|
|
For debate in the Standing Committee see Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure
Pour débat à la Commission permanente – Voir article 15 du Règlement
Doc. 8810 revised
16 November 2000
Technological possibilities for fulfilling the targets of the Kyoto Protocol (to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change)
Report
Committee on Science and Technology
Rapporteur: Mr Martti Tiuri, Finland, European Democratic Group
Summary
The production of energy from fossil fuels is causing a climate change with its unpredictable consequences for mankind and biodiversity. Burning fossil fuels and biomass produces fine-particle emissions in the atmosphere. These particles are dangerous for health, causing the death of more than one hundred thousand European citizens annually.
According to the climate specialists, bringing the climate change to an acceptable level demands a reduction of greenhouse gases (GHGs) by 60% to 80 % within a couple of decades. The Kyoto Protocol is one of the first steps aiming at slowing down the climate change. 55 countries have agreed to reduce emissions by the year 2010 by an average of 5 % as compared with the emission level in the year 1990.
The main factors causing climate change are the carbon dioxide emissions from energy production. In almost all Kyoto Protocol countries except for the transition countries of central and eastern Europe emissions have grown since 1990 and are predicted to do so till the year 2010. Thus, realisation of the Protocol is very difficult. The technical solutions are to save energy, improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon dioxide emissions in energy production and use. In the future it might also be possible to apply carbon dioxide sequestration. An improvement in energy efficiency due to developments in technology has already been taken into account in the energy scenarios. There are large saving potentials in the heating and cooling of buildings for example.
In the production of electricity, the carbon dioxide emissions can be reduced by improving power plant efficiency and by shifting to production methods that produce less or no carbon dioxide emissions. Due to the development of technology, the efficiency of the new power plants has greatly improved, but the growth in coal use especially in developing countries has been estimated to cause 40 % of the growth in the world's carbon dioxide emissions for the period 1990-2010. Natural gas power plants produce half of the carbon dioxide emissions as compared to coal and oil energy, but the growth in natural gas use is estimated to cause a growth equal to 40 % of the OECD countries' carbon dioxide emissions for the period 1990-2010. Fine-particle emissions will grow in line with the carbon dioxide emissions.
Renewable energy sources cause small carbon dioxide emissions. Wind and solar energy grow 15%-20 % annually and can thus reach a 1% share of the world's energy by the year 2030. The electricity production from these sources is very variable, so the emissions depend on the necessary regulating power. Due to low energy density the collecting areas needed are large. To replace one large natural gas or nuclear power plant (1300 MW) with windmills, a wing swept area of 1000 hectares would be needed. This is equal to 3400 windmills, each reaching a height of 100 metres, with a peakpower of 1.5 MW. Correspondingly, 40 square kilometres of solar electricity panels would be needed. Bio energy demands large cultivation areas and will be in competition with food production. To replace a large power plant would demand 6000 square kilometres of cultivation area in Europe. Burning biomass with up-to-date technology produces lots of fine-particle emissions.
In the following decades hydro and nuclear power will still be the only means of producing a large amount of electricity without carbon dioxide and fine-particle emissions. The European hydropower potential has already mainly been built up, and in some scenarios it has been predicted that nuclear power will not increase its share in the electricity market. However, nuclear power could produce a major part of the additional electricity needed in Europe, but this is possible only if nuclear power is widely accepted by the public.
In the OECD countries nuclear power has proved to be safe. The cost of possible accidents, waste disposal and plant decommission are included in the price of nuclear energy. This is not the case with fossil fuel and biomass energy where large external costs of climate change and fine-particle pollution are not taken into account. Therefore it will be necessary to re-assess the acceptability and costs of using different energy sources in future energy production.
I. Draft recommendation
1. The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was signed with the aim of mitigating the climate change. The signatories have committed themselves to reducing their average annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from their level in 1990 by about 5 % by the period 2008-2012, calculated as an average over these five years. The Kyoto Protocol is only the first step, since, according to the climate experts, the emissions should be reduced by 60%-80% in the following decades to limit the climate change to an acceptable level.
2. The European Union countries and some other member states of the Council of Europe have committed themselves to an average reduction of 8 %. The emissions of the most important GHG, the carbon dioxide, have increased since the year 1990 in the member states of the Council of Europe except for the transition countries. They are predicted to continue their growth until 2010. The growth of gross national product requires the increased use of electricity and the production of additional electricity increases the carbon dioxide emissions. Thus carrying out the Kyoto agreement is a great challenge, where all means are to be applied.
3. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has pointed out that, while reducing the GHG emissions from energy production, the fine-particle emissions would also have to be reduced. Fine-particle emissions are created in the combustion of fossil fuels and biomass and they are spread beyond the borders of the producing country to a distance of thousands of kilometres as an almost even carpet of air pollution. The fine particles penetrate directly into the lungs, causing allergies, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and cancer. WHO estimates that the fine-particle emissions cause the death of more than 100 000 Europeans annually.
4. The Assembly, reiterating its Recommendation 1390 (1998) on fine-particle emissions and human health, consequently recommends that the Committee of Ministers advise the member states of the Council of Europe to promote the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol and the reduction of fine-particle air pollution by:
i. promoting the development of technologies and means to save energy and improve energy efficiency;
ii. improving the energy efficiency of existing power plants and building new plants to state-of-the-art level;
iii. enhancing, when coal is used as the source of energy, the use of clean-coal-technology in coal combustion plants, so that energy efficiency can be improved and fine-particle emissions decreased;
iv. encouraging if possible, when using fossil fuels, the use of natural gas instead of other fossil fuels since the carbon dioxide emissions are half that of coal power plants' emissions and the fine-particle emissions are one third that of coal power plant's emissions;
v. increasing the amount of combined heat and power regeneration (CHP), so that the total fuel efficiency can be almost doubled;
vi. re-assessing nuclear power’s acceptability and possibilities of use by comparing its risks to the risks of other energy sources;
vii. enhancing the use of cars with three-way converters to decrease the fine-particle emissions;
viii. encouraging research and the development of alternative technologies to the traditional combustion engine in the traffic sector.
