean unit costs are estimated to be less than 1€/kg VOC. Themagnitude of the reduction in VOC emissions achieved willdepend inter alia, on the actions taken by the government, pre-ferably in consultation with the sectors, to encourage switchingto lower-VOC products. Such actions might include publicitycampaigns designed to promote the use of low-VOC paints andwater-based paints, but also tax incentives. Products whichharm the environment would be taxed more heavily than envi-ronmentally friendly (low-VOC) products.

Emission ceiling and NEPP4 objectiveIn conclusion, the NEC emission ceiling of 185 ktonnes in 2010cannot be achieved without further policy. The extra measuresconsidered in this report cannot realistically be expected to gobeyond 177 ktonnes. It should therefore just about be possibleto comply with the NEC emission ceiling. The NEPP4 objectiveof 163/155 ktonnes remains unattainable.

2.5 Fine particulate matter

Primary and secondary particlesFine particulate matter is not (yet) a ‘NEC pollutant’. It hasnevertheless been included in this report. There are a number ofreasons for this. Half of the anthropogenic emissions are formedfrom reactions involving acidifying components. These inorganicsalts are also referred to as secondary fine particles. Reductionsin emissions of acidifying components therefore also result inlower concentrations of fine particulate matter. Primary fineparticles form the other type of anthropogenic fine particulatematter. These are mainly emitted from combustion processes,like the pollutants responsible for acidification. Measures takento deal with acidification, therefore, also have an impact on fineparticulate matter. In view of this synergy and the seriousness ofthe health effects, account needs to be taken of fine particulatematter when evaluating our international obligations. (See Annex).

Recent trendsSince 1990, emissions of fine particulate matter have fallen by34% for PM10 and 38% for PM2.5 (since 1980 by 53% and 59%respectively). This is as a result of process modifications andparticulate filters for business activities which create particu-late pollution, reduced emissions from cars and heavy goodsvehicles, improvements in combustion installations, and res-

trictions in fuels and other measures for wood-burning stovesand multi-fuel stoves (see table 2.6). The relevant regulationsare the same as those mentioned for SO2 and NOx. These threepollutants are often tackled together in emissions regulations.

TargetsThere are not yet any emissions objectives and targets for fineparticulate matter. The Netherlands does have an air qualitylimit value for fine particulate matter (PM10) (see Chapter 3).There are still many unanswered questions about fine particu-late matter, such as whether we have yet identified al sourcesof emissions and which category or categories of fine particu-late matter are responsible for the health effects. A great dealof research is being done in the Netherlands and elsewhere toanswer these and other questions, because the health effectsdue to fine particulate matter are serious and are not in doubt(see Chapter 3 and the Annex). The Netherlands remains fullycommitted to a policy of reducing the emissions of fine particu-late matter. Whether this policy needs to be stepped up andemissions objectives and targets need to be set depends onwhether new and more stringent international policy is to bedrawn up (see Annex).

23

PM10 PM2,5

1980 1990 1998 2010 1980 1990 1998

Industry (incl.refineries), Energya) 68 37 17 14 38 18 8 Transport 33 27 19 12 31 25 17 Agriculrure 8 9 10 9 2 2 2 Services andConstructionb) 3 4 4 4 0 1 0 Household 4 4 4 3 4 4 3

Total 116 81 53 42 76 50 32



c) The emission inventories for 1999 and 2000 are still incomplete.

Table 2.6 Emissions (1980, 1990 and 1998c) and forecast for 2010 for fine particu-

late matter (PM10 and PM2,5) (ktonnes)

24

Excessive ozone and fine particulate levels in the atmosphere cause several

thousand premature deaths and several thousand emergency hospital admissions

each year.

Reductions in emissions will lead to an improved environment.Emissions and environmental quality are two sides of the samecoin. In this chapter we therefore look at the impact of emis-sions on human health (Section 3.1) and on nature (Section 3.2).To this end the emissions calculated by the RIVM for this reportwere used in order to calculate concentrations, depositions,exceedances of standards and objectives and the most serioushealth effects. We begin by examining the Dutch environmentalquality objectives for the protection of health and nature andthe interim environmental quality objectives included in theNEC Directive.

Environmental quality objectivesThe NEPP4 contains not only emissions objectives and targetsfor the target groups, but also environmental quality objectivesfor 2010. Most of these environmental quality objectives areactually interim objectives on the path towards sustainablevalues. The latter are levels of concentrations and depositionsfor which the health effects are either nil or (where there is nothreshold value) a level which can be accepted and there is noimpact on ecosystems. Sustainable values are included in theNEPP4 as long term objectives (2030). The 2010 air quality objectives for the protection of both healthand the environment have the status of limit values. They arederived from WHO guideline values, and are included in EUdirectives. These values are legally binding. The Netherlandsincorporated these air quality limit values in the Air QualityDecree. The NEPP4 deposition objectives for nature were calcu-lated from the NEPP4 emissions objectives for 2010, assumingthat (other) EU countries implement the emission ceilings ofthe NEC Directive and that other European countries implementthose of the Gothenburg Protocol.

Objectives for human healthTable 3.1 summarises the air quality limit values which apply inthe Netherlands. The SO2 limit values are no longer exceededanywhere in the country. This is due to the large reductions inemissions already achieved in the Netherlands and neighbou-ring countries. For NO2 it is the case that when the standard forthe annual mean has been met, the peak value of 200 µg/m3

will no longer be exceeded. In Section 3.1 we therefore consideronly the annual mean concentration. The ozone value has thestatus of guide value in the Netherlands according to theEnvironmental Management Act. The EU Directive refers to tar-get values. This implies that a country must do all it can toavoid exceedance. The PM10 limit values will be evaluated in2003. The WHO has been asked by the European Commission toadvise on these standards. The WHO will probably also look atdifferent particle sizes, e.g. PM2.5 and PM1.0.

Table 3.1 Air quality limit values for the protection of human health for the themeacidification and continental air pollution

Compo- Limit Averaging Number of Com-nent value in period exceedances pliance

µg/m3 permitted by

NO2 40 jaar - 2010200 uur 18 times per year 2010

SO2 125 dag 3 times per year 2001350 uur 24 times per year 2001

PM10 40 jaar - 200550 dag 35 times per year 2005

PM10 – 20 jaar - 2010indicativea) 50 dag 7 times per year 2010Ozon – guide 120 8 uur on 25 days per 2010valueb) year (mean

over 3 year)

a) The indicative limit value for fine particulate matter will be evaluated by the EU in 2003.

b) The NEPP4 specifies that the guide value may be exceeded on 20 days.

