-------
Total Methane Emissions from
Other Non-Agricultural Sources
Year
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
MMTC02
55
51
50
51
54
GgCH4
2,630
2,410
2,370
2,440
2,560
For other agricultural sources, emissions from
developed countries are projected to remain stable
through 2010. The lack of reporting on these sources
does not allow for accurate analysis of the trends in
either category. For other non-agricultural sources,
emissions drop 8 percent between 1990 and 1995, but
return to 1990 levels by 2010.
2.9 Explanatory Notes
1. The amount of methane emitted from fuel
combustion is driven by the amount of fuel
combusted and the combustion technology used.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 Methane 2-9
-------
3. Nitrous Oxide
Nitrous oxide (TS^O) is emitted from a variety of natural and anthropogenic sources. It is produced from natural
microbiological processes in soil and water, as well as from human-related activities like agriculture, industry,
energy, and waste management. As a result of human activity, atmospheric concentrations of nitrous oxide have
risen by approximately 13 percent during the last 200 years (IPCC 1996). Nitrous oxide is estimated to be 310 times
more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide over a 100-year time period.
This chapter presents emission inventories and projections for developed countries from 1990 through 2010 for the
following nitrous oxide source categories:
• Agricultural soils;
• Industrial processes: adipic acid and nitric acid production;
• Fossil fuel combustion: both stationary and mobile sources; and
• Livestock manure management.
Agricultural soils are by far the largest source of emissions, representing nearly two-thirds of N2O emissions overall,
and accounting for the majority of nitrous oxide emissions from nearly every country and region. Industrial
processes and mobile sources are also important sources of N2O.
3.1 Overview
Exhibits 3-1 and 3-2 summarize total nitrous oxide
emissions estimates by sector and region for the
period 1990 through 2010. More detailed nitrous
oxide emissions data for each country are presented
in Appendix C.
Aggregate nitrous oxide emissions from developed
countries declined from 1990 to 2000, but are
expected to begin to increase. Much of the initial
decline was due to the economic restructuring taking
place in Russia and Eastern Europe, which caused a
contraction of the agricultural sectors. In the EU-15,
emissions dropped primarily due to the reform of the
Exhibit 3-1 : Nitrous Oxide Emissions - By Source (MMTC02)
ff 1,200
O
o
t 1,000
o
o
p
'x
o
in
D
O
800 —
.2 600
ILI
400 --
200 —
1990
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
n Stationary
Combustion
Manure Management
n Mobile Combustion
Q Industrial Processes
n Agricultural Soils
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Nitrous Oxide
3-1
-------
Exhibit 3-2: Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Developed Countries (MMTCCh)
Region
EU-15
Other Western
Europe
Russia
Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
U.S.
Total
1990
371
79
130
29
16
60
389
1,082
1995
347
51
89
31
18
66
423
1,033
2000
307
57
106
34
24
64
424
1,024
2005
314
67
122
38
28
69
438
1,084
2010
318
74
136
39
29
73
455
1,131
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which shifted
from production-based support to direct area-based
payments. This policy change increased pressure to
optimize agricultural inputs and thus reduced
fertilizer use. Therefore emissions from fertilizer use
and manufacturing in the EU-15 dropped
significantly and are expected to continue that trend
through 2010.
Although much smaller than the agricultural soil
emissions, industrial and mobile source emission
trends are noteworthy. In 1990, industrial processes
were the second largest source, accounting for about
15 percent of total emissions. These emissions
dropped dramatically in the last decade, however,
they are expected to stay near 2000 levels thereafter.
The installation of abatement technologies, shifts in
chemical production to developing countries, and
decrease in nitric acid demand have all contributed to
this decrease in emissions. Emissions from mobile
sources, on the other hand, have increased
dramatically. This increase comes as a result of a
significant increase in the number of vehicles and
miles traveled, as well as increased use of NOX
abatement technologies that produce N2O as a
byproduct.
3.2 Agricultural Soils
Nitrous oxide is produced naturally as part of the
nitrogen cycle in soils, through the microbial
processes of denitrification and nitrification. A
number of anthropogenic activities add nitrogen to
soils, thereby increasing the amount of nitrogen
available for nitrification and denitrification, and
ultimately the amount of nitrous oxide emitted.
Anthropogenic activities add nitrogen to the soils
both directly and indirectly.
Direct nitrogen additions occur through:
• Cropping practices:
Q Application of fertilizers;
Q Production of nitrogen-fixing crops (beans,
pulses, and alfalfa);
Q Incorporation of crop residues into the soil;
and
Q Cultivation of high organic content soils
(histosols).
• Livestock waste management:
Q Spreading of livestock wastes on cropland
and pasture; and
Q Direct deposition of wastes by grazing
livestock.
Indirect additions occur through two pathways:
• Volatilization and subsequent atmospheric
deposition of ammonia and oxides of nitrogen
that originate from the application of fertilizers
and the production of livestock wastes; and
• Surface runoff and leaching of nitrogen from the
same sources.
Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Agricultural Soils
Year
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
MMTC02
656
614
645
675
701
GgN20
2,120
1,980
2,080
2,180
2,260
As shown in Exhibit 3-3, emissions decreased from
1990 to 1995 but are expected to increase steadily to
2010. Since the application of synthetic fertilizers is
typically the largest emission sub-source for
agricultural soils, the consumption of fertilizers has a
significant effect on the trends.
The short-term decline resulted from agricultural
policy changes in the EU-15 and economic
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Nitrous Oxide
3-2
-------
restructuring in Eastern Europe and the FSU. The
economic transitioning in Eastern Europe and FSU
created a downturn in the overall economy. Due to
the lowering of income, farmers purchased and used
less fertilizer. During the same period, EU-15
countries also reduced their use of fertilizer as a
result of the reform of the Common Agricultural
Policy (CAP), which reduced market support prices
to world prices and offset the impact by direct
payments. EU-15 farmers had more incentive to
optimize input use, including fertilizer. The
reduction in fertilizer use led to a significant decrease
in emissions. Only Italy, Canada, and the U.S.
showed an increase in emissions from 1990 to 1995.
The largest increase was in the U.S., where there was
an increase in agricultural acreage and increased
fertilizer use.
The trend through 2010 has two counteracting
drivers: continued economic transitioning in Russia,
Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, and continued
agricultural restructuring in the EU-15. As the
economies of Russia and Eastern Europe improve,
N2O emissions from soils will also increase. This
increase will come as a consequence of more
fertilizer use and increased livestock production. On
the other hand, emissions from many EU-15
countries are decreasing, and in the rest of the EU-15
they are increasing at a lower rate than production.
The decreases in fertilizer use as a result of the
reform of the CAP is expected to continue. The
lower emission rates per unit of production lowers
overall emissions despite expected increases in
production.
3.3 Industrial Processes
Nitrous oxide is emitted during the production of
both adipic and nitric acid.