II. Draft resolution
1. The Assembly, referring to its Recommendation … (2000) on the technological possibilities for fulfilling the targets of the Kyoto Protocol (to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), with a view to implementing its objectives and reducing fine-particle pollution, asks that the signatory states of the Kyoto Protocol increase their use of renewable energy by:
i. constructing hydropower plants, including small-scale ones where it is possible, taking into account environmental and other aspects;
ii. making use of geothermal energy where possible, and enhancing the use of ground heat in the heating of apartments. This may allow two-thirds of the heating energy to be taken from the ground and only one-third from electricity;
iii. constructing windmill plants in suitable locations like low seacoasts, where the average power can rise up to one third of the peak power;
iv. using solar collectors for domestic hot water production and for space heating, district heating (Northern Europe) and air conditioning (Southern Europe);
v. enhancing the development and use of solar photovoltaic panels and their applications where useful and possible;
vi. constructing pilot solar power plants in places where solar radiation is favourable;
2. The Assembly further asks that the use of renewable bioenergy be developed and researched, for example by:
i. using the methane escaping from landfill sites for energy production;
ii. increasing the share of bioenergy in heat and electricity co-generation, paying special attention to decreasing the fine-particle emissions by developing biomass gasification for example;
iii. promoting research into bioenergy cultivation possibilities in low-productive agricultural lands, developing biomass harvesting techniques and studying applications of gene technology to improve the photosynthesis efficiency;
3. The Assembly notes that in the coming decades hydro and nuclear power are the only means to produce large amounts of electricity without carbon dioxide and fine-particle emissions, and that in the OECD countries nuclear power has proved to be safe. Considering the difficulties in implementing the Kyoto agreement, the likely additional carbon dioxide emission reduction goals after Kyoto and health hazards caused by fine particles, the Assembly asks member states
i. to re–assess the acceptability and possibilities of use of nuclear power when compared to the risks of other energy sources;
ii. to inform the public on the health effects of natural radiation and man-made radiation, the health hazards of fine-particles pollution and the risks of climate change;
iii. to increase the share of safe nuclear power in those member countries where it is feasible, in order to decrease the carbon dioxide emissions of Europe and to lower the fine particles pollution in the European area;
iv. to develop and use new nuclear power plants, combining economy with the highest safety standards;
v. to make investments in order to ensure safe nuclear waste disposal;
vi. to increase the research and development of passively safe reactors;
vii. to increase investments in order to develop a breeder reactor, which would make it possible to use uranium for almost limitless energy production;
viii. to devote considerable investments to research on fusion power, having as a goal an almost non-polluting energy source for mankind.
4. Understanding that the technical solutions recommended above will not be sufficient to entirely fulfil the targets of the Kyoto Protocol, the Assembly asks for the effective application of the Kyoto mechanisms (International Emission Trading, Joint Implementation and Clean Development Mechanism) as soon as the application rules are defined by the Sixth Conference of the Parties (COP6 in The Hague in 2000).
III. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Martti Tiuri
CONTENTS
paragraphs
A. Introduction
a) Climate change 1-9
b) Greenhouse gases 10-13
B. Kyoto Protocol, greenhouse gas and fine-particle emissions
a) Kyoto Protocol 14-21
b) Present and future emissions of carbon dioxide 22-30
c) Energy related fine-particle pollution 31-36
d) Energy related radiation exposure 37-47
e) Vital role of energy in modern society 48-51
C. Reduction of carbon dioxide and fine-particle emissions
a) Energy conservation 52-61
b) Reduction of emissions of fossil fuel energy 62-68
c) Nuclear power in reducing emissions 69-73
d) Renewable energy sources in reducing emissions 74-97
e) Reduction of emissions in transportation 98-103
D. Carbon dioxide sequestration 104-105
E. Conclusions 106-112
F. References (page 22)
Annex: Tables 1-5 (pages 23-25)
Figures 1-8 (pages 26-28)
*****
A. Introduction
a) Climate change
1. Emissions resulting from human activities are increasing the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases (GHG's). GHG's do not affect solar radiation, but prevent heat (infrared) radiation from the earth's surface to escape into the space causing an additional warming of the earth´s surface. Natural greenhouse gases, water vapour and natural carbon dioxide, contribute to a natural greenhouse effect. Additional warming caused by man made GHG's is called the greenhouse effect or climate change.
2 Climate scientists (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC) predict that if emissions continue as present (Business-As-Usual, BAU-scenario) the global mean temperature will increase about 1°C above the present value by 2025 (about 2°C above that in the pre-industrial period) and 3°C above today's value before the end of this century (about 4°C above pre-industrial). The warming will be greater in the northern latitudes and smaller in the tropics.
3. Natural terrestrial ecosystems will be significantly influenced because the rate of climate change will be too fast for some species to adopt. The BAU-scenario indicates rates that are 10-50 times faster than during the ice age recovery period. Many species could become extinct. Some current forests, for example northern conifer forests, will decline in a climate to which they are increasingly poorly adapted, while a potential for forest growth might develop in more northern latitudes than today.
4. According to the IPCC report agricultural production potential for the world as a whole would remain about the same when the earth warms up but locally reductions in rainfall may cause severe drops in harvests. Brazil, Peru, the Sahel region of Africa, Southeast Asia, China, the Asian part of the former Soviet Union and the Mid-West of the United States are in this situation.
5. Relatively small changes of climate can cause large water resource problems. The availability of water and biomass might be significantly affected, causing problems especially in many developing countries.
6. Due to climate change the global average means sea level will rise about 6 cm per decade over the next century (BAU-scenario), with an uncertainty range of 3-10 cm per decade. A rise of sea level by 30-50 cm would affect significantly the habitability of low-lying coastal regions and a one metre rise would render some island countries uninhabitable, displace tens of millions of people, threaten low-lying urban areas, flood productive land and contaminate fresh water supplies.
7. In a warmer climate tropical diseases such as malaria will spread towards the north and become worse in presently peripheral regions causing millions of extra illnesses and deaths. Pest insects and plant diseases will become common in regions where they do not occur presently.
8. When the earth's surface and troposphere become warmer the stratosphere will cool down. Hence, the critical temperature for ozone depletion will be reached more often and the ozone layer will be weaker.
9. A warmer atmosphere will contain more energy. This could strengthen storms and rains. Several exceptionally strong storms and floods that occurred lately may indicate the advancing of climate change.
b) Greenhouse gas
10. The most important greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide (CO2) (60 % of the greenhouse effect). Burning of coal, oil and natural gas releases the carbon dioxide stored in the fossil fuels. Deforestation also releases carbon stored in the trees. Presently oceans and land vegetation absorb about half of the man-made carbon dioxide emissions. The result is that atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is growing by about a half % per year. Every year about 22000 million tonnes of carbon dioxide is added to atmosphere by energy production and about 6000 million tonnes by deforestation
11. Table 1 and Figure 1 a show the carbon dioxide emission of different modern large power plants per 10 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity. 10 TWh is the electric energy produced by a large 1300-megawatt (MW) plant in a year. Internal combustion engines also produce carbon dioxide. Table 2 and Figure 2 show the comparison of emissions from different vehicles. The share of transportation of all energy related carbon dioxide emissions in different countries varies from about 10 % to 30 %.
12. Methane contributes 20 % of the total greenhouse effect. The main sources of methane emissions are agriculture (especially flooded rice fields and cattle), waste dumps and energy production (leakage in the gas and coal production). The main sinks of methane are chemical reactions in the atmosphere. Because methane has a short effective lifetime in the atmosphere, only 12 years, its relative importance decreases much faster than that of carbon dioxide which stays in the atmosphere for more than one hundred years.
13. Other long-lived GHG's are nitrous oxide, halocarbons and sulphur hexafluorides. They contribute the remaining 20 %. Nitrous oxide originates mainly from agriculture and from energy production. CFC's and other halocarbons are mainly created by industry for use in various products such as refrigerators and air conditioners. The Montreal Protocol for the protection of the ozone layer restricts the production of CFC's and has stabilised the emissions in the 1990's.