25

3.Environmental quality

26

Heathland is grazed by sheep to stop it being overgrown with grasses and otherplants as a result of excessive nitrogen deposition.

Objectives for nature Table 3.2 summarises the deposition and concentration objecti-ves for the Netherlands. The deposition objectives and excee-dance rates have been recalculated. Calculated depositions,exceedances and percentage of natural habitat (land withnatural or semi-natural vegetation) protected depend on ourstate of knowledge about emissions, deposition (depends onmodel grid size) and the desired quality (type of ecosystem) ofnature. A number of changes have been made since the NEPP4,and these have already been allowed for in the Milieubalans2002. We, therefore, also give the recalculated deposition objec-tives in this report, against which the calculated environmentalquality will be compared.

Table 3.3 is the updated version of a table presented in theNEPP4 and the Policy overview of the theme acidification andcontinental air pollution, and gives recalculated figures. Thetable summarises the depositions and exceedances per pro-vince. The calculated depositions and exceedances have nottaken the effects of specific local policies into account. Suchlocal policies are particularly appropriate in the case of NH3 toreduce deposition rates and exceedances and increasing thepercentage of natural habitat which is protected, because of therelatively rapid deposition rate for this pollutant.

27

Objective / unit Description

Acid deposition 2300 mol potential acid/ha per yearb) Mean deposition rate to ecosystems in the Netherlands such that 20% of the area of nature is protected.

Nitrogen deposition 1650 mol nitrogen/ha per yearb) Mean deposition rate to ecosystems in the Netherlands such that 20% of the area of nature is protected.

Ozone vegetation 8.5 ppm.hr (17,000 µg/m3.hr)c) AOT40. Obtained by summing all hourly values in excess of 40 ppb (80 µg/m3) during May, June and July (mean over 5 years).

NOx vegetation 30 µg/m3 annual mean concentration

SO2 vegetation 20 µg/m3 mean winter concentration

a) The NOx and SO2 objectives for vegetation are mandatory values from the first EU daughter directive on air quality. The ozone objective is a guide value.

b) The objectives for acid and nitrogen deposition have been recalculated using improved data on emissions and deposition rates. These objectives have been recalcu-

lated using the NEPP4 emissions objectives. They are interim objectives towards a situation in which 95% of nature in the Netherlands is fully protected

(NEPP4, pp. 83-85).

c) This is the NEPP4 objective. A value of 18,000 µg/m3.hr (9 ppm.hr) is included in the EU ozone directive.

28

Table 3.2 Environmental quality objectives a) for the protection of nature in 2010 for the theme acidification and continental air pollution.

Groningen 1600 40 20 1150 60 10 Friesland 1500 60 40 1050 60 20 Drenthe 1950 30 60 1500 30 40 Overijssel 2250 10 140 1750 10 90 Flevoland 1850 60 10 1300 40 10 Gelderland 2500 ‹10 280 1850 ‹10 180 Utrecht 2600 10 60 1900 10 30 North Holland 1850 40 40 1150 60 20 South Holland 2000 40 40 1200 40 20 Zeeland 1950 60 10 1100 70 10 North Brabant 2700 10 310 2000 10 190 Limburg 2550 ‹10 130 1850 10 70 National 2300 20 1140 1650 20 680

a) Deposition rates have been rounded to the nearest 50 equivalents.

b) Percentages are rounded to the nearest 10, as are the total excess depositions.

c) The provincial deposition objectives, the excess depositions and the percentages have been recalculated. If there is an improvement in our knowledge of the depo-

sition and emission mechanisms, for example the results of studies of the ‘NH3 gap’, or if there are changes in the area or the desired quality of ecosystems,

these figures will have to be recalculated.

d) The calculated deposition objectives and excess depositions have not taken the effects of specific local policy into account. Depending on how successful such

policy is there will be further reductions in the depositions and exceedances and an increase in the area fully protected.

29

Table 3.3 Deposition objectives by province for acid and nitrogen deposition, percentage of ecosystems on which sustainable levels are exceeded in year 2010 and totalexcess deposition over sustainable deposition rates a),b),c),d) a),b),c),d)

Percentage areaof nature fully

protectedagainst

exceedance ofsustainable aciddeposition rates

Total excessacid deposition

over sustainable

levels(Mmol)

Rate of nitrogendeposition to

ecosystems(mol N/ha)

Percentage areaof nature fully

protectedagainst

exceedance ofsustainable

nitrogen deposi-tion rates

Total excessnitrogen

deposition oversustainable

levels (Mmol)

Rate of aciddeposition to

ecosystems (mol H+/ha)

Intermediate NEC objectivesIn drawing up the NEC Directive the European Commission wor-ked through many different scenarios. These scenarios linkedenvironmental objectives with emissions and costs. TheCommission’s final proposal included emission ceilings for themember states and environmental objectives for acidification,eutrophication and ground-level ozone. The environmentalobjectives adopted are spelled out in the NEC Directive (seebox). The emission ceilings adopted in the Directive were notthose proposed by the Commission. The ceilings accepted bymember states, including the Netherlands, were somewhat hig-her. The interim objectives of the NEC Directive are not bindingon member states. However when the NEC Directive is revie-wed, the feasibility of these objectives will be reconsidered (seeAnnex, Section 2).

RIVM calculationsAs for emissions, the RIVM calculated the consequences of thepackage of 12 (groups of) measures for pollutant concentra-tions and depositions, and their impact on health and nature.The RIVM reported4, for the resulting deposition rates, excess

loads and percentage areas of nature protected, two figures for-ming a range. The higher deposition rates and excess loads,and the corresponding percentage areas were obtained by fac-toring up the results to allow for the difference between thecalculated and the measured NH3 (the ‘NH3 gap’). The higherfigures are used in this document. In Sections 3.1 and 3.2 theRIVM calculations are compared with the Dutch objectives andthe interim environmental objectives of the NEC Directive.