Adipic acid (hexane-1, 6-dioxic acid) is a white
crystalline solid used as a feedstock in the
manufacture of synthetic fibers, coatings, plastics,
urethane foams, elastomers, and synthetic lubricants.
Commercially, it is the most important of the
aliphatic dicarboxylic acids, which are used to
manufacture polyesters. In the U.S., for example,
90 percent of all adipic acid is used in the production
of nylon 6,6 (SRI, 1998). Adipic acid is produced
through a two-stage process with nitrous oxide
generated in the second stage. By treating nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and other regulated pollutants in the
Exhibit 3-3: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agricultural Soils 1990 through 2010 (MMTCCb)
CM
O
o
E
ILI
o
TJ
'
800.00
Canada
Russia
Other
1990
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Nitrous Oxide
3-3
-------
waste gas stream, N2O emissions can be reduced.
Studies confirm that these abatement technologies
can reduce N2O emissions by up to 99 percent,
depending on plant specifications (Riemer et al.,
1999).
Nitric acid (HNOs) is an inorganic compound used
primarily to make synthetic commercial fertilizer. It
is also a major component in the production of adipic
acid and explosives. During the catalytic oxidation
of ammonia, nitrous oxide is formed as a by-product
and released from reactor vents into the atmosphere.
While the waste gas stream may be cleaned of other
pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, there are
currently no control measures aimed at eliminating
nitrous oxide.
Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Industrial Processes
Year
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
MMTC02
188
170
106
111
115
GgN20
606
548
342
358
372
Total nitrous oxide emissions from industrial sources
dropped substantially from 1990 to 2000 and are
expected to remain stable through 2010, as illustrated
in Exhibit 3-4.
For adipic acid, process changes and a shift in
production to developing countries offset the increase
in global demand. Global demand for adipic acid
was 4.0 billion pounds in 1995 and was projected to
be 4.8 billion pounds in 2000 (SRI, 1998). Much of
this increase comes from the growing nylon 6,6 resin
end-use market rather than the more mature nylon 6,6
fibers end-use market. Capacity expansions to meet
this projected demand occurred in the Far East,
instead of in Western Europe and North America.
Additionally, industry in the U.S., EU-15, and
Canada made efforts to reduce nitrous oxide
emissions from the adipic acid production process in
the late 1990s. As shown in Exhibit 3-4, Canada
expects to reduce emissions significantly by 2000
through the phase-in of abatement technology by the
sole adipic acid producer. Similarly, in the U.S.,
emissions dropped substantially between 1996 and
1998 due to the installation of abatement technology
in two of the four plants.
Fertilizer demand, and thus nitric acid use, is
expected to decline in Western Europe but increase in
Eastern Europe, Ukraine, and Russia. The decline in
Western Europe is due to concerns about the level of
nitrates in the water supply. Since nitric acid involves
Exhibit 3-4: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Industrial Processes 1990 through 2010 (MMTCCh)
200
s
u
a>
160 -
120 -
m 80 -
in
o
40 -
EU-15
, Other
,Canada
1990
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Nitrous Oxide
3-4
-------
little global trade (SRI, 1998), it is expected that
nitric acid production in this region will decline as
well, leading to a decline in nitrous oxide emissions
from this source in the EU-15. As demand for
fertilizer increases in Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern
Europe after 2000, so will N2O emissions,
counteracting the trend in Western Europe.
3.4 Fossil Fuel Combustion
Nitrous oxide is a product of the reaction that occurs
between nitrogen and oxygen during combustion of
fossil fuels and biomass. Both mobile and stationary
sources emit nitrous oxide, and the volume emitted
varies according to the type of fuel, combustion
technology, and pollution control device used, as well
as maintenance and operating practices.
3.4.1 Stationary Combustion
Stationary combustion encompasses all fossil fuel
combustion activities except transportation (i.e.,
mobile combustion). These activities primarily
include combustion of fossil fuels and commercially-
traded biomass fuels used in large power plants and
boilers. Total emissions from stationary combustion
are small in comparison to other sources, amounting
to only 7 percent of N2O emissions from developed
countries.
Emission estimates have been developed for the
electric utilities sector and the manufacturing and
construction industry sector. The electric power
sector emits more than twice as much nitrous oxide
on average as the manufacturing and construction
industries combined. The commercial and residential
sectors are also sources of nitrous oxide emissions
but they are not analyzed in this report because
emissions are believed to be much smaller.1
Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Stationary Sources
Year
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
MMTC02
64
61
66
70
74
GgN20
205
198
213
227
240
Fuel consumption and fuel type are the primary
drivers of nitrous oxide emissions from stationary
combustion, thus emissions from this source are
largely dependent on energy demand and energy use
trends.
From 1990 to 1995 the two driving forces behind the
decrease in emissions, shown in Exhibit 3-5, were the
Exhibit 3-5: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources 1990 through 2010 (MMTC02)
80
O 70 H
60 -
50 -
.2 40 H
E
ILI
o 30 -
"
20 ^
u>
1 10
1990
EU-15
Russia
Other
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Nitrous Oxide
3-5
-------
decline in energy consumption in Russia and Eastern
Europe along with a shift in Western Europe from
coal to natural gas. Emissions are expected to grow
after 1995 because of increased energy demand. As
the economies of Eastern Europe and Russia recover
after 2000, energy demand is expected to rise. High
emitting coal boilers and furnaces will continue to be
the primary source of emissions in these regions as
long as coal remains a major source of energy.
Emissions from the EU-15 are also expected to
increase with energy consumption. Emissions per
unit of energy will decrease, however, because of a
shift from coal to natural gas, and the increased use
of fluidized bed systems in coal-fired plants, which
reduce nitrous oxide emissions.
3.4.2 Mobile Combustion
Mobile combustion sources such as automobiles and
airplanes emit nitrous oxide. As with stationary
sources, nitrous oxide emissions are closely related to
air-fuel mixtures and combustion temperature, as
well as pollution control equipment on transportation
vehicles. The total distance traveled is an important
factor in the emissions from all mobile sources. Road
transport accounts for the majority of mobile source
fuel consumption, and hence the majority of mobile
nitrous oxide emissions.
Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Mobile
Sources
Year
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
MMTC02
82
104
122
137
148
GgN20
263
336
393
443
478
The sharp increase in N2O emissions from mobile
sources seen in Exhibit 3-6 is due to two factors.
First, an increasing share of the automotive fleet are
equipped with emission reduction catalysts. Certain
types of catalyst technologies, while achieving
substantial reductions in Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOCs), Carbon Monoxide (CO), and
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX), may actually result in higher
nitrous oxide emissions. In the U.S. and Canada, the
automobile industry is planning to phase-in new
emission control technologies that produce lower
N2O emissions. The penetration of these new control
technologies is expected to occur somewhat later and
at a slower rate in the EU-15. Second, a substantial
increase in distance traveled and fuel consumption
has occurred since 1990 due to strong economic
Exhibit 3-6: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Mobile Sources 1990 through 2010 (MMTCCb)
o
u
UJ
9)
in
o
160
Japan
Canada
Other
1990
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Nitrous Oxide
3-6
-------
growth and low fuel prices during the 1990s and this
trend is likely to continue in the future. In the future
some of this increased activity will possibly be offset
by increasing energy efficiency of passenger cars.