B. Kyoto Protocol, greenhouse gas and fine-particle emissions
a) Kyoto Protocol
14. The climate change is considered to be the most severe environmental risk for the globe and mankind. An international consensus has been reached to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. The "Rio treaty", signed in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, assumed voluntary restrictions of emissions. Developed countries agreed to cut down carbon dioxide emissions by 2000 to the same level as in 1990. The Rio treaty will not be realised.
15. The new agreement on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol, was signed in Kyoto in 1997 (Ref.1). It is binding. Countries signing the Protocol have committed themselves to cut down the GHG emissions by the year 2010 by 5 % on the average from the level in 1990.
16. GHGs included in the Kyoto Protocol are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC's), perfluorocarbons (PFC's) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). Total GHG emissions are calculated adding equivalent carbon dioxide emissions (CO2eq) of different GHGs. In calculating the CO2eq emissions, the GHG is multiplied by its global warming potential (GWP). GWP takes into account the lifetime and the effectiveness of the GHG in causing climate change. The GWP of methane is 20 and that of nitrous oxide 310 in a time scale of 100 years.
17. The Kyoto Protocol is a part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It sets different binding emission reduction targets - defined in Annex B of the Protocol, see Table 3. The European Union has committed itself to reduce the emissions by eight %. The division between different EU countries is shown in Table 4. The Russian Federation may keep its emissions on the level of 1990, Japan has to cut down emissions by six % and USA's commitment is seven %.
18. The Kyoto Protocol is just a start in reducing the GHG emissions, since according to IPCC, emissions must be cut down by 60-80 % in a couple of decades in order to stabilise the GHG content in the atmosphere to double value as compared to the preindustrial level. The developed countries have even a greater duty to reduce emissions so that the developing countries could be allowed to add their own emissions.
19. According to the Kyoto Protocol each Annex B country plus Belarus and Turkey shall by 2005 have made demonstrable progress in achieving its commitments. Each country must submit national communications to the Conference of the Parties (COP) on a regular basis describing what it is doing to fulfil the Protocol. Communications also include national inventories of GHG emissions and removals.
20. The Kyoto Protocol contains a set of economic instruments that can help to make the emission reduction efforts more flexible. They are called the Kyoto Mechanisms and consist of:
- International Emission Trading (IET); referring to trading of assigned amounts of emissions. The Annex B Countries may participate in IET to fulfil their commitments. Emission trading shall be only a supplement to domestic actions.
- Joint Implementation (JI); countries can co-operate to gain or give emission reduction units by accomplishing projects aimed at reducing emissions.
- Clean Development Mechanism (CDM); helping countries not included in the Protocol to achieve sustainable development in co-operation with member countries. CDM co-operation projects must have real, measurable and long-term benefits related to the mitigation of climate change. Member countries may use the emission reduction obtained from such projects to fulfil their own emissions commitments more easily.
21. The precise rules of applying the Kyoto Mechanisms will be defined during the sixth Conference of the Parties (COP6), which will be held in The Hague in 2000.
b) Present and future emissions of carbon dioxide
22. Because carbon dioxide emissions from energy production are the main part of GHGs, the development of GHG emissions in the future will depend on the demand for energy. It is estimated (International Energy Agency, IEA; business as usual, BAU-scenario) (Ref. 2) that the energy demand globally in 2010 will be 12 500 million tonnes oil equivalent or nearly 40 % higher than in 1990, Figure 3. It may double in 40 years. The main part of the growth will take place in developing countries, where energy is needed to improve the standard of living. In OECD countries energy demand in 2010 may be 6000 million tonnes oil equivalent or 30 % higher.
23. The electricity demand will grow even faster, because the share of electricity of the total energy will grow. Hence consumption of electricity in the world in 2010 is estimated (IEA) to be 21 000-terawatt hours (TWh) or nearly twice the consumption in 1990. In OECD countries the consumption of electricity can be expected to grow almost as fast as the gross domestic product, and is estimated in 2010 to be 11 000 TWh or nearly 60 % higher than in 1990, Figure 4.
24. Applying BAU scenario IEA has estimated that world carbon dioxide emissions in 2010 will be over 31 000 million tonnes or nearly 50 % higher than in 1990, Figure 5. Half of emissions occur in OECD countries where the increase is 30 %. In OECD countries the growth is mainly due to increase in electricity production.
25. In constructing the BAU scenario it has been assumed that some actions that reduce carbon dioxide emissions take place without policy changes. Estimates of these reductions are already included in the BAU projection:
-the share of gas as primary energy supply rises relative to oil and coal;
-some additional nuclear power plants are built;
-the use of renewables in power generation increases;
-energy use rises more slowly than economic activity.
Despite these actions CO2 emissions continue to rise.
26. Figure 6 shows the share of world commercial primary energy sources from 1860 to present. Oil, coal and natural gas are dominating and will be so for many coming years. All of them produce carbon dioxide emissions.
27. Many Kyoto Protocol countries have published information about GHG emissions. Table 5 shows GHG emissions in 1990, 1996 (1995), the predicted emissions in 2010, and reductions needed as percentage of predicted emissions in 2010 for achieving the Kyoto commitment.
28. GHG emissions have grown from the level of 1990 by 1995 or 1996 in every EU-country except in Germany, UK and Luxembourg. In many transition countries they have generally decreased. In Russia carbon dioxide emissions have dropped nearly 30 % due to reduction of industrial production, but are expected to start growing again.
29. To ease the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol many countries begin by trying to cut their methane emissions. They can be reduced e.g. by improving landfills and by using the methane leakage of landfills. In this manner many countries can reduce their equivalent GHG emissions even by several %s. These reductions have usually been taken into account in the scenarios for 2010. Reducing methane emissions is reasonable indeed, but it does not solve the problematic set by the realisation of the Kyoto Protocol. Nor does it restrain the climate change, which is mainly driven by carbon dioxide emissions.
30. The information shows that almost all signatory countries will exceed their GHG emission goals if strong actions are not taken to reduce them.
c) Energy related fine-particle pollution
31. Climate change is not the only energy related environmental problem. Another serious problem is air pollution. It has been found during the 1990s that fine particles in air created in energy production, are dangerous to human health. In the fifth Conference of the Kyoto Protocol Parties (COP5), held in Bonn in November 1999, the representatives of the World Health Organisation (WHO) emphasised that cutting carbon dioxide emissions must not increase fine- particle emissions. Instead, both should be reduced.
32. Recent studies have shown that air pollution at the presently common levels in Europe is dangerous to health. Particularly dangerous are fine particles (PM2.5), which are smaller than 2,5 thousands of a millimetre. They penetrate directly into lungs and possibly into the blood circulation system. According to studies they cause respiratory and cardiovascular diseases as well as cancer. Almost all fine particles in the air are man-made and caused by combustion processes in energy production. Natural fine particles are produced by forest fires, volcano eruptions etc. but their percentage is usually small in comparison to combustion fine particles.