3.1 Health

Recent trendsPollutant concentrations have fallen substantially since 1990(see Table 3.4). This is the result of the effective measurestaken both in the Netherlands and other countries. This is par-ticularly true of SO2. Since 1980 the emissions have fallen by80%, so that there are no air quality blackspots for this pollu-tant: the SO2 standards are not exceeded anywhere in theNetherlands.Concentrations are declining due to measures at home and inother countries. The extent to which pollutant concentrationscan be influenced by the Netherlands varies for the differentpollutants. The proportions of the concentrations of NO2, O3 andPM10 accounted for by Dutch emissions are 60, 15 and 25%respectively. The concentrations of PM10 are determined bynatural emissions (dust entrained by the wind, sea salt, etc.),directly emitted particles (primary particulate matter) and par-ticles formed in the atmosphere (secondary particulate matter).Secondary particulate matter consists mainly of salts formed byacidifying substances. Reducing emissions of acid precursorstherefore results in lower concentrations of fine particulatematter. Such reductions are often accompanied by an indirectreduction in the emissions of primary fine particulate matter.

ExceedancesOzone and fine particulate matter pose the greatest threats tohealth. It is estimated that exposure to these pollutants willresult in several thousand premature deaths in the Netherlandsin 2010. The entire population of the Netherlands will be expo-sed to concentrations of fine particulate matter in excess of theindicative value for 2010. There is now no longer any exposureto concentrations of ozone above the guide value. The fact thatnon-zero effects are estimated for ozone is due to the fact that

30

Interim environmental objectives in the NEC DirectiveThe national emission ceilings in the NEC Directive werebased on the following criteria:1. Acidification: to reduce the area in which the sustainable

deposition rates are exceeded by 50% in 2010 relative to1990.

2. Ozone, health: to reduce ozone loads in excess of thehealth-related criterion (AOT60) by 67% in 2010 relativeto 1990. Ozone levels to remain within the maximumvalue of 58,000 µg/m3.hr (29 ppm.hr (AOT 60));

3. Ozone, vegetation: to reduce ozone loads in excess of the critical level (AOT 40 = 6000 µg/m3.hr (3 ppm.hr)) by 33% in 2010 relative to 1990. The load should nowhereexceed 26,000 µg/m3.hr (13 ppm.hr (AOT 40));

4. Eutrophication: to reduce loads in excess of the sustainable deposition rates (soil) by 30% in 2010 relative to 1990.

there is no safe level for ozone below which health effects donot occur. In the same way, there is no threshold level for fineparticulate matter. In 2010 there may still be exceedances ofthe limit values for NO2 and people may still be exposed toexcessive concentrations. This will depend in part on how thereductions in NOx emissions are achieved. Any residual excee-dances of the limit value for NO2 can, according to the EUDirective, be dealt with by means of local measures. Calculating the health effects from the actual exposure and themost up-to-date dose-response relationships for theNetherlands, it is seen that the health risks for PM10 are gradu-ally declining, whereas there is virtually no change in those forozone. The interim objectives for ozone for 2010 in the NECDirective will be achieved in the Netherlands (see Table 3.6).

Effects The health effects are predominantly respiratory problems.People who already have respiratory or cardiac and circulatorydisease are particularly vulnerable.The problem of fine particulate matter was studied and evalu-ated as part of the Dutch Aerosol Programme10. In thisProgramme, the number of premature deaths in theNetherlands in 2000 was calculated to be in the range 1700-3000. This number fell to 1600 deaths for 2001. The lower figureof 1700 from the Dutch Aerosol Programme is based on relativedeath rates observed in Dutch studies. The higher figure of3000 is a mean based on various methods used internationally.Table 3.4 shows that the number of deaths and emergencyadmittances to hospital due to PM10 is expected to fall between2001 and 2010. For the purpose of these calculations the ageprofile of the population was assumed to be the same in 2010as in 2001, as otherwise, the increasing average age and size ofthe population would have masked the underlying effect. It canbe seen that the number of deaths due to O3 increases in 2010.This is due to the fact that the mean O3 concentration issomewhat higher in 2010 than in 2001, due to the high levels ofNOx in North-West Europe. Ozone is of course formed by a cata-lytic reaction between NOx and VOC in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations will only fall if there are largereductions in NOx and VOC. Particulate matter is made up of amixture of particles of various sizes and compositions. Somecomponents are more harmful to health than others. Thesource of the fine particulate matter is probably one of the fac-tors which determines how harmful it is. Particulate matter

originating from traffic and other combustion processes appe-ars to be more harmful, for example, than matter originatingfrom the soil. The causal mechanisms between exposure tovarious types of particles and health effects are not fully under-stood. Although at present there are only standards for PM10,separate standards for finer particulate matter in which diffe-rent sources are distinguished would seem desirable. Chapter 2of the Policy overview of the theme acidification and continentalair pollution contains a detailed description of the health effectsof caused by air pollution.

Table 3.4 summarises the exposure data and the most serioushealth effects.The differences between the various calculated figures for 2010are not great. This is hardly surprising given the small differen-ces in emissions between the various 2010 variants and thedependence of the concentrations on emission reductions in theNetherlands.

31

10 RIVM: On health risks of ambient PM in the Netherlands, report no. 650010033, 2002.

1990b) 2001 2010 Foracast Foracast NEPP4 Limit

excl. extra incl. emissions valuemeasures 12 DGM objective

measuresd)

Concentrations NO2, anual mean 27 21 18 17 16 40 concentration (µg/m3)O3, days exceedance 120 µg/m3 39 11 8 9 8 25c)

8-hour mean concentrationa)

PM10, anual mean conc.(µg/m3 ) 45 31 29 29 29 20

ExposureNO2, anual mean conc. 3.9 mill. 0.4 mill. 3,000 0 0 ›40 µg/m3(backroundconcentration)Idem (along busy 0.2 mill. 300-30,000 0-7,000 0-5,000motorways)O3, ›25 dagen 10.8 mill. 0 0 0 0PM10, ›20 µg/m3 14.9 mill. 16.5 16.8 mill. 16.8 mill. 16.8 mill.O3, premature death 2800 3000 3000 3000PM10, premature death 1600 1200 1200 1200PM10, hospitalisation 2200 1700 1700 1700

a) The forecast concentrations and exposures were calculated on the basis of long-term mean meteorology. In other circumstances the figures can be lower or higher.

In the last few years actual ozone concentrations have been significantly lower.

b) The 1990 figures were derived by means of expert judgement from the RIVM report: Gezondheids- and natuureffects of verschillende milieuambities in 2010, report

no. 725501007, 2003 and the RIVM report Evaluatie van de verzuringsdoelstellingen: de emissievarianten, report no. 725501002, 2001.

c) The NEPP4 objective is 20 days.

d) These figures are based on estimated emissions allowing for the full introduction of the 12 (groups of) measures indicated by DGM. The difference with the emis-

sions as forecasted inclusive of extra measures for SO2, NOx, NH3 and VOC is 2,16, 10 and -5 ktonnes respectively.