3.5 Manure Management
As with nitrogen in soil, nitrogen in livestock manure
undergoes nitrification and denitrification. The
nitrous oxide emission rate depends on the system
used for waste management. Emissions that occur
during storage and handling of manure (i.e., before
the manure is added to soils) are included in this
source category; emissions associated with the land
application of manure are included in the agricultural
soils category.
Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Livestock Manure Management
Year
MMTC02
GgN2Q
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
94
83
86
91
94
302
268
277
294
302
As shown in Exhibit 3-7, emissions in Russia and
Europe decreased between 1990 and 1995. In Russia
and Eastern Europe the decrease was due to the
economic decline leading to less demand for
livestock products. The decline in demand resulted
in a decrease in livestock populations and thus lower
emissions. As the economies recover, livestock
demand will increase. In the EU-15, US, Western
Europe, and Australia, governments are reducing
production supports. As a result, production is
decreasing, leading to less manure and lower
emissions. However, in many of these countries, the
production decrease is offset by a change in manure
management practices. As local environmental
quality concerns grow, governments require more
sophisticated management systems for manure,
which tend to produce more nitrous oxide.
3.6 Explanatory Notes
1. U.S. emissions inventory and projections from
this source include commercial and residential
sector emissions.
Exhibit 3-7: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manure Management 1990 through 2010 (MMTC02)
o
u
£
LU
in
o
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1990
EU-15
Russia
Canada
Other
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Nitrous Oxide
3-7
-------
4. High Global Warming Potential Gases
This chapter presents estimates and projections of high global warming potential (high GWP) emissions in
developed countries from 1990 through 2010. High GWP emissions result from the use of substitutes for
ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and five additional industrial sectors:
• Several hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and, to a lesser extent, perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and hydrofluoroethers
(HFEs) are replacing ODS in a wide variety of applications, including as refrigerants, aerosol propellants,
solvents, foam blowing agents, medical sterilization carrier gases, and fire extinguishing agents.
• PFCs, SF6, and HFC-23 are used in semiconductor production.
• HFC-23 is released as a byproduct of HCFC-22 production.
• SF6 is used as a dielectric gas and insulator in sealed electric power equipment.
• SF6 is released during its use as a cover gas to protect molten magnesium from burning on contact with air.
• PFCs-CF4 and C2F6-are produced and released during primary aluminum smelting.
4.1 Overview
Exhibit 4-1 summarizes total high GWP emissions by
source for 1990 through 2010. Exhibit 4-2
summarizes total high GWP emissions by region.
Exhibit 4-3 lists the high GWP gases included in this
analysis, along with their associated uses or emission
sources, atmospheric lifetime, and global warming
potentials. More detailed high GWP emissions and
projections are presented in Appendix D.
Exhibit 4-2: Total High GWP Gas Emissions from
Developed Countries (MMTCCh)
Region
EU-15
Other Western
Europe
Russia
Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
U.S.
Total
1990
57
6
20
4
8
15
14
98
223
1995
46
4
15
2
5
34
11
100
223
2000
80
5
18
2
6
31
13
140
298
2005
120
10
33
8
11
58
21
220
489
2010
160
18
53
15
12
88
27
310
685
Exhibit 4-1: High GWP Gas Emissions by Source (MMTCCb)
CM
O
o
U)
o
'
(fl
HI
in
0.
CD
.c
D!
I
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
\\X\\
•yww
1990
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
• Aluminum
Manufacturing
(RFC)
• Magnesium
Manufacturing
(SF6)
DHCFC
Manufacturing
(HFC23)
a Utility Industry
(SF6)
n Semiconductor
Manufacturing
(RFC)
n ODS Substitution
(HFC, RFC)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-1
-------
Exhibit 4-3: High GWP Chemicals
Chemical
Life-time
(yrs)
GWP
(100-yr)
Use
Hydrofluorocarbons (MFCs)
HFC-23
HFC-32
HFC-41
HFC-43-10mee
HFC-125
HFC-134
HFC-134a
HFC-152a
HFC-143
HFC-143a
HFC-227ea
HFC-236fa
HFC-236ea
HFC-245fa
HFC-245ca
HFC-365mfc
264
5.6
3.7
17.1
32.6
10.6
14.6
1.5
3.8
48.3
36.5
209
8.1a
7.7b'c
6.6
10.2a
11,700
650
150
1,300
2,800
1,000
1,300
140
300
3,800
2,900
6,300
1 ,000a
816b'c
560
91 Oa
Byproduct of HCFC-22 production, used in very-low temperature refrigeration, blend
component in fire suppression, and plasma etching and cleaning in semiconductor
production.
Blend component of numerous refrigerants.
Not in commercial use today.
Cleaning solvent.
Blend component of numerous refrigerants and a fire suppressant.
Not in commercial use today.
Most widely used HFC refrigerant, blend component of other refrigerants, propellant in
metered-dose inhalers and aerosols, and foam blowing agent.
Blend component of several refrigerant blends.
Not in commercial use today.
Refrigerant blend.
Fire suppressant and propellant for metered-dose inhalers.
Refrigerant and fire suppressant.
Not in commercial use today.
Foam blowing agent and refrigerant; near commercialization.
Not in commercial use today, possible refrigerant in the future.
Under study for use as foam blowing agent.
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
CF4
C2Fe
C3F8
C4Fio
C-C4F8
CsFi2
CeFi4
50,000
10,000
2,600
2,600
3,200
4,100
3,200
6,500
9,200
7,000
7,000
8,700
7,500
7,400
Byproduct of aluminum production. Plasma etching and cleaning in semiconductor
production and low temperature refrigerant.
Byproduct of aluminum production. Plasma etching and cleaning in semiconductor
production.
Low-temperature refrigerant, and fire suppressant. Used in plasma cleaning in
semiconductor production.
Fire suppressant.
Not in much use, if at all, today. Emerging for plasma etching in semiconductor production.
Not in much use, if at all, today.
Precision cleaning solvent - low volume use.
Nitrogen Trifluoride (NFs)
NFs 740d 10,800d Plasma cleaning in semiconductor production.
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SFe)
SFe
3,200
23,900
Cover gas in magnesium production and casting, dielectric gas and insulator in electric
power equipment, fire suppression discharge agent in military systems, atmospheric and
subterranean tracer gas, sound insulation, process flow-rate measurement, medical
applications, and formerly an aerosol propellant. Used for plasma etching in semiconductor
production.
Hydrofluoroethers (HFEs)
C4F9OCH3
C4FgOC2H5
5.0a
0.77s
390a
55a
Cleaning solvent and heat transfer fluid.