33. Combustion of fossil fuels and bio mass releases solid, airborne fine soots particles (primary fine particles) into the atmosphere. These carry on their surface various noxious compounds resulting from combustion. In addition, combustion produces sulphur and nitrogen oxides. Roughly half of these transform in the atmosphere to sulphate and nitrate fine particles (secondary fine particles). Fine particles can travel hundreds or thousands of kilometres with the wind and form widespread almost evenly distributed pollution. During rain they precipitate as acid rain which is harmful to nature.
34. Table 1 and Figure 1 b show fine-particle emissions of modern electricity power plants per 10 tera watthours (TWh) of electricity. Radio active radiation doses in the vicinity of power plants is also shown. Table 2 and Figure 2 show relative fine-particle emissions of vehicles.
35. The European Office of WHO (WHOE) estimates (Ref. 3) that the annual mortality rates increase by 1-4% per 10µg/m3 of long term average PM10 concentration (PM10 are particles smaller than 10 thousandths of a millimetre). This corresponds to an increase of about 5 % per 10 µg/m3 of long term average PM2.5 concentration. Figure 7 shows the increase of annual death rate as function of the average annual PM2.5 concentration in air (Ref.4). Some preliminary measured PM2.5 values are also shown in the figure. According to WHOE between 102 000 and 368 000 deaths per year in Europe are caused by fine particles.
36. The atmosphere (CO2 emissions) and peoples' lungs (fine-particle emissions) are the actual disposal sites of the combustion plants. Fine-particle emissions of a country spread to neighbouring countries causing diseases and deaths. For example more than a half of the fine particles of Southern Finland originate from Central and Western Europe. The possible replacement of the nuclear power plants with natural gas and bioenergy in Germany and Sweden will increase fine-particle concentration in Central and Northern Europe. Fine-particle emissions are indeed an international problem.
d) Energy related radiation exposure
37. The use of nuclear energy includes the risk of radioactive emissions. In normal operation a nuclear power plant causes less than one fifth of the radiation exposure compared to fossil fuel plants (Table 1). The public is worried about the radiation caused by possible accidents and the dangers of nuclear waste. It must be remembered that natural radiation from soil, and human bodies as well as cosmic radiation expose people to significant radiation doses. In the accidents happened so far in the western nuclear power plants the public has got very small radiation doses comparing to the natural radiation ones.
38. The only way to obtain information on the health effects of radioactive exposure has been to follow the health of those who survived the atomic bombs in Japan. Their radiation doses have been large enough to detect the effects. Based on these studies, the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and WHO conclude that temporary heavy radiation exposure does increase the risk to die of cancer but not risks of other diseases. The cancer risk increases 5% with a radiation dose of 1000 millisieverts (millisivert, mSv, is a measure for radiation exposure). With smaller doses the probability increase is assumed to be respectively smaller. A very strong temporary exposure causes radiation sicknesses, and a dose of more than 4000 mSv usually leads to death. Hereditary effects have not been found among the successors of those exposed to radiation in Japan during the World War II.
39. When examining the effects of radiation, the doses of individual's whole lifetime are to be summed up. The lifetime radiation dose caused by natural radiation varies between 150 and 400 mSv depending on the radioactivity of the soil and the altitude of the place of residence (cosmic radiation increases with the altitude). Natural radiation causes a 0.5-2 % risk to die of cancer. The average probability for cancer death is at present 20 %.
40. The main reason for the public's resistance towards nuclear power is the Chernobyl catastrophe. The reactor type that caused the catastrophe was unstable in principle and could not have been licensed in Western countries for safety reasons. It contained a large amount of graphite.
In a test situation the power of the reactor increased suddenly and the graphite core lit up like a torch. The radioactive plume reached the height of a couple of kilometres and spread the radioactive matter from the reactor with the wind to thousands of kilometres away. This kind of fire is not possible in Western type reactors, where there is no burning material. Thus a possible catastrophe will have only local effects.
41. The consequences of radioactive fallout caused by Chernobyl have been exaggerated strongly. According to WHO the only cancer, which can be connected to the fallout, is children's thyroid cancer. If there are other cancers their number is too small to be detected. Theoretically it is possible to calculate extra cancers, when radiation doses are known. Figure 8 shows the calculated mortality increase in the worst fallout areas. The increase is small in comparison to effects of fine-particle emission.
42. Instead, due to the Chernobyl catastrophe, there has been widespread damage to health and well being, which are attributed to stress deriving from the concern for the health consequences of exposure to radiation. This phenomenon has become known as the psychosocial effect, and has had an effect entirely disproportional to the health risks involved in the accident. The main cause has been the public's complete mistrust in authorities and their controversial descriptions of the situation.
43. In OECD-countries the nuclear power has proved to be safe compared to other primary energy sources. The only major catastrophe was in Harrisburg, where the upper part of the reactor melted. Thanks to emergency cooling systems and the gas tight containment practically no radiation escaped outside. After the incident the safety culture has developed strongly so that nowadays the operation of nuclear plants is safer.
44. Most of the radioactive leakage within the western nuclear power industry has happened during the production of nuclear fuel or reprocessing of nuclear waste. It is evident that their safety culture has not yet developed to the high safety level of nuclear power plants. Sellafield's reprocessing plant in the United Kingdom has had several leakages. The worst radiation accident happened during the production of test fuel in Tokaimura, Japan, in 1999. One employee got a lethal dose and two others a very large radiation dose. 400 people living nearby have got an average radiation dose less than 0,1 mSv, which means that in the future none of them is likely to die of cancer caused by the accident. In comparison, tens of people die every year in mining and explosion accidents during the production of coal, oil and natural gas.
45. Another worry for the public is nuclear waste. Used nuclear fuel is very radioactive. It is being stored in a water tank for 40 years, after which its radiation is only one thousandth of the original and it can be disposed (Ref. 6). Nuclear waste can be placed in bedrock to the depth of 500 metres, inside copper capsules. After thousand years the radiation will not differ significantly from the radiation of rich uranium ore. The preparation for this type of final disposal has been going on for a good while e.g. in Finland. The deposition is considered as safe, and the Finnish Parliament will decide upon the plans in 2000.
46. In the fundamental rock of Finland there are large quantities of natural uranium and thorium, which's radiation equals to the radiation of nuclear waste from 400 nuclear power plants. The nature has not been careful; radioactive radon escapes from natural reserves, causing an average dose of 140 mSv for each Finn.
47. The costs caused by deposition of nuclear waste and the decommissioning of the plant as well as the cost of possible accidents have been taken into account in the price of nuclear electricity. As noted earlier the external costs of fossil or biomass energy are not included in their energy price.
e) Vital role of energy in modern society
48. It can be concluded that energy production is the main cause for GHG emissions and hence for climate change. Combustion of fossil fuels produces most of carbon dioxide emissions. Leakages in the gas fields and coalmines produce methane emissions and combustion of fossil fuels and burning of bio mass causes nitrogen oxide emissions.
49. In its present state the production of energy is not sustainable. However, energy is one the most important and critical resources of modern society. Reliable, continuous supply of energy is vital for the basic functions of society. In order to constrain the climate change the methods of energy production and use have to be modified. It will not be easy, because the capital attached to energy systems is estimated to be some ten thousand billion US dollars. Typically it has lasted 40 years for a new energy form to increase its share from one % to 10 % of the total energy production in the world, Figure 6.