32

Table 3.4 Summary of calculated concentrationsa), exposure of the population to concentrations in excess of the limit values for 2010 and premature deaths and emergency hospital admissions in the Netherlands.

DALYsWith regard to the figures for (premature) death due to expos-ure to air pollution, it should be noted that older people andpeople suffering from respiratory complaints and disease of theheart and circulatory system appear to be particularly vulnera-ble. The provisional results of a study carried out for theMinistry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment11

show that in Europe, fine particulate matter alone is responsi-ble for shortening life by an average of one year. New indicatorsare being developed which express how much earlier people dieand suffer from various health problems. One such indicator isthe DALY (Disability Adjusted Life Year), and it seeks to measurehealthy years of life lost, through both mortality and morbidity.By way of example, Figure 3.1 shows calculated DALYs for anumber of different (environment-related) causes.

3.2 Nature

Recent trendsBoth acid and nitrogen deposition have been falling rapidly, as

have exceedances of critical levels. Unfortunately the depositionrates were so high that the reductions have not yet much incre-ased the percentage of natural habitat protected against exces-sive acidity and nitrogen. 60% of acid deposition and 70% ofnitrogen deposition are accounted for by Dutch emissions ofacidifying substances and nitrogen compounds respectively. Theozone excess load of natural vegetation and agricultural cropswill fall only slowly, and the mean ozone concentration exhibitsa slow upward trend. These concentrations are heavily influen-ced by background levels. Large reductions of NOx, VOC andCH4, coordinated internationally, will be necessary to reducethese concentrations.

Excess depositionSince 1990 the mean acid and nitrogen deposition to naturalhabitat have fallen by 36 and 27% respectively. The total excessdeposition fell even more, by 53% and 44% respectively.However, acid and nitrogen deposition to Dutch ecosystems arestill too high. At present 90% of the area of nature in theNetherlands suffers from excessive acid and nitrogen deposi-tion (see Table 3.5). However this situation is improving rapidly,and with it the rate and extent of the various types of adverseeffects caused. The effects consist, broadly, of impairment ofthe soil and groundwater, reduced tree growth and loss of bio-diversity. It has proved possible to establish a link betweenexcessive deposition and the likelihood of occurrence of spe-cies. In simple terms, excess deposition creates a situation inwhich plants which thrive under nitrogen-rich conditions, e.g.grasses, brambles and nettles, begin to predominate, leading toa reduction in the diversity of flora and fauna. For a detailedaccount of the effects of excessive deposition on natural eco-systems see Chapter 2 of the Policy overview of the theme aci-dification and continental air pollution.Table 3.5 presents an overview of the mean deposition and theexcess deposition for the Netherlands. There are largebetween-province differences. Provinces in the North and Westof the country will be reaching protection rates of 50-60% by2010. This is due partly to lower deposition rates (particularly ofNH3) and partly to the fact that these ecosystems are less sen-sitive.

33

900008000070000600005000040000300002000010000

0

DALY's

11 IIASA : A methodology to estimate changes in statistical life expectancy due tothe control of particulate matter air pollution. IR-02-035, 2002

Figure 3.1 Loss of healthy years of life in the Netherlands (DALYs), various causes (Source: RIVM, Milieubalans 1997)

34

2001

mol H+/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

2010 including 12 DGM measures

mol H+/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

2010 NEPP4 emissions objectives

mol H+/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

2010 excluding additional measures

mol H+/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

Figure 3.2 Deposition of potential acid in excess of critical levels on soil ecosystems for various emission levels.

35

1990b) 2001 2010 Forecast Forecast incl. NEPP4

excl. extra 12 DGM emission measures measuresc) objectived)

Acid depositionMean (mol/ha.year) 5100 3250 2550 2300 2300 Total excess deposition 4930 2330 1490 1190 1140 (Mmol/year)Percentage protected ‹10 10 10 20 20

Nitrogen depositionMean (mol/ha.year) 3310 2400 1900 1700 1650 Total excess deposition 2800 1580 990 740 680 (Mmol/year)Percentage protected ‹10 10 20 20 20

Ozone Excess load (AOT40, µg/m3.u) 18,000 7,000 5,700 6,000 6,000

a) The forecast concentrations, exposures, effects and loads were calculated on the basis of the long-term mean meteorology. In the last few years actual ozone

concentrations have been significantly lower.

b) The 1990 figures are derived by means of expert judgement from the RIVM report: Gezondheids- and natuureffects of verschillende milieuambities in 2010, report

no. 725501007, 2003 and the RIVM report Evaluatie van de verzuringsdoelstelingen: de emissievarianten, report no. 725501002, 2001.

c) These figures are based on estimated emissions allowing for the full introduction of the 12 (groups of) measures as indicated by DGM. The difference with the

emissions as forecasted inclusive of extra measures for SO2, NOx, NH3 and VOC is 2,16, 10 and -5 ktonnes respectively.

d) The acid and nitrogen deposition objectives have been recalculated to allow for improved estimates of emissions and depositions.

Table 3.5 Summary of calculated mean deposition, total excess deposition and percentage area of ecosystems protected from acid and nitrogen in theNetherlands a)

36

2001

mol N/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

2010 including 12 DGM measures

mol N/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

2010 NEPP4 emissions objectives

mol N/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

2010 excluding additional measures

mol N/ha/yr‹00-500500-1000›1000

Figure 3.3 Deposition of nitrogen in excess of critical levels on soil ecosystems for various emission levels.

NEC Directive: environmental quality objectives Table 3.6 summarises the environmental quality in theNetherlands in 1990 and 2010 for those parameters for whichthe NEC Directive sets quality objectives (see box beforeSection 3.1). All the objectives except those relating to acidifi-cation will be comfortably achieved before 2010. Indeed some ofthe objectives have already been met.