Near commercialization for use as a cleaning solvent.
GWPs and atmospheric lives are reprinted from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Second Assessment Report, 1995, except
as noted below:
aWMO, 1999, Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 1998, World Meteorological Organization, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring
Project -Report No. 44, p.10.27.
bJunyi Chen, Valerie Young, and Hiromi Niki, Kinematic and Mechanistic Studies for Reaction of CF3CH2CHF2 (HFC-245fa) Initiated by H-
Atom Abstraction Using Atomic Chlorine, J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 101 , 2648-2653.
Personal communication between Don Wuebbles, University of Illinois at Urbana-Campaign and Reynaldo Forte, US Environmental
Protection Agency, August 27, 1998.
dIPCC,2001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-2
-------
As the exhibits show, emissions of the high GWP
gases have increased during the 1990s and are
expected to increase through 2010 in every country,
primarily due to increasing emissions of the ODS
substitutes as countries' phase out ODS production
under the Montreal Protocol.
The major source of potential emissions increase
among the other industrial gas uses is the
semiconductor industry, which is expected to
continue dramatic economic growth throughout the
forecast period. High GWP emissions will increase
more modestly from the utility and magnesium
industries. Emissions from HCFC-22 production are
expected to decline after non-feedstock HCFC
production is phased out. Emissions from aluminum
smelting are projected to decrease over time,
although aluminum production is increasing, because
of on-going efforts to significantly modify operating
parameters and reduce the emissions from this
source.
4.2 Substitutes for Ozone
Depleting Substances
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and, to a lesser extent,
perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and hydrofluoroethers
(HFEs) are used as alternatives to several classes of
ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) that are being
phased out under the terms of the Montreal Protocol.
ODSs, which include chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),
halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), have been used
for decades in a variety of industrial sectors including
refrigeration and air conditioning, aerosols, solvent
cleaning, fire extinguishing, foam production, and
medical sterilization. Although the HFCs, and PFCs
that replace ODSs are not harmful to the stratospheric
ozone layer, they are powerful greenhouse gases.
Total Emissions of ODS Substitutes
Year
MMTC02
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2
42
125
260
382
As shown in Exhibit 4-4, the use and subsequent
emissions of HFCs and PFCs as ODS substitutes has
increased dramatically, from small amounts in 1990,
to 127 MMTCO2 in 2000. This trend is expected to
continue for many years, and will accelerate in the
early part of this century as HCFCs, which are
interim substitutes in many applications, are
themselves phased out under the provisions of the
Copenhagen Amendments to the Montreal Protocol.
Exhibit 4-4: HFC and PFC Emissions from ODS Substitute Uses 1990 through 2010 (MMTC02)
400
Russia
Japan
Other
1990
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-3
-------
In addition, in some ODS replacement applications,
such as solvent cleaning or aerosol applications, the
substitutes are emitted immediately, but in others,
such as refrigeration and air conditioning
applications, the substitutes are replacing ODSs in
equipment that slowly releases the gas. Therefore,
the rate of increase in ODS substitute emissions is
driven by the pace of the phase out in each country
and by the emissions profile for the source in which
the gas is used.
Significant uncertainty exists in these estimates. In
particular, European projections have significantly
lower estimates for Europe than those presented here
(Ecofys, 2001). Additionally, extrapolating from
ODS use in 1990 may be problematic for estimating
future HFC use as substitution rates are uncertain.
4.3 Semiconductor
Manufacturing
The semiconductor industry currently emits
fluorocarbons (CF4, C2F6, C3F8, C-C4F8, HFC-23),
and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) during manufacturing
processes. These gases, collectively called
perfluorinated carbon compounds (PFCs), are used in
two important steps of silicon-based semiconductor
manufacturing: (1) plasma etching of thin films; and
(2) cleaning of chemical-vapor-deposition (CVD)
chambers. Some amount of the chemical used in
these processes is emitted to the atmosphere. In
addition, a fraction of the heavier PFCs used in these
two production processes is converted into CF4 and
emitted. The amount of the PFCs used in and emitted
during any process varies according to the
manufacturer and to the device being manufactured.
Exhibit 4-5 presents estimates of the total emissions
from semiconductor manufacturing for the years
1990 through 2010 for developed countries.
Total PFC and SFe Emissions from
Semiconductor Manufacturing
Year
MMTC02
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
5
13
24
65
124
Among developed countries, the majority of PFC
emissions originate from the three major
semiconductor producing regions: the US, EU-15,
and Japan. These three regions are projected to
remain the major producers of semiconductors
through 2010.
Exhibit 4-5: PFC and SFs Emissions from Semiconductor Manufacturing 1990 through 2010 (MMTC02)
Japan
1990
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-4
-------
Market demand for semiconductors is projected to
continue its current rapid growth. Correspondingly, a
rapid growth in PFC emissions from the
semiconductor industry in these three regions is
projected. It is important to note that these
projections are not inclusive of voluntary climate
commitments. The semiconductor industry has taken
an aggressive target to reduce PFC emissions. In
April 1999, the World Semiconductor Council
(WSC) agreed to reduce PFC emissions by at least 10
percent below 1995 levels by 2010. WSC members
produce over 90 percent of the world's
semiconductors.
4.4 HCFC-22 Production
Trifluoromethane (HFC-23) is generated and emitted
as a by-product during the production of
chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22). Nearly all
producers in developed countries have implemented
process optimization or thermal destruction to reduce
HFC-23 emissions. In some cases, however, it is
collected and used as a substitute for ozone depleting
substances, mainly in very-low temperature
refrigeration and air conditioning systems.
HFC-23 emission factors range from 1 to 5 percent
per unit of HCFC-22 produced. HFC-23 exhibits the
highest global warming potential of the HFCs, 11,700
over a 100-year time horizon, and it has an
atmospheric life of 264 years.
Total HFC-23 Emissions from
HCFC-22 Production
Year
MMTC02
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
80
69
66
63
56
As shown in Exhibit 4-6, HFC-23 emissions from
HCFC-22 production deceased overall from 1990 to
2000 with a significant decrease from 1990 to 1995
due to process optimization. Emissions are expected
to continue decreasing through 2010. A major reason
for the decrease is that HCFC-22 production, for
most end-uses, is scheduled to be phased-out by 2030
under the Copenhagen Amendments to the Montreal
Protocol. Emissions are not anticipated to decrease
to zero, however, because HCFC-22 production for
use as a feedstock to other chemicals is permitted to
continue indefinitely and feedstock production is
anticipated to continue growing steadily, mainly for
manufacturing Teflon® and other chemical products.