50. It is an extremely difficult task to satisfy the global energy demand and at the same time mitigate climate change and reduce fine-particle emissions. In the rapporteur's opinion the plans to achieve this are far too optimistic. A reasonable debate on realistic energy policy is needed. This report focuses on the possibilities of science and technology to achieve more sustainable production of energy and especially electricity.
51. The Kyoto Mechanisms and energy taxation are not considered in this report. The Kyoto Mechanisms can help individual countries to fulfil the Kyoto Protocol, but the debate about their usefulness is still ongoing. The rules will be determined by the COP6 meeting in 2000. Energy taxes can encourage energy conservation, but studies indicate that the taxes must be quite high to really have a significant effect.
C. Reduction of carbon dioxide and fine-particle emissions
a) Energy conservation
52. By using energy more efficiently than today the need for additional energy and overall energy consumption can be decreased. This naturally lowers also the amount of harmful emissions. Saving energy does not, anyway, need to lead to stingy attitudes towards the use of energy, but to the understanding of how the essential functions can be performed with more efficient use of energy.
53. The energy demand and emission predictions take the normal development of technology into account, which brings the energy intensity (energy per national income unit) to pass a rate of circa one % per year. E.g. the energy consumption of household machines becomes constantly lower due to developments in technology. On the other hand the absolute amount of them increases, so the total consumption stays at best the same. By investing more in research and development it would probably be possible to improve energy intensity by 1.5 % per year.
54. Probably the biggest saving potential lies in the residential and commercial buildings' energy need. By using computer-aided design it is possible to find the most economic layout and orientation which takes into account solar heating, natural lighting, improved insulation, glazing, etc.
55. Advanced insulation technologies, such as gas-filled and evacuated panels offer a great saving potential. Other promising technologies are electro chromatic coatings that can change the optical characteristics of windows passively to match changing environmental conditions. Advanced building control systems are also a key to future reductions in energy use. Occupancy - based and voice-activated controls must be developed.
56. Lighting takes up to one fourth of the energy of a commercial building and around ten % of a residential building. Fluorescent lamps use only one fifth of the energy compared to the traditional light bulbs, so that the energy savings together with a longer life cycle will out-balance the higher acquisition costs in a couple of years. Research is also done on light emitting diodes (LED's), the efficiency of which is expected to be around twice as good as with fluorescent lamps. LED's have been available since the LED emitting blue light was developed. With three differently coloured LED's it is possible to create white light and also to tune the tone of the light.
57. Many of the technologies presented are still in the development phase and relatively expensive. Most advantageously they can be taken into use in the new buildings. The savings become significant only in the long term since the life cycle of the buildings is tens of years.
58. In existing buildings the savings can be achieved by improving the wall and window insulation. Sealing buildings should, anyway, be done with care. Eg. in Finland sealing the buildings in order to save heating energy has lead to unbreathing apartments and schools. As a consequence, the accumulated dampness has functioned as a growth base for moulds. The mould damages and the diseases caused by mould spores have turned out to lead to nation-wide extra costs. Also the concentration of the radioactive radon gas has increased in the apartments.
59. District heating, the Combined Heat and Power generation (CHP) in municipalities and industry, is an economical way to save energy and decrease emissions especially in the regions with cold winters. In Europe CHP is already widely used e.g. in Denmark, Finland and in the Netherlands. In many other countries it offers savings potential still unused. In CHP even 90 % efficiency of the fuel energy can be achieved, while in separate electricity generation the efficiency stays below 50 %. CHP is economical also from the emissions point of view, since in large plants they are notably smaller per useful energy unit.
60. There are plenty of possibilities to save energy in the industry as well, but also their realisation is easiest when constructing new capacity. A new or renewed factory usually consumes only a fraction of what an old one does. Usually the total amount of energy can be diminished by increasing the share of electricity, since it is flexible energy. In general, it is justified to invest in the research of processes that consume lots of energy.
61. As a conclusion it can be stated that the savings potential of energy, especially heat energy, is large. In practice its realisation takes a long period, so that it offers only a moderate help in carrying through the Kyoto Protocol.
b) Reduction of emissions of fossil fuel energy
Coal and oil
62. Coal is the most common and also the cheapest fossil fuel. It is evident that the use of coal will still grow, especially in the developing countries with large coal reserves. About one third of the electricity in the world is produced by coal. According to the BAU-scenario the coal electricity will grow 3 % per year and other use of coal by 1.5 % per year. Around 40 % of the world's carbon dioxide emissions increase in the period 1990-2010 are caused by the growth of the use of coal.
63. Oil passed coal as a primary source for energy around the year 1960. Half of the oil is consumed in the transportation and one tenth in the production of electricity. Oil power plant produces a bit less carbon dioxide emissions but equally many fine-particle emissions as a coal power plant. According to the BAU-scenario the growth of oil consumption will be 2 % per year, mainly due to increase in the traffic sector.
64. Due to the development in technology, the efficiency of new power plants has continuously increased and their carbon dioxide emissions respectively decreased. By modernising the old plants the emissions can be reduced significantly. The efficiency of old plants is typically around 30 %, but with new technology it will be possible to reach efficiency of 45 % in the near future. Since the life cycle of power plants is tens of years, the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions by modernising plants will take time.
65. In the future the efficiency of a traditional coal power plant can reach 50 %. Research is going on in coal gasification or clean-coal technology which can offer even higher efficiencies, but commercial applications are not yet available. Coal gasification with converter to reduce nitrogen emissions could cut down also the fine-particle emissions.
Natural gas
66. The share of natural gas is getting closer to oil in the world's energy production. A natural gas power plant produces about half of the carbon dioxide emissions of a coal power plant. New advanced combined cycle gas turbine plants offer 60 % efficiency and produce correspondingly less carbon dioxide. They are based on progress made in material technology.
67. Carbon dioxide emissions can be reduced only if a natural gas plant replaces an existing coal or oil plant. In the meantime, more electricity will be needed. The natural gas energy is estimated to grow by 4 % per year in the world and in the OECD countries by almost 6 % per year. In the period 1990-2010 the addition of natural gas will cause 40 % of the OECD countries' growth in carbon dioxide emissions.
68. Natural gas power plants produce one third of fine-particle emissions compared to coal and oil plants. It is possible to cut down fine-particle pollution of natural gas plants by applying a converter to get rid of most of the nitrogen emissions.
c) Nuclear power in reducing emissions
69. Nuclear fission power is not renewable. It is, anyway, comparable to the renewables since in practice it does not cause carbon dioxide or fine-particle emissions. Only the construction of the plant and the production of uranium fuel cause some carbon dioxide emissions, which are equivalent to what would be needed to construct a wind energy farm of equal power. Almost one fifth of the world's electricity is nuclear energy. If this amount of electricity (2300 TWH) would be produced by coal, the carbon dioxide emissions of the world would be 9 % higher and air pollution correspondingly more.