Table 3.6 Interim environmental quality objectives in the NEC Directive, applied to the Netherlands a)

1990c) 2010 NEC-doel voor NederlandNetherlands

AcidificationAcid deposition <10% protected 20% protected >55% protected (50% reduction in area with excessive deposition)

EutrophicationNitrogen deposition 2800 Mmol 740 Mmol 1960 Mmol (30% reduction in the total excess deposition over sustainable levels)

Ground-level ozoneOzone, health 39 days 9 days <13 days (67% reduction in excess exposure over guideline value) Ozone, health 16 days 2 days 0 (no exceedance of peak valueb)) Ozone vegetation 18,000 µg/m3.hr 6,000 µg/m3.hr 12,000 µg/m3.hr(33% reduction in excess load (AOT40, averaged over the Netherlands)) Ozone vegetation 14,000-24,000 µg/m3.hr 2,500-10,000 µg/m3.hr 26,000 µg/m3.hr(no exceedance of peak value (AOT40))

a) Concentrations, exposures and effects calculated on basis of long-term mean meteorology.

b) The peak value in the NEC Directive is expressed in terms of AOT60. This is not calculated in the Netherlands. The EU ‘information threshold’ of 180 µg/m3 (1 hour

mean) is calculated, however. This value is used here.

c) The 1990 figures are derived by means of expert judgement from the RIVM report: Gezondheids- and natuureffects of verschillende milieuambities in 2010, report

no. 725501007, 2003 and the RIVM report Evaluatie van de verzuringsdoelstellingen: de emissievarianten, report no. 725501002, 2001.

37

38

The dairy sector will be exempt from the requirements under the LivestockHousing Regulations to use low-emissions housing, on condition that it achievesthe planned emission reduction through changes in feed.

4.1 Emissions

InstrumentsThis review makes it clear that the emissions ceilings in theNEC Directive (and the Gothenburg Protocol) can only be achieved if additional measures are taken. To ensure that thisactually happens, a great deal of work will be needed to pre-pare the necessary instruments (legislation and regulations)and to get the additional measures implemented. The preciseform and content will be the subject of the ‘ImplementationMemorandum Emission Ceilings for Acidification and Long-Range Air Pollution 2003’, which will be sent to Parliament andthe European Commission at the end of 2003. In this section weoutline the measures already planned and being implemented,and those for which regulations are being drafted. This outlineis not exhaustive, and concentrates on the extra measuresreviewed in this report, but illustrates the extent to which lawsand regulations will have to be amended or drafted. A moreprecise description of the regulatory changes, the timetable,etc., will be presented in the Implementation Memorandum2003 referred to earlier.

SO2On the emissions side, modifications will have to be made tothe BEES A and B, the Dutch Emission Guidelines, orders incouncil regulating certain industrial sectors and individual environmental licences. Other possibilities include the introduc-tion of emissions trading or allowing competent authorities toincorporate emission ceilings for individual companies in company licences. On the fuel side, the Sulphur Content ofFuels Decree will be amended.

NOxA system of emissions trading is being prepared for stationaryfacilities with a capacity equal to or greater than 20 MWth. Forfacilities with a total capacity less than 20 MWth, the regulationswhich need to be amended will be the BEES B, the DutchEmission Guidelines, the orders in council for certain industrialsectors, but also the Heating Equipment (Type approval)Decree. An incentives scheme will be vigorously promoted toencourage the replacement of engines in inland waterway vessels in order to secure the greatest possible reduction. Taxincentives could also be introduced to encourage the earlyintroduction of the EURO 4 and EURO 5 standards for heavy

goods vehicles. The accelerated introduction of the EURO 5standards by the EU would also be helpful in achieving theemissions ceiling. The growth in the number of delivery vansand diesel-engined cars also needs to be curbed (this is alsoimportant for air quality). It is particularly important for NOxthat existing installations are replaced rapidly, because evenafter the additional measures are taken, emissions in 2010 areforecast to exceed the NEC ceiling by 10 ktonnes.

NH3In the case of NH3 the intention is that modifications should be made to cattle feed which reduce the excreted nitrogen, thereby reducing the emissions. This will be implementedthrough agreements with the sector. The Use of FertiliserDecree also needs to be amended in order to implement potential reductions in that area.

VOCAgreements relating to VOC need to be made within the

39

4. Conclusions

Heavy goods vehicles are a major source of NOx, accounting for 25% of emissionsin 2001.

framework of the VOC Reduction Plan (the successor to theKWS 2000 programme), possibly followed by modifications inthe Dutch Emission Guidelines, and in the orders in councilregulating certain industrial sectors, and which will also becarried over into the environmental licences issued by the pro-vinces and municipalities. An assessment will have to be madeof the reduction which can be achieved by improving the main-tenance of the stock of private cars by including checks on VOCemissions in the annual technical inspection for motor vehiclesand by restricting the tuning up of mopeds and scooters. As faras products are concerned, the EU is currently working on adirective on paints. This should be extended to cover other con-sumer products. It is not yet clear whether the Wood-burningand Multi-fuel Stoves (type approval) Decree needs to be revi-sed (this is also important for fine particulate matter). The useof low-solvent and solvent-free products can be promotedthrough the regulations on workplace health and safety and theintroduction of incentives schemes.

4.2 Environmental quality

Emission guidelines, emission targets and air qualityNext year, Dutch emissions and emissions forecasts will bedrawn up in accordance with the new emission inventory guide-lines. Although a detailed comparison still remains to be madebetween the Netherlands territory method and the new method,it is already known that the latter will reduce the SO2 and NOxemissions, mainly because most of the emissions from mari-time shipping while inshore will no longer count. This couldlead to a revision (upwards) of the targets, particularly for SO2.This may not be the case for NOx where the target for transportis expected to be substantially exceeded and there is potentialfor the situation to be further exacerbated by unfavourabledevelopments. Furthermore, there is little scope for additionalmeasures in this sector. An upwards adjustment in the SO2 tar-gets, and a larger or smaller increase in the NOx target fortransport (the target will then exclude maritime shipping) willincrease concentrations of SO2, NO2, O3 and fine particulatematter and will increase acid and nitrogen deposition.

Maritime shippingMaritime shipping while still inshore comprises a very largesource of emissions. It is expected to account for approximately

20% of SO2 and 15% of NOx emissions from Netherlands terri-tory in 2010. Maritime shipping accounts for 13% of the totalacid and nitrogen deposition on Netherlands territory. Levels ofNO2, but also of O3 and fine particulate matter, are also heavilyinfluenced by marine shipping. The fact that the Netherlandswill have difficulty in meeting the air quality standard for NO2and that measures to reduce emissions from this sector arevery cost-effective means that it is sensible to continue to pressfor measures to be taken in this sector.