Exhibit 4-6: HFC-23 Emissions as a Byproduct of HCFC-22 Productions 1990 through 2010 (MMTC02)
Japan
Other
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-5
-------
4.5 Electric Utilities
An estimated 80 percent of the worldwide sales of
sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) are made to electric utilities
and manufacturers of equipment used to enable the
transmission and distribution of electricity (Rand,
2000). Sulfur hexaflouride has been employed as an
insulating gas by the electric power industry since the
1950's because of its dielectric strength and arc-
quenching characteristics. It is used in gas-insulated
high voltage circuit breakers, substations,
transformers, and transmission lines. Sulfur
hexafluoride has replaced flammable insulating oils
in many applications and allows for more compact
electrical equipment in dense urban areas.
Fugitive SF6 can escape from gas-insulated
substations (GIS) and gas-insulated circuit breakers
through seals, especially from older equipment. It
can also be released when equipment is opened for
servicing, which typically occurs every few years or
when equipment is disposed. In the past, some
utilities vented SF6 to the atmosphere during
servicing. Increased awareness and the relatively
high cost of the gas have reduced this practice.
Total SFe Emissions from
Electric Utilities
Year
MMTC02
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
50
46
26
27
28
As shown in Exhibit 4-7, emissions from electric
utilities have steadily decreased since 1990 and are
expected to continue decreasing, despite the growth
in the electric utility sector. The price increase of SF6
in the mid-90s encouraged electric power systems to
improve equipment maintenance and servicing in
order to conserve the gas. The use of leak detection
and recycling methods has also increased as utilities
strive to lower costs and mitigate environmental
effects.
4.6 Magnesium Production
The magnesium metal production and casting
industry uses sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) as a covergas
to prevent the violent oxidation of molten magnesium
in the presence of air. Small concentrations of SF6 in
Exhibit 4-7: SFe Emissions from Electric Utilities 1990 through 2010 (MMTC02)
60
CM
O 50 -
40 ^
•| 30 -
ILI
u>
20-
(D
.c
D)
I
10 -
1990
U.S.
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-6
-------
combination with carbon dioxide and air are blown
over the molten magnesium metal to induce the
formation of a protective crust. The industry adopted
the use of SF6 to replace sulfur dioxide (802). The
SF6 technique is used by producers of primary
magnesium metal and most magnesium parts die
casters. The recycling industry employs a variety of
melt protection techniques including salt fluxes and
SF6. Exhibit 4-8 presents total SF6 emissions from
magnesium production through the year 2010 for
developed countries.
Total SFe Emissions from
Magnesium Production
Year
MMTC02
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
13
12
16
32
55
Worldwide, the magnesium production industry is
projecting very strong growth between 1990 and
2010. The rate of growth increases after 2000. All
regions are projected to experience increased
magnesium production, leading to a strong increase
in SF6 emissions in every region. For the U.S., there
is a leveling of emissions from magnesium
production between 1995 and 2000 due to the closing
of the largest of the three facilities in the U.S. The
two remaining U.S. facilities are expected to regain
most of the lost production capacity and resume a
trend of net national production growth by 2010, with
a corresponding growth in SF6 by 2010.
4.7 Aluminum Production
The primary aluminum production industry is
currently the largest source of PFC emissions.
During the aluminum smelting process, when the
alumina ore content of the electrolytic bath falls
below critical levels required for electrolysis, rapid
voltage increases occur, termed "anode effects"
(AEs). These anode effects cause carbon from the
anode and fluorine from the dissociated molten
cryolite bath to combine, thereby producing fugitive
emissions of CF4 and C2F6. In general, the
magnitude of emissions for a given level of
production depends on the frequency and duration of
these anode effects: the more frequent and long-
lasting the anode effects, the greater the emissions.
Exhibit 4-9 presents the total aluminum PFC
emissions from industrial sources through the year
2010 for developed countries.
Future PFC emissions will be affected by changes in
primary aluminum production and changes in the
Exhibit 4-8: SFe Emissions from Magnesium Production 1990 through 2010 (MMTCCb)
1990
1995
2000
Year
2005
Western Europe
Canada
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-7
-------
emission rate per ton of aluminum produced.
Continued increases in global aluminum production
are anticipated through 2010.
Total PFC Emissions from
Aluminum Production
Year
MMTC02
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
74
42
41
42
40
The production growth results from additions to
current aluminum capacity, mostly in the developing
world, and improvements in cell technology that
increase production efficiency at existing smelters
worldwide. Emission rates, on the other hand, are
expected to decrease as upgrades in process controls
and alumina feeding systems will yield shorter, less
frequent anode effects. The developed countries as a
whole will see a substantial decrease in emissions
because of the combined effect of production moving
to developing countries and reduced emission rates.
In the U.S. and EU-15, aluminum smelters have
realized the environmental and economic benefits
of reducing the frequency and duration of anode
effects, which cause PFC emissions. This action
resulted in a lower emissions rate that will continue
into the future.
i: PFC Emissions from Primary Aluminum Production 1990 through 2010 (MMTC02)
Exhibit 4-9
1990
2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
High Global Warming Potential Gases 4-8
-------
5. Methodologies Used to Compile and Estimate
Emissions
This chapter outlines the methodological approach used to compile and estimate emissions and projections. It
describes the overall approach and then discusses, by source, any caveats or deviations from this approach. For
many countries, the emissions estimates in this report are those reported in National Communications to the
UNFCCC or other publicly available documents. This report does not describe the methodologies used to generate
these publicly available numbers, but in almost all cases they are consistent with the Revised 1996IPCC Guidelines.
5.1 Estimation and Projection
Approaches
The general approach was to use country-prepared,
publicly available reports wherever possible, with
preference given to the most recent report. All
estimates were assessed for compatibility with the
Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines and to ensure the
projections were business-as-usual (BAU). In some
cases, EPA made adjustments to the data as emission
and particularly projection data were not available
from any published sources. An overview of the basic
methodology for estimating emissions of methane,
nitrous oxide, and high global warming potential
(GWP) gases is presented below.
5.1.1 Methane and Nitrous Oxide
Emissions
For some countries, EPA used estimates provided in
country-specific reports that had more updated
information than the information provided in the
country's most recent National Communications. The
methodology for estimating historical and projected
emissions for these countries is presented below.
• Member States of the European Union (except
the United Kingdom): For historical emissions,
the EU-15 submitted a compilation inventory that
included all member states for the historical
period of 1990 to 1998 (EC, 2000). For
projections, three European Commission (EC)
reports provide emissions and projections for all
the countries (AEA Technology Environment,
2001a, b, c). For a few smaller sources, the
Second National Communication projections were
used. The historical estimates for 1990-98 in the
three EC projection reports are older than the
most recent historical estimates in the compilation
report. Therefore, to ensure consistency, EPA
based projected emissions on the historical
estimates in the compilation report and the
projected growth rates as determined in the three
EC reports (i.e., EPA applied the projected growth
rates to the historical estimates).
United Kingdom: For historical and projected
emissions, the UK published a country-specific
study in 2000 of non-CO2 greenhouse gases for
most sources (WS Atkins Environment, 2000).
For a few smaller sources not included in that
report (wastewater, other agricultural and other
non-agricultural) the Second National
Communication estimates were used.