70. At present 31 countries use nuclear energy for electricity generation. In 17 of these the share of nuclear electricity is more than 25 %. There are 428 reactors currently operating in the world, with further 35 reactors under construction. Extensive programmes to increase nuclear energy are going on in Japan and China. On the other hand there are plans to close down nuclear plants in Sweden and in Germany. If they are replaced by modern natural gas plants, carbon dioxide emissions in Sweden will grow 35 % (Kyoto commitment +4 %) and in Germany around 5 % (Kyoto commitment -21 %).
71. In 1971-1995 the annual growth of nuclear power in the world was 13.5 % (Figure 6). Technically and economically it would have been possible to keep at least half of the growth rate in 1995-2010. If that had happened, more than a half of the additional electricity needed by the year 2010 would have been produced by nuclear power. Most of the coal electricity and a notable part of the natural gas electricity growth would have been replaced by nuclear power, and the growth in the world's carbon dioxide emissions by 2010 would have been only one third of what has been estimated to happen now. Fine-particle emissions would also have been smaller.
72. The safety of nuclear power and the safety culture of nuclear power plants have been developed continuously. E.g. the new nuclear power plants designed in co-operation between France and Germany are all safer than before. Nuclear waste disposal has been examined and several models for a solution have been developed. Their application will begin in the next years to come. The costs caused by the disassembly of power plants, the waste disposal and possible accidents have been included in the price of nuclear electricity. In turn, the price of coal, oil and natural gas plants' energy do not include the costs caused by the climate change. Neither have the costs caused by fine-particle emissions from fossil fuel and bioenergy plants been taken into account in the energy price.
73. The world's uranium supply will last for decades, but the breeder reactors would ensure it to last for thousands of years. Thus the research and development work of the breeder reactor has to be continued. Fusion power is a possible, almost pollutionless, energy source of the future. Enough investments should be made for its research and development.
d) Renewable energy sources in reducing emissions
74. The main renewable energy sources are hydro, biomass and biofuels, geothermal power, wind power, wave power, tidal power, passive and active solar heating and cooling, solar thermal electricity, and photovoltaics. Hydro, wind and photovoltaics supply only electricity, passive solar only heat and biomass and biofuels heat or electricity or transport fuels.
75. Renewables produce practically no carbon dioxide, but biomass and biofuels generate fine particles. Many of the renewable sources encourage decentralised production and thus reduce the need for transmission lines. All except hydro and biomass contribute much less than one % of energy needs (Figure 6).
Hydro power
76. Hydropower is at present the most important renewable energy source. It causes practically no carbon dioxide or fine-particle emissions. Some emissions are produced in plant construction. Almost one fifth of world electricity (2500 TWH in 1995) is hydropower. If this energy had been produced by modern coal fired power plants, world carbon dioxide emissions would be 9 % higher and air pollution correspondingly more.
77. Hydropower is excellent for taking care of variations in electricity demand, because it can be easily controlled almost instantly. Hence hydropower is more valuable than other electricity.
78. Unfortunately in Europe most of the potential of hydropower has already been taken into use. However, there are still possibilities to construct several small local hydro power plants. They could somewhat reduce carbon dioxide emissions. BAU-scenario expects very little growth in hydropower production in OECD-countries.
79. Some developing countries have large hydropower potentials. If these potentials can be utilised, the world's carbon dioxide emissions would be significantly reduced. Limiting factors are the required investments and also the local opposition against the construction of dams. BAU-scenario predicts a three % annual growth of electricity demand in developing countries corresponding to 600 TWh in the next 20 years.
80. A special case of hydropower is extraction of energy from tidal flows. It can be applied in places were the tide difference is exceptionally high and the geography suitable for it. One tidal power plant has been operating in France for several tens of years, and some potential exists also in other countries. Wave power takes energy from sea waves. Research has been going on for many years, but so far there has been no demonstration project at significant power levels.
Bioenergy
81. Traditional biomass, burning of wood and other biomass, has been an important energy source and still continues to be so in many developing countries. New biomass or the combustible renewables and waste all include biomass used directly or converted to solid fuels, as well as biomass-derived gaseous and liquid fuels, and industrial and municipal organic waste converted to energy. The International Energy Agency estimates that in the OECD countries the share of biomass of primary energy is at present 3 %. The estimate of the share of traditional and new biomass in the developing countries is 14 %.
82. Biomass has a potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in heat and electricity production. Plants such as sugarcane can be used as a raw material to produce transport fuels. Biogas (methane) can be extracted at dumping areas and burned for energy. It gives a double benefit: greenhouse gas methane is not emitted to the atmosphere and energy is gained without net carbon dioxide emissions.
83. Biomass energy plants, e.g. willow cultivation, have been developed and experimented already for a long time. The negative side in bioenergy is that in order to produce significant amounts of energy, relatively large areas are needed. The experimental areas have been relatively small up to now, so it is still difficult to estimate the possibilities for large-scale production. The biggest potential is in the developing countries, but there the energy cultivation competes with food production. Gene technology might dramatically improve the premises of energy cultivation in the future.
84. The European Union has created a renewable energy program, one goal of which is to produce 27 million tons of oil equivalent of bio energy by cultivating energy plants in the year 2010. The area of cultivation would be over 6 million hectares (almost 5 % of the agricultural land). The carbon dioxide emissions of the EU would be around 80 million tons or two % lower in 2010 than without energy plant cultures. As no large-scale energy plant cultivation exists yet, it is evident that the program will not be realised.
85. In the countries producing paper and timber, bioenergy is an important energy source. Large quantities of wood are collected from forests and the waste wood can be used for energy. In pulp production about half of the wood material is left as lignin, when fibres are separated. Lignin (black liquor) is used as a fuel in special plants to produce heat and electricity. In Finland nearly ten % of total primary energy is produced by black liquor and altogether 18 % by wood.
86. One of the best areas of growth for bio energy is the Combined Heat and Power generation. As it has been stated earlier, CHP saves energy. Due to bio energy the net carbon dioxide emissions are also eliminated. In the renewable energy sources program of the EU it has been considered possible that wood, agricultural waste, straw etc. taken into CHP use would make it possible to produce up to 30 million tons of oil equivalent energy. This would lower the EU carbon dioxide emissions in 2010 by a couple of %s. Anyway, this scenario is as well unlikely to become reality since the biomass collection techniques still need to be developed.
87. The weakness of bioenergy is that it produces relatively much fine particles and often also other air pollution like polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), heavy metals etc. Wide-scale use of bioenergy presumes development of combustion technologies to reduce air pollutants and health problems caused by them. Especially the gasification combustion should be developed.
Geothermal energy
88. Geothermal energy can be considered renewable if the consumption is not higher than the renewal-cycle. Geothermal energy's share of the world's total energy is about half a % and it is slowly increasing. In some areas where geothermal power exists there is growth potential available.
89. A new application is the use of ground heat. A piping network set under ground or water collects the heat stored during the summer, and it can be used with the help of a heat pump. In Sweden it has already been applied to warm more than 300 000 apartments, and in Finland they number tens of thousands. The heat energy can be taken from the ground without producing pollutants, but the heat pump takes about one third of the heating energy as electricity. Ground heat is a reasonable way to save energy.