Local measuresOf all the acidifying and eutrophying substances, the depositionrate for NH3 is the highest, so that this pollutant causes themost damage to ecosystems in the Netherlands. Extra NH3reduction will reduce the excessive acid and nitrogen loads onecosystems in the Netherlands. An effective way of reducingthese loads is to reduce the emissions of NH3 close to suchareas. For this reason it is important that strategies for redu-cing NH3 emissions should include geographically specific

40

Mopeds, scooters and motorcycles emit relatively large quantities of VOC.Something you can easily smell.

measures. This could be achieved by tightening up of theAmmonia and Livestock Farming Act, by introducing geographi-cal differentiation into national measures (incorporation ofmanure into the soil, regulations on animal housing, etc.) andby providing for the eventually buying up of manure permits incertain areas.

4.3 Research

Emissions inventoriesIf the Netherlands switches to the internationally agreedmethod of reporting emissions, the new figures will be incon-sistent with those for previous years. The time series will haveto be adjusted. This also applies to emissions totals used fordomestic purposes, such as the Milieubalans, etc. A study willbe carried out next year into the precise differences betweenthe emissions calculated according to the Netherlands territorymethod and those obtained using the new emission inventoryguidelines.

Heavy goods vehicle emissionsThere is strong evidence that the emissions from heavy goodsvehicles which are subject to the EURO 2 and EURO 3 standardsin practice turn out to have higher emissions than those calcu-lated on the basis of the emission factors of the test cycle. Thedifference between the calculated and actual emissions mayamount to 10-20 ktonnes. This matter needs to be studied furt-her.

Revision of Dutch dataAgreements in Europe on further reductions in emissions rela-ting to acidification and continental air pollution must be basedon ‘sound science’. In preparing agreements of this kind, use ismade of all the data used by the different countries to calculatethe emissions, dispersion, effects and costs. These include dataon energy use, production, transport, agriculture, measuresalready taken, the costs of measures, policy adopted to date,the location of the emissions, sustainable deposition rates fordifferent ecosystems, etc. After the acidification objectives wereevaluated in 2001, sustainable levels of deposition for acid andnitrogen were again reported internationally. Other data werelast reviewed in 1998 when the Gothenburg Protocol and theNEC Directive were being prepared. The Dutch data need to be

modified in 2003 because after that the first scenario calcula-tions will begin for the preparations for the review of theDirectives on air quality and the review of the NEC Directive(CAFE-programme) and the Gothenburg Protocol (see Annex).

41

42

The industry sector has achieved the largest proportionate reduction in emissionsof fine particulate matter.

International air pollution treaties contain not only obligationswith regard to emissions, emission standards etc., but alsoobligations with regard to reporting, monitoring and enforce-ment. Evaluating whether obligations have been met and drawing up new, usually more stringent emissions reductions,are also important components of these treaties, and are referred to as the review.This Annex deals with the reviews of both the UN/ECEGothenburg Protocol and the EU/NEC Directive, because thesetwo processes are intimately interrelated. We also discuss theRAINS model, which is used in both fora prior to and during thenegotiations.

1 Gothenburg Protocol

ReviewThe Gothenburg Protocol is the eighth and most comprehensiveProtocol under the Convention on Long-Range TransboundaryAir Pollution (CLRTAP), concluded by the member states of theUN/ECE in 1979. The Gothenburg Protocol obliges the parties tocommence a review one year within the date of entry into forceof the Protocol; the Protocol describes in broad terms the mat-ters to be dealt with in the review. The Gothenburg Protocol willenter into force when it has been ratified by 16 countries. Thisis expected to be at the beginning of 2004. At present 4 coun-tries have ratified the Protocol. The Netherlands expects to beable to do so around May 2003. Within one year from the com-pletion of the review, negotiations must start with a view toundertake deeper cuts in emissions which will bring us closerthe objective of the Protocol, i.e. to reduce the concentrations ofpollutants and deposition rates to within values sustainable forhuman health and nature.

Reorganisation and strategyWell before the Gothenburg Protocol was signed (1 December1999), a new organisational structure was designed (see figure 1) to take effect after this date. When the GothenburgProtocol enters into force the CLRTAP will become more orien-ted towards evaluating, implementing and reviewing existingprotocols, rather than drawing up new protocols. The newstructure reflects this modus operandi.

After the Protocol was signed, a future strategy was defined12.

The main elements of this strategy are as follows:• health will become more important in the future, particularly

in relation to fine particulate matter;• local air quality problems will form part of a regional appro-

ach to air pollution.• there will be more emphasis on non-technical measures and

measures to combat climate change, resulting in more cost-effective solutions;

• indicators need to be developed which have greater policy andpolitical appeal (for example which translate distress sufferedby natural ecosystems into consequences for biodiversity orthe preservation of species, or disability adjusted life years(DALYs)), which really bring home to people what the conse-quences are of air pollution and of measures to reduce it;

• better and more complete quantification is needed of thedamage caused by air pollution, and therefore also of thebenefits of reducing pollution; this should be done not only inphysical but also in monetary terms; at present, for example,the damage to objects of monuments and to ecosystems cannot be quantified in money terms.

Large-scale work programmes have been set up which reflectthese elements13. These work programmes have been designedto facilitate the review in 2004 and 2005 and to make a startwith the negotiations.

Result of the review processIt is impossible to predict precisely what the results of thereviews of the Gothenburg Protocol and the NEC Directive willbe. The new strategy and work programmes mean thatEuropean air pollution is being tackled in a much more integra-ted manner than it was. More attention is being given to healthaspects (fine particulate matter and NO2, and therefore to localair quality) and account is being taken of synergies with climatechange policy. A more integrated approach also yields costbenefits.The review is primarily intended to evaluate progress towardsmeeting the emission ceilings and environmental quality objec-

43

Annex: Reviews of theGothenburg Protocoland the NEC Directive

12 Workshop on future needs for regional air pollution strategies, Saltsjöbaden,ISBN 92-893-0484-7, 10-12 April 2000.

13 The website www.unece.org/env/lrtap/ contains considerable informationabout the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution, includingthe full texts of the protocols and links to EMEP (emissions, monitoring and airpollution modelling in Europe) and the websites of the Coordination Centresrelating to the effect programmes.