United States: For historical and projected
emissions, the U.S. baseline emissions estimates
for each source reflect the methodologies and data
reported for the most recent inventory and
projections estimate (EPA 200la and EPA 200Ib
draft).
Newly Independent States: For Russia and the
Ukraine, detailed country study reports were used
for historical and projected emissions for most
sources. For a few smaller sources not included in
that report (i.e., other non-agricultural) the
projections were assumed zero or estimated by
EPA, as detailed later in the chapter.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-1
-------
For other countries, EPA primarily used the data
provided in the countries National Communications to
the UNFCCC because they represent each country's
own analysis of its detailed national circumstances.
However, in some cases, EPA made adjustments to the
estimates, These adjustments and the relevant
countries are described below for methane and nitrous
oxide.
• Methane and Industrial Nitrous Oxide: For the
remaining countries, the Second National
Communication of each country was the preferred
source of emissions data. If "business as usual"
(BAU) emission projections were available
through 2010, they were used in this report. In a
small number of cases, the only available
projections included control measures. The
methodology that EPA used to exclude the
impacts of control measures is described in
Section 5.2. If the Second National
Communication was not submitted or was
incomplete, the First National Communication
was consulted, which typically contains
projections only to 2000. After assessing the
estimates from the National Communications,
EPA determined if a more recent inventory was
submitted to the UNFCCC. If more recent
estimates for a country were available for 1990
and/or 1995, these historical estimates were
included and the projections were scaled to reflect
the change. At the time of publication, Croatia
and Liechtenstein had not yet submitted National
Communications. The estimates used for Croatia
were reported using the Corinair approach.1 A
1995 UN-submitted report provided estimates for
Liechtenstein. The approach used for each of
country is documented in Appendix E.
• Nitrous Oxide from Agriculture and Fossil
Fuel Combustion: While most countries reported
historical and projected emissions of agricultural
nitrous oxide (N2O) in their Second National
Communications, those estimates typically did not
reflect the significantly improved methodologies
in the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines. This
approach was particularly apparent for the nitrous
oxide emissions from agricultural soils. As
discussed above, updated N2O emission
projections were available for the EU-15 and the
U.S. Nitrous oxide estimates for the remaining
countries were derived as follows:
Q For Australia, Bulgaria, Canada,
Hungary, Japan, Monaco, New Zealand,
Norway, Slovakia, and Switzerland, the
historical estimates were recent and assumed
to be consistent with the Revised 1996 IPCC
Guidelines. EPA scaled these historical to
develop projections. For details see
Appendix G.
Q For the Czech Republic, Estonia, Iceland,
Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania,
Russia, Slovenia, and Ukraine, EPA
estimated nitrous oxide emissions and
projections using the most recent
methodological guidelines, internationally
recognized data sets, and IPCC emission
factors. These methodologies are described
in detail in each source section.
5.1.2 High Global Warming Potential
(High GWP) Gas Emissions
For most countries, emissions and projections were
not available for these sources. Therefore, high GWP
emissions and projections were estimated using
detailed source methodologies described later in this
chapter.
5.2 Adjustments to Methane
Estimates
To ensure consistency and completeness, some of the
methane data in this report have been estimated by
EPA, or modified from publicly available reports. For
example, in some cases, countries reported projections
that include the anticipated effects of climate change
mitigation efforts. Since the purpose of this report is
to provide historical and projected emissions in the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-2
-------
absence of climate measures, the anticipated effects of
these policies have been added back into the estimates.
In other cases, emissions data for certain years were
missing and had to be estimated. Some countries
presented aggregated projections (e.g., livestock),
which had to be disaggregated into their constituents
(e.g., enteric fermentation and manure management).
5.2.1 Landfilling of Solid Waste
For those countries that included control measures in
projections, EPA adjusted the projections to exclude
the impacts of the control measures. For those
countries with no reported projections, EPA developed
estimates. The approach that EPA used for these
countries is presented below.
• Japan, New Zealand, and Switzerland: These
countries included control measures such as
methane recovery and waste reduction in their
projections. The implementation of mitigation
activities for these countries is assumed to result
in emissions reductions from the baseline that are
similar to those expected to occur in the U.S. from
1990-2010 (30 percent, 61 percent, and 62
percent, respectively , EPA, 1999). To estimate
BAU emissions, these anticipated emission
reductions associated were added back in to the
projections.
• Russia and European countries without
projections: EPA assumed that future emissions
remain constant. In Russia and Eastern Europe
this reflects reduced economic activity along with
increased use of landfilling.
Exhibit B-2 presents emissions and projections for
each country.
5.2.2 Coal Mining Activities
Most of the countries that did not report emissions
from coal mining do not produce coal domestically,
according to the International Energy Outlook (IEA,
1997a). For these countries, EPA assumed methane
emissions from coal mining to be zero.
For a few countries, coal-specific reports were
available and more recent than other sources. In other
countries, no projections were available. The approach
used in both cases is outlined below.
• Russia: The estimates came from a draft EPA
report (EPA, 1999c draft) that focused exclusively
on historical and future coal mining methane
emissions in Russia. For the majority of
underground mines, the methodology was
consistent with the IPCC Tier 3 methodology,
using measurement data collected by the
individual mines. For the remaining underground
mines and for surface and post mining, the IPCC
Tier 2 methodology was used. To determine the
projections, the total projected coal production for
a particular year was multiplied by the share of
coal production in the region for that year, and
then multiplied by the average 1990-1998
emission factor for the specific region. The
Russian estimates are the total of these regional
estimates.
• Ukraine: A Ukrainian coal inventory study
provided historical estimates (PEER, 2001 draft).
For 2000 to 2010, EPA assumed coal production
and, thus related emissions, to decrease by 20
percent, based on a Ukrainian government
decision to close 82 of the country's 236 mines by
1999 (EIA, 1997). Economic and social factors
are likely to delay completion of these closures
until 2005. By 2010, the changes should be
implemented and emissions were assumed to
stabilize.
• Poland: The National Communication reported
that emissions are expected to decline sharply by
2010, largely due to anticipated closings of a large
number of privatized mines. The pace of mine
closures might be slower than anticipated,
however, because of social and economic
considerations. Unlike Germany and the UK,
which are expecting drastic reductions in coal
production, the Polish economy is largely coal-
based (97 percent of energy consumption, IEA,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-3
-------
1991 a), with negligible natural gas and oil
reserves. Also, Poland will continue to sell some
coal to foreign markets to earn foreign currency.
Many of Poland's gassiest mines are located near
major industries, where there is increased
possibility for methane recovery and use. With
the expected closure of highly gassy longwall
mines and modest increases in methane recovery
and use, EPA assumed emissions will decline 5
percent over each 5-year period to 2010.
In those cases in which a projection of future
emissions was not available, EPA used the following
two types of assumptions: (1) for Eastern European
countries, EPA used Ukraine and Germany as
analogue countries (countries with similar
circumstances or geography); and (2) for Western
European countries, EPA assumed that emissions
would remain constant.