Wind energy
90. Wind energy causes some carbon dioxide and fine-particle emissions only in the construction phase. The world's capacity of wind energy grows annually about 20 %. In 1999 the peak power was circa 10 000 MW. The average power is one third or one fourth of the peak power, so the electricity production equalled that of two large nuclear power plants.
91. With the present growth rate the wind energy could produce 0.6 % of the world's electricity in 2010 and decrease the carbon dioxide emissions by 0.3 %. One % share of the world's total energy could be reached around the year 2030.
92. The weaknesses of wind energy are the large wing swept and ground areas needed and great variations in the output of power. To produce 10 TWh electricity, around 1000 hectares of wing swept area is needed. This corresponds to 3400 windmills, 1.5 MW each, rising to the height of hundred metres. The best regulating power is hydropower, but if it is not available, and polluting fossil fuel plants have to be used.
93. More recently so-called wind farms have been developed in shallow coastlines. In favourable wind conditions the average annual power rises to one third of the peak power.
Solar energy
94. Direct solar power for heating buildings and solar panels for warm water are already in wide use in Southern Europe. Millions of square metres of solar panels exist in Europe, and the world total is estimated to be 35 million square metres.
95. Solar electricity is at its best in special applications at places where the conventional electric network is not available. The average power is around one fifth of the peak power. In the good conditions of the Mediterranean 40 square kilometres of solar panels would be needed to produce 10 TWh of electricity in a year.
96. The production of solar panels grows nowadays by around 15 % per year. Production needs energy, so if the annual growth exceeds 20 %, more energy will be bound to the panels than they produce.
97. Solar radiation can be applied directly via focusing mirrors to produce steam for electricity production. Solar power plants are still in experimental phase.
e) Reduction of emissions in transportation
98. Transportation consumes one fifth of the world's energy. It also produces one fifth of the carbon dioxide emissions. According to the BAU-scenario the carbon dioxide emissions will grow 60 % between 1990 and 2010. This is 40 % of the total growth, so it is important to develop means to cut the emissions.
99. Transportation also produces a significant amount of fine-particle emissions. In the European countries the transportation's share of fine-particle emissions varies from one fifth to a half. In Sweden and France it is more than half because relatively a large part of energy is nuclear power, which produces no fine particles.
100. The emissions of transportation can also be decreased by developing rapid train connections, which are competitive with private cars and aeroplanes between big cities. Motorways, when appropriate, save energy due to smoother traffic, cutting carbon dioxide and fine-particle emission.
101. The total efficiency of an internal combustion engine car is poor, about 20 %. The efficiency can be doubled and the emissions respectively halved with a combined internal combustion engine and an electric motor. Car engines run with optimum speed and electric motor when starting and accelerating. The engine keeps the accumulator loaded. Toyota Prius is an example of such combined vehicle.
102. Accumulator-run electric cars designed for urban delivery traffic are now commercial. Due to the good efficiency of the electric motor and the controlled emissions of the power plants the carbon dioxide and fine-particle emissions are much lower than that of a normal car.
103. A promising way to cut emissions is an electric car applying fuel cell. This has been experimentalised eg. at DaimlerChrysler. The best “fuel” for the cell is hydrogen, if hydrogen can be produced without carbon dioxide emissions. Since hydrogen technology and delivery do not exist yet, methane or gasoline can replace it as a fuel in the fuel cell. This causes carbon dioxide emissions, but due to the better efficiency of electric motor they are reduced and no fine particles are released. If methane can be produced from bioenergy, carbon dioxide emissions are omitted.
D. Carbon dioxide sequestration
104. Carbon sequestration involves preventing CO2 reaching or remaining in the atmosphere. CO2 could be captured directly from fuel gases and stored in geological formations such as depleted oil wells or deep oceans. There are studies going on but so far no large-scale experiments have been made in order to clear technical and economic uncertainties. Storing can be possible in the future, but not soon enough to fulfil the Kyoto commitments.
105. Destruction of forests is negative sequestration. By planting and growing more forests carbon dioxide could be absorbed from the atmosphere. It functions only during the period the forest is growing. Full-grown forest is in equilibrium. It absorbs and emits equal amounts of carbon dioxide. Droughts and forest fires can disturb the sequestration. In connection with Kyoto COP-meetings the question of carbon dioxide sinks will be discussed.
E. Conclusions
106. Fulfilling the goals of the Kyoto Protocol will be extremely difficult. This document indicates that practically only two technical solutions are available for effective decrease of carbon dioxide emissions. They are saving energy and adding nuclear power, but even these solutions together will not be enough. It is already now evident that most of the countries which signed the Kyoto Protocol are not able to fulfil it.
107. Other means play a minor role compared to these two. Coal power plants can be renovated to a better efficiency or natural gas plants can replace them, but the change is slow compared to the demand for new power plants set by ever-growing need for energy. New renewable energy sources will help only marginally before the year 2010. Additional hydropower will help a little. Carbon sequestration methods are still under development.
108. Saving energy has been a goal in many countries already for years, but the growth of energy has followed the business as usual -scenario. The energy savings achieved by the development of technology have already been taken into account in the scenarios, and savings bigger than those have not been possible to reach. The potential to cut the emission growth by a simply saving of energy is, anyway, promising, and thus all actions towards it should be strongly encouraged.
109. In the BAU-scenario it has been assumed that the nuclear power production will grow very slowly, so nuclear power has not been expected to help very much in reducing carbon dioxide or fine-particle emissions. The world's electricity consumption will grow annually by 3.5 % and the total energy consumption by 2.5 %, so that the carbon dioxide emissions will grow 2.5 %. In the OECD countries the share of electricity in the increase of carbon dioxide emissions is more than 50%. Most of the growth will be produced by new coal fired power plants.
110. Increasing the share of nuclear power could significantly reduce the increase of carbon dioxide emissions. Nuclear power has a growth potential that would, when realised, also reduce the expected fine-particle emissions.
111. As the demand for energy grows, but carbon dioxide and fine-particle emissions are to be cut, the augmentation of nuclear power is a superior solution. The resistance against nuclear power has slowed down the construction of new plants. Hence also this method will be too slow to implement in full scale with notable results by the year 2010, in the rapporteur's opinion. It is essential that the additional construction of nuclear power plants will continue also after 2010. In the longer run it is possible to reach really significant decrease in emissions.
112. To make additional construction of nuclear power plants possible, the public must receive correct information on nuclear power and other energy sources. Media plays an important role here. To be successful, journalists ought to have enough knowledge on different energy sources, climate change, fine-particle pollution and radiation.
F. References
1. The Kyoto Protocol to the Convention on Climate Change; Climate Change Secretariat, 1998.
2. World Energy Outlook 1998 Edition; International Energy Agency IEA/OECD 1998.
3. Overview of the environment and health in Europe in the 199Os; EUR/ICP/ECHO 020205. 16 August 1999.
4. Fine-particle emissions and human health; Doc. 8167, 9 July 1998, Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe.
5. Opinion on the health effects of the Chernobyl accident; Doc. 7751, 7 February 1997, Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe.