Executive Body

Working Group on Effects

EMEPSteering Body

Working Group onStrategies and Review

ICPForest

Task Force

ICPIntegrated Monitoring

Task Force

ICPModelling and Mapping

Task Force

ICPMaterials

Task Force

ICPVegetationTask Force

ICPWaters

Task Force

ProgrammeCoordinating

Centre

ProgrammeCentre

CoordinatingCentre

for effects

Main Research

Centre

ProgrammeCentre

ProgrammeCentre

Task ForceHealth

Task ForceEmission Inventories

and Projections

Task ForceMeasurementand Modeling

ChemicalCoordinating

Centre

MeteorologicalCoordinating

Centre

MeteorologicalSynthesizingCentre-East

Expert groupon Ammonia

Expert groupon POP's

Expert groupon Heavy Metals

Network of Expertson Benefits and

Economic Instruments

Expert groupon Techno-Economic

Issues

Task ForceIntegrated

Assessment Modeling

CentreIntegrated

Assessment Modelling

Implementation Committee

44

Figure 1 Organisation chart for the UN/ECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution

tives for 2010. This could result in the agreed ceilings beingmodified. If this happens, the focus will be on ceilings wheremember states have been given too much leeway. Emission cei-lings are also expected for PM10 and/or PM2.5. But the reviewalso looks a little further into the future. At this point in time itis not certain whether objectives for 2020 (or 2015) will be set in2005. This could also be done in the following review, whichshould take place around 2008.

2 NEC Directive

ReviewThe history of the NEC Directive goes back to December 1997,when the EU ministers decided to take a more strategic appro-ach to acidification (including eutrophication). Until then the EUhad concentrated on adopting directives to abate emissions(cars, combustion plants, etc.) and regulate air quality. The NECDirective, which entered into force at the end of 2001, providesthat a review must be completed in 2004. The review will evalu-ate whether member states are on target to achieve their emis-sion ceilings. The emission levels can be tightened if cost-effec-tive measures are available to meet the interim standards setbefore 2010 (see box in Chapter 3 and Section 3.2). It should besaid that the emission ceilings provided by member states inthe NEC Directive are well in excess of the emission levels forwhich the interim environmental objectives were set. The emis-sion ceilings can also be lowered so that the long-term objec-tive, i.e. the attainment of levels sustainable for human healthand nature, can be met, preferably by 2020.

CAFEAn initial draft of the programme Clean Air For Europe (CAFE)was presented by the European Commission before the EUministers endorsed the NEC Directive in June 2001. With thisprogramme the European Commission is seeking to develop astrategy for the full protection of human health and nature fromthe effects of acidification and continental air pollution. Thereview will cover not only the NEC Directive, an important com-ponent of the programme, but also the air quality directives

(standards for NO2, fine particulate matter and ozone) and theemissions directives. A steering group and various workinggroups have started work and work programmes have been setup14 (see Figure 2). It has now become clear that it will not bepossible to complete the review on schedule in 2004.

Cooperation between EU and ECEThe development of the NEC Directive and the GothenburgProtocol has seen an increasing convergence and coordinationbetween the work of the European Commission and that of theUN/ECE-CLRTAP. For example, while the EU included eutrophi-cation (and therefore ammonia emissions ceilings) as one of theobjectives in the NEC Directive, the ECE concentrated more inthe Gothenburg Protocol on air quality and health (ozone). Bothorganizations use as far as possible the same data (sustainablevalues, emissions, costs of measures, etc.). Both have emb-raced the same concept of integrated assessment, involvingseeking to simultaneously solve as many problems as possibleat least cost. Both also used the RAINS model in preparing the

45

Coordination Group

Steering Group

Implemen-tation

Particulate Matter

Target Setting and Policy Assessment

Technical AnalysisGroup

Research

DG EnvironmentCAFE Secretariat

Inter Service Group

WHO

UNECE-CLRTAP

Structural and ad hoc working groups

Commission

Multi stakeholderinvolvement

Research Institutes

Non EU organizations14 Information on the National Emission Ceilings (NEC) Directive and the

CAFE-programme and other matters can be found on the websitehttp:europa.eu.int/comm/environment/air.

Figure 2 Organisation chart for the CAFE process

emissions reductions and in the subsequent negotiations.Cooperation will be stepped up in future and the work program-mes will be coordinated. The work needed for the review will bedistributed between the two organisations. The EU will focus onair quality and health issues (fine particulate matter, NO2 andozone) and has asked the WHO to review the health standards.The EU is also looking into the modelling of cities at a higherlevel of resolution. The ECE is concentrating more on thequality of ecosystems, air pollution transport modelling and theinteraction with climate change. The fact that both the NECDirective and the Gothenburg Protocol are due for review in2005 is a further token of this cooperation.

3 RAINS model

Integrated assessment modellingBoth the ECE and the EU are using the same tool for theirpolicy preparation: RAINS15, a computer model developed bythe Austrian International Institute for Applied SystemsAnalysis (IIASA). RAINS is short for Regional Air pollutionINformation and Simulation. The model contains a representa-tion of the main socio-economic activities in European countries(transport, industry, agriculture, etc.), the emissions generatedby these activities, the abatement measures which can be takenin each country and their costs. The model also uses a simplepollution transport model derived from the EMEP model16

which allows concentrations and depositions to be calculated.The environmental objectives are incorporated in the RAINSmodel in the form of critical deposition maps and air qualitystandards. Figure 3 shows the structure of the RAINS model.The model uses all these data to determine in which countriesthe cheapest and most effective measures can be taken. Thismethod is know as integrated assessment modelling.

Fine particulate matter The RAINS model was able to calculate the most cost-effectivemanner of implementing certain acid and nitrogen depositionlevels (acidification and eutrophication) and certain concentra-tions of ozone (related to health, natural vegetation and agricul-tural crops) for the Gothenburg Protocol and the NEC Directive.During the last two years considerable work has been done toextend the model to include fine particulate matter, both PM10and PM2.5. This involved introducing into RAINS all the data on

emissions, measures and costs as well as the ability to modelthe transportation of particles.

Climate change.There is a considerable overlap between the effects of acidifica-tion and continental air pollution and climate change, and theseeffects can be mutually reinforcing. The causes are often alsothe same, i.e. the combustion of fossil fuels. Measures whichcombat climate change will be introduced into the RAINSmodel, and this is an important development. This work wascontracted by the Dutch environmental ministry to IIASA inNovember 2002, thereby fulfilling one of the recommendationsmade after the Gothenburg Protocol was signed (see Section 1).This will involve extending the model to represent all of the 6Kyoto Protocol gases, including the activities which generatethem, the emissions, the abatement measures and their costs.A change will be made in the structure of the model, with data-bases of measures and costs, rather than cost curves per pollu-tant per country as at present. This will allow non-technicalmeasures such as switching to a cleaner fuel, emissions tra-ding and CDM to be included. The extension of the model willtake two years, and will allow cost-effectiveness calculations tobe carried out for both policy areas, either separately ortogether. Based on the experience of integrated assessmentwith acidification and continental air pollution the synergy couldresult in savings of many billions of Euros.