Appendix E provides specific information on
particular countries. Exhibit B-3 presents emissions
estimates and projections data for coal mining.
5.2.3 Natural Gas and Oil Systems
In some cases, no projections were available. For
these countries, EPA used one of two approaches: (1)
for Eastern European countries, EPA assumed
emissions remain constant; this assumption balances
increased oil and gas production and use with
modernization of the system; or (2) for Western
European countries, EPA projected historical
inventories based on trends in analogue countries.
Appendix E provides specific information on
particular countries. Exhibit B-4 presents emissions
estimates and projections data for natural gas and oil
systems.
5.2.4 Livestock Manure Management
and Enteric Fermentation
For some countries the emissions associated with
livestock manure management and enteric
fermentation were reported as combined estimates.
EPA disaggregated these emissions for several
countries as indicated below.
• Australia, the Czech Republic, Estonia,
Lithuania, New Zealand, Norway, and
Switzerland: EPA disaggregated the projections
based on the relative share of each provided in
disaggregated historical estimates for each
country.
• Ukraine: EPA disaggregated the total reported in
the mitigation study (Raptsoun, et al., 1996)
according to the patterns seen in Poland and
Estonia.
For some countries, no projections were available. For
these countries, EPA used one of two approaches: (1)
for Eastern European countries, EPA assumed they
would experience a short-term decline in emissions (to
2000) followed by an increase; this trend is consistent
with economic projections, as well as the countries for
which projections were available (e.g., Ukraine); or (2)
for Western European countries, EPA assumed that
emissions would remain constant.
Exhibits B-5 and B-6 present emissions estimates and
projections data for each country.
5.2.5 Wastewater Treatment
Emissions from this source are typically small, and
some countries did not report this category in their
inventories. In cases where a suitable analogue country
was available, EPA scaled emissions on the basis of
the per capita emissions rate of the analogue country.
In cases where no projections were available, EPA
assumed that emissions would remain constant over
time. Where wastewater projections were combined
with landfill emissions, EPA disaggegrated estimates
based on the percentages for each source taken from
the latest inventory.
Exhibit B-7 presents emissions estimates and
projections data for each country.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-4
-------
5.2.6 Other Agriculture Sources
Less than half of the developed countries included
categories such as rice cultivation and agricultural
residue burning in their inventories. Australia and
Japan report the only significant emissions. For
countries with historical estimates but no projections,
EPA assumed future emissions to be constant.
Exhibit B-8 presents emissions estimates and
projections data for each country.
5.2.7 Other Non-Agricultural Sources
This category includes emissions sources such as fuel
combustion, industrial processes, and waste
incineration, which are usually small. Some of the
inventory estimates may be incomplete, indicating that
the values are not fully comparable. In those cases in
which a projection of future emissions was not
available, EPA assumed future emissions to remain
constant.
Exhibit B-9 presents emissions estimates and
projections data for each country.
5.3 Methodology and
Adjustments to Approaches
Used for Nitrous Oxide
To maintain a consistent set of emissions estimates
and projections, EPA made adjustments to publicly
available N2O data, and in some cases generated new
estimates. This step was necessary particularly for
N2O emissions from agricultural soils and mobile
combustion. Unlike the major sources of methane,
these sources were significantly revised in the Revised
1996IPCC Guidelines. Many countries were not able
to apply the more rigorous methods in time for the
Second National Communication. The following
sections summarize the methodologies by source,
including any adjustments.
5.3.1 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Agricultural Soils
Given the lack of available country-developed
information for this source, EPA developed methods
of estimating both emissions and projections. For the
Czech Republic, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania,
Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, and Ukraine, EPA
developed both emissions and projections. For
Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Hungary, Japan, Monaco,
New Zealand, Norway, Slovakia, and Switzerland, the
recent historical estimates are available and appear to
incorporate the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines. EPA
developed projections following the method described
below, but scaled them to the inventory data.
EPA used the bottom-up approach outlined in the
Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines (IPCC, 1997), which
made significant methodological improvements in
both coverage and emission factors. The methodology
outlines three major components: (1) direct emissions
from agricultural soils, (2) direct emissions from
deposition of animal waste, and (3) indirect emissions.
Direct emissions are broken down further into sub-
categories including fertilizer application, histosol
cultivation, cultivation of nitrogen fixing crops,
incorporation of crop residues, and daily spread
operations. Histosol cultivation area, alfalfa
production, and consumption of commercial organic
fertilizers were not available and thus are not included
in this report.
The Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines provide default
emission factors for different world regions, but
require country-specific activity data. The specific
approach and data sources used to estimate historical
and projected emissions from each sub-component in
this source category are presented in Appendix G.
Exhibit C-2 presents total N2O emission estimates
from agricultural soil management for each developed
country.
5.3.2 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Industrial Processes
Most countries report N2O emissions from industrial
processes in their Second National Communication or
other reports. For the few countries with no estimates
for this source, emissions for these countries are not
reported.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-5
-------
Exhibit 5-1: Fuel Types Included in N20 Emissions from Fossil Fuel Combustion Analysis
Coal
Natural Gas
Oil
Hard Coal
Brown Coal
Coke Oven Coke
Gas Coke
Peat
BKB
Natural Gas
Refinery Gas in metric tons
Ethane
Liquefied Petroleum Gases
Gas Works Gas
Coke Oven Gas
Blast Furnace Gas
Oxygen Steel Furnace Gas
Crude
Motor Gasoline
Aviation Gasoline
Gasoline - type Jet Fuel
Kerosene - type Jet Fuel
Kerosene
Gas/Diesel Oil
Residual Fuel Oil
Petroleum Coke
Non-specified Petroleum Products
Naphtha
Patent Fuel
Total nitrous oxide emissions from industrial sources
are summarized in Exhibit C-3. The data sources for
each country can be found in Appendix F.
5.3.3 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Stationary Fossil Fuel
Combustion
Many countries do not report N2O emissions from
fossil fuel combustion. EPA developed methods of
estimating both emissions and projections. For the
Czech Republic, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania,
Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, and Ukraine,
EPA developed both emissions and projections. For
Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Hungary, Japan,
Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Slovakia, and
Switzerland, the recent historical estimates are
available and appear to incorporate the Revised 1996
IPCC Guidelines. EPA developed projections
following the method described below, but scaled
them to the inventory data.
Historical Emissions
EPA collected fossil fuel consumption data by
country, fuel product and sector use for all major fuel
types as indicated in Exhibit 5-1 (IEA, 1997b). The
sectors included in the analysis were the electric
utility industry and the manufacturing and
construction industries. The consumption was then
multiplied by the IPCC Tier 1 N2O emissions factor
for each fuel type and sector. EPA estimated
historical data for two countries with no reported
historical estimates:
• For Monaco, French data on per capita energy
demand was applied to Monaco to estimate fuel
consumption by fuel type for each sector (IEA,
1997b).