6. Report on nuclear waste disposal; Doc. 8054, 31 March 1998, Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe.
TABLE 1
CARBON DIOXIDE AND FINE-PARTICLE EMISSIONS AND YEARLY RADIATION DOSES OF MODERN LARGE POWER PLANTS PER 10 TWH OF ELECTRICITY
Carbon dioxide Fine-particles PM2.5 Radiation dose
soot sulphate total
and nitrate
tonnes tonnes tonnes tonnes mSv
Coal 7 500 000 800 7800 8600 0.002
Oil 6 200 000 800 7800 8600 0.001
Nat.gas 3 800 000 0 2900 2900 0.001?
Bio(Wood) 30 000 860 3000 3900
Nuclear 75 000 0 0 0 0.0002
Hydro 30 000 0 0 0
Wind 75 000 0 0 0
Solar el. 55 000 0 0 0
-10 TWh is the electric energy produced by a large (1300 MW) nuclear plant in a year.
-Emissions are estimated for plants using modern technology.
-Half of the sulphur dioxide emissions are estimated to be transformed in the atmosphere to sulphate fine-particles and half of the nitrogen dioxide emissions to nitrate fine-particles.
-Radiation doses are in the vicinity of the plant.
-Natural radiation doses in Europe are 1-4 mSv per annum
-Carbon dioxide emissions of a nuclear plant are due to the plant construction, fuel extraction and plant operation.
-Carbon dioxide emissions of bio, hydro, wind, and solar plants are due to the plant construction.
-Bio energy has additional emissions caused by wood extraction and transportation
-Wind and solar plants need an additional plant for a continuous supply of electricity. About 70 % of the emissions of the additional plant should be included.
TABLE 2
RELATIVE EMISSIONS OF VEHICLES IN CITIES
Carbon Fine particles PM2.5
dioxide
soot sulphate
and nitrate
Car with converter 1 1 1
Car without conv. 1 4-7 4-7
Car (diesel) 0.8 40 2
Bus (diesel) 4.4 35-50 54
-Car with a converter = 1. Figures correspond the number of passengers for achieving equal emissions per passenger.
-Values for diesel vehicles assume that there is very little sulphur in the fuel.
TABLE 3
GHG emission limitations of Annex B Countries of the Kyoto Protocol
Reduction commitment in 2008-2012 (in average per year) as percentage of emissions in 1990.
Australia + 8 % Lithuania - 8 %
Bulgaria - 8 % Monaco - 8 %
Canada - 6 % New Zealand 0 %
Croatia - 5 % Norway +1 %
Czech Republic - 8 % Poland - 6 %
Estonia - 8 % Romania - 8 %
European Union - 8 % Russian Federation 0 %
Hungary - 6 % Slovakia - 8 %
Iceland +10% Slovenia - 8 %
Japan - 6 % Switzerland - 8 %
Latvia - 8 % Ukraine 0 %
Liechtenstein - 8 % USA - 7 %
TABLE 4
Burden sharing within the European Union
Reduction commitment in 2008-2012 (in average per year) as percentage of emissions in 1990.
Austria - 13 % Italy - 6,5 %
Belgium - 7.5 % Luxenburg - 28 %
Denmark - 21 % Netherlands - 6 %
Finland 0 Portugal +27 %
France 0 Spain +15 %
Germany -21 % Sweden + 4 %
Greece +25 % U.K. -12.5%
Ireland +13 % European Union - 8 %
TABLE 5
GHG emissions and required reductions as percentage of predicted emissions in 2010
Carbon dioxide tonnes equivalent
GHG GHG GHG predicted Required reductions as
in 1990 in 1996 in 2010 percentage of emisions in 2010
Austria 78 77* (77) (- 13 %)
Belgium 140 145* (145) (- 11 %)
Denmark 72 92 60 - 6 %
Finland 65 82 80 - 23 %
France 500 555 560 - 12 %
Germany 1200 1080 1180 - 24 %
Greece 100 111 112 + 12 %
Ireland 57 59 67 + 4 %
Italy 540 540* (540) (- 7 %)
Luxembourg 12 10* (10) (- 9 %)
Netherlands 217 232 252 - 24 %
Portugal 68 75 82 + 5 %
Spain 300 325 360 + 4 %
Sweden 65 72 74 - 9 %
United Kingdom 740 700 695 - 7 %
European Union 4154 4155 (4195) (- 11 %)
TABLE 5 cont.
GHG emissions and required reductions as percentage of predicted emissions in 2010
Carbon dioxide tonnes equivalent
GHG GHG GHG predicted Required reductions as
in 1990 in 1996 in 2010 percentage of emisions in 2010
Norway 48 52.5 60 - 19 %
Switzerland 51 52,5 56 - 16 %
Bulgaria 138 87* 140 - 9 %
Czech Republic 190 152* 195 - 10 %
Estonia 40 23* (23) (+ 60 %)
Hungary 100 78* (78) (+ 21 %)
Latvia 27 19* (19) (+ 31 %)
Poland 580 440 (440) (+ 24 %)
Russia 3000 2250* (2250) (+ 33 %)
Slovakia 71 54* 69 - 5 %
Ukraine 900 800* (800) (+ 13 %)
Canada 460 490 560 -23 %
New Zealand 76 74 83 + 1%
USA 5750 6500 6500 - 18 %
Japan 1190 1230 1420 - 21 %
*in 1995; numbers in parentheses assumed, no predictions released
Source: http://www.grida.no/db/maps/collection/climate5/index.htm
Reporting committee: Committee on Science and Technology.
Budgetary implications for the Assembly: none.
Reference to committee: Doc. 8320 and Reference No. 2359 of 30 March 1999.
Draft recommendation unanimously adopted by the committee on 29 June 2000.
Members of the committee: MM. Rakhansky (Chairman), Birraux (Vice-Chairman), Tiuri (Vice-Chairman), Lekberg (Vice-Chairman), About, D’Aron, Asciak, Bartos, Brunhart, Bulic, Cherribi (Alternate : Dees), Cioni, Colla, Cunliffe (Alternate : Etherington), Mrs Damanaki, MM. Dolazza, Duka-Zolyomi, von der Esch, Mrs Faldet, MM. Fayot, Mrs Fernandez Capel, MM. Gligoroski, Guardans (Alternate : Fernandez Aguilar), Ivanov, Jackson, Kitov, Kittis, Kjaer, Kolb, Kurucsai, Leers, Lengagne (Alternate : Mattei), Libane, Liiv, Lotz, Maass, Marmazov, Mateju, Melnikov, Minarolli, Monteiro, Moreels, Mrs Moynihan-Cronin, Mr Mozgan, Mrs Nabholz-Haidegger, MM. Niculescu, Nigmatulin, Nikologorsky, Patarkalishvili, Pawlak, Plattner, Mrs Ragnarsdottir, MM. Rapson, Raskinis, Riccardi, Roseta, Scheer (Alternate: Wodarg), Steolea, Tanik, Turini, Wittbrodt, Wurm, Yürür, Mrs Zissi.
N.B. The names of members present at the meeting are printed in italics.
Secretaries of the committee: Mr Lervik, Mr Torcătoriu