46

15 Information on the RAINS model can be found at the internet sitewww.iiasa.ac.at/~rains; this site contains a web version of the model whichallows simple calculations to be made.

16 Co-operative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Long-RangeTransmission of Air Pollutants in Europe. EMEP coordinates an extensivemonitoring network and models the dispersion and transport of air pollutants(www.emep.int).

47

Economicactivities

Energy use

Agriculture

Industrialproduction,

solvents,products

Transport

Emissioncontrols& costs

SO2 emissions

NH3 emissions

NOx emissions

VOC emissions

PM emissions

CH4 emissions

CO2 emissions

N2O emissions

HFC emissions

PFC emissions

SF6 emissions

Environmentalcontrol costs

S deposition

N deposition

O3 formation

Secondaryaerosols

Primaryparticles

NO2 concentration

Critical loadsacidification

Critical loadseutrophication

Critical levelsozone

Critical levelshealth

RadiativeForcing/Global

WarmingPotential

Environmentalimpacts

Figure 3 Structure of the RAINS model

Update of national dataThe quality of the output of the RAINS model depends heavilyon the input. What are the underlying activities, and where dothey take place? What abatement techniques are already beingapplied? How much do the measures cost? What are the criti-cal/sustainable acid and nitrogen deposition rates? Most ofthese data are provided by the countries themselves. IIASAinputs these data into the RAINS model, so that scenario calcu-lations can be carried out. It is obviously up to the countriesthemselves to ensure that their data are correct. Countries arealso given the opportunity to comment on the data entered intothe model on their behalf. After the acidification objectives wereevaluated the Netherlands submitted critical/sustainable acidand nitrogen deposition rates for Dutch ecosystems. The sustai-nable levels for acid and nitrogen, for which biodiversity is pro-tected, are new values. These correspond to a more propitiousenvironmental quality for the species which may be found inthat ecosystem. There is a great deal of interest in Europe forthese sustainable levels and how they can be determined. The Netherlands last examined the more technical informationfor the Netherlands in the RAINS model in 1998. Before the firstserious scenario calculations are performed (at the end of 2003,when the air quality daughter directives are due to be evalu-ated), the Dutch data in the model will be reviewed in detail.

Cost-benefit analysisDuring the preparations for the Gothenburg Protocol and theNEC Directive, many calculations were made of the costs andbenefits. The final results of these calculations were publishedin two reports17 ,18. The benefits were expressed not only in envi-ronmental and health terms, but also, where possible, in mone-tary terms. The benefits exceed the costs by a factor of 2 ormore for nearly all the countries. For the Netherlands, the ratioof benefits to costs for the Gothenburg Protocol woks out at 2.5.Not all the effects of air pollution can be quantified in moneyterms. The main costs are health effects (deaths, hospitaladmissions, illness, etc.), damage to materials (buildings andinstallations), damage to agricultural crops and reduced woodproduction. The benefits associated with the GothenburgProtocol in 2010 compared with the situation in 1990 was calcu-lated to be € 6.1 – 9.3 billion. The two values correspond to dif-ferent bases for valuing human life. Many benefits, particularlyrelating to national monuments and wildlife and the countrys-ide, cannot yet be expressed in monetary terms. For this reason

the benefits are generally regarded as being an underestimate.The opposite applies to the costs: these are generally overesti-mates. Costs are often calculated on the basis of technical aba-tement measures. This ignores the fact that there are generallyless costly options such as switching to cleaner fuels.Furthermore, end-of-pipe technologies often become cheaperover time.It is important to improve cost-benefit techniques, expressedboth in physical and monetary terms. Expenditure needs to bejustified. A great deal of research is being conducted into thedamage caused by air pollution and its quantification. Furtherprogress can be expected in quantifying the damage, and there-fore the benefits of abating air pollution, when the GothenburgProtocol and the NEC Directive are reviewed, although it is amoot point whether this will apply to values such as monu-ments and nature. Some progress has been made in this direction by the Network of Experts on Benefits and EconomicInstruments within the LRTAP Convention.

17 Integrated assessment modelling for the Protocol to abate acidification, eut-rophication and ground-level zone in Europe VROM 17519/187

18 Cost-benefit analysis for the Protocol to abate acidification, eutrophication andground-level ozone in Europe. VROM 17520/187

48

Title Emission ceilings acidification andcontinental air pollution. Report of theNetherlands 2002.

Keywords EU, National Emission Ceilings (NEC)Directive, UN/ECE, Gothenburg Protocol,NEPP4, emissions, emission guidelines,emission ceilings, emission objectives,emission targets, sulphur dioxide, nitrogenoxides, ammonia, volatile organiccompounds, fine particulate matter, targetgroups, industry, refineries, energy,transport sector, services sector,construction, consumers, instruments,regulation, environmental quality objectives,deposition, concentrations, air quality,ozone, nitrogen dioxide, exposure, health,exceedance, nature, provinces, Clean Air ForEurope (CAFE) programme, Convention onLong-Range Transboundary Air Pollution(CLRTAP), Regional Air pollutionINformation and Simulation (RAINS) model,cost-benefit, climate change.

Photography Tineke Dijkstra, Flying Camera, Karel Tomeï (page 16),Foto Natura, J. Vermeer (page 26).

Address Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning andthe Environment, Climate Change andIndustry Department, Climate andAcidification Division, Johan Sliggers,Internal Post Code 650, PO Box 30945, 2500GX The Hague.

Date of May 2003, the original Dutch vision was sentpublication to the EC January 7, 2003.

Orders: The English vision has not been printed. It isposted as a pdf-file onwww.vrom.nl/international The printed Dutch version can be obtainedvia www.vrom.nl

Distribution code: VROM 17549/187

49

Colophon


www.vrom.nl

Publication of: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment> 8, Rijnstraat > 2515 XP > The Hague > www.vrom.nl/international

Ministry of VROM >Where the rural and urban environment as well government buildings really matter.Where policies are developed, implemented and enforced.Knowing that, in a small country like the Netherlands, it pays to think big.

vrom

02.

1107

/04-

03

Report of the Netherlands 2002 ontinental air pollution...

Documents

Transcript of Report of the Netherlands 2002 ontinental air pollution...