• For Liechtenstein, EPA applied the average per
capita energy demand from Austria and
Switzerland to the population of Liechtenstein
(IEA, 1997b).
Projected Emissions
EPA applied region specific average annual growth
rates by fuel type (IEA, 1997b) to 1995 consumption
data to determine future energy consumption for
2000, 2005, and 2010. The growth factors were only
available for industrialized, developing and EE/FSU
country categories (IEA, 1997b), as summarized in
Exhibit 5-2. The EE/FSU rates were applied to
Russia and Eastern Europe and industrialized rates
were applied to all other countries. For each country,
the projected energy consumption by fuel product
and sector use were multiplied by the IPCC Tier 1
emission factors.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-6
-------
Exhibit 5-2: Annual Growth Rates for Electric Utilities
and Manufacturing/Construction Sectors (%/year)
Industrialized Developing and
Countries EE/FSU Countries
Energy Source
Oil
Natural Gas
Coal
Biomass/Waste
1.1
2.6
0.7
1.3
3.3
3.8
2.5
3.1
Note: EE/FSU rates are applied to Russia and Eastern
Europe and Industrialized rates are applied to all other
Developed Countries in the analysis. Source: IEA
(1997b).
5.3.4 Nitrous Oxides Emissions from
Mobile Fossil Fuel Combustion
For many developed countries, the estimates
provided in the Second National Communications did
not reflect the updated emission factors provided by
the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines. These new
emission factors incorporated the results of
measurement projects, and lead to a significant
revision upwards of N2O emissions. To ensure
consistency across sources, and provide more
complete estimates for all countries, EPA
recalculated emissions for all countries using the
updated emission factors.
The basic approach was to estimate fuel consumption
for each country, assign the fuel consumption to
different classes or categories of vehicles, and then
apply the updated emission factors at a disaggregated
level. The details are summarized in Appendix H.
Emissions from all modes were summarized and are
presented in Exhibit C-7.
5.3.5 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from
Manure Management
This section addresses emissions and projections of
N2O resulting from the storage or handling of
livestock manure (i.e., before the manure is added to
soils). N2O emission levels from manure
management systems depend on the type of system
and the length of time the waste stored. Similar to
agricultural soils, the manure methodology was
revised in the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines and
many countries were not able to apply the more
rigorous methodologies in time for the Second
National Communication.
Given the lack of available country-developed
information for this source, EPA developed methods
of estimating both emissions and projections. For the
Czech Republic, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania,
Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, and Ukraine,
EPA developed both emissions and projections. For
Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Hungary, Japan,
Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Slovakia, and
Switzerland, the recent historical estimates are
available and appear to incorporate the Revised 1996
IPCC Guidelines. EPA developed projections
following the method described below, but scaled
them to the inventory data.
Historical Activity Data
FAO reported historical animal population data for
most countries (FAO, 1998c). The exceptions are
described below:
• Luxembourg: EPA used N2O emissions from
agricultural soils, as reported in each country's
National Communication, as a proxy (98%
Belgium and 2% Luxembourg).
• Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, and
Ukraine: Data for 1990 are reported for the
Former Soviet Union. EPA divided the 1990
livestock populations in the Former Soviet Union
among Estonia, Lithuania, Russia, and Ukraine
based upon each country's relative share in 1995.
The 1995 data filled the gap for 1990 for Croatia.
• Czech Republic and Slovakia: In 1990,
population statistics were reported for
Czechoslovakia. Each country's 1995
population statistics were used to determine
relative shares.
• Liechtenstein: No data were available.
Historical Emissions
EPA estimated total livestock nitrogen excretion
based on default values for each animal type. The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-7
-------
total nitrogen excretion was then divided among
animal waste management systems using IPCC
default assumptions. To estimate N2O emissions, the
excreted livestock nitrogen for each management
system (with the exception of pasture, range and
paddock, and daily spread) was multiplied by IPCC
default emission factors specific to the animal waste
management system.
Projected Emissions
Animal population forecasts were not available for
2000, 2005 and 2010 except for the U.S. To project
other countries' emissions, EPA assumed emissions
would grow at the same rate as methane emissions
from livestock manure.
Direct N2O emissions from deposition of animal
waste are summarized in Exhibit C-8.
5.4 Estimation and Projection
Approaches Used for High
Global Warming Potential
Gases
High global warming potential (High GWP) gas
emissions result from the use of substitutes for
ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) and from other
industrial sectors. Until recently, few nations have
made significant efforts to track and project use and
emissions of HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. If countries did
present information on these gases it was often partial
estimates or an aggregate estimate. In either their
National Communication or more recent literature,
Austria, Canada, Germany, Japan, Norway, Russia,
the United Kingdom, and the United States provide
enough information to incorporate in this analysis.
5.4.1 HFC and RFC Emissions from
the Use of Substitutes for ODS
Substances
This analysis incorporates estimates of the emissions
of ODS substitutes available through the National
Communications of Japan, Norway, Russia, the
United Kingdom, and the U.S.2 EPA assumed that
the U.S. transition pattern from ODS to alternatives
can be applied to the remaining countries.
Additionally, this analysis uses a U.S. emission
profile for each end use application.
The U.S. transition pattern was customized to each
region or country using adjustment factors that take
into consideration differences in the rates of the
phase out and the distribution of ODS consumption
across end uses.
The Vintaging Model
EPA uses a "Vintaging Model" of ODS-containing
equipment and products to estimate the use and
emissions of ODS substitutes in the U.S. (This
model is discussed in more detail in Appendix I.)
The model tracks the use and emissions of each of
the substances separately for each of the ages or
"vintages" of equipment.
The consumption of ODS and ODS substitutes are
modeled by estimating the amount of equipment or
products sold, serviced, and retired each year, and the
amount of the chemical required to manufacture
and/or maintain the equipment and products over
time. Emissions are estimated by applying annual
leak rates and release profiles to each population of
equipment or product. By aggregating the data for
more than 40 different end-uses, the model estimates
and projects annual use and emissions of each
compound over time. For this analysis, the model
calculates a "business as usual" case that does not
incorporate measures to reduce or eliminate the
emissions of these gases other than those regulated
by U.S. law.
The major end-use categories defined in the
Vintaging Model to characterize ODS use in the U.S.
are: refrigeration and air conditioning, aerosols,
solvent cleaning, fire extinguishing equipment, foam
production, and sterilization. The Vintaging Model
estimates the use and emissions of ODS alternatives
by taking the following steps:
1. Collection of historical emissions data from
published sources and industry experts.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-8
-------
2. Simulation of the implementation of control
technologies: The Vintaging Model uses
detailed characterizations of the existing uses of
the ODSs, as well as data on how the substitutes
can replace the ODSs, to simulate the
implementation of control technologies that
ensure compliance with ODS phase out policies.
As part of this simulation, the ODS substitutes
are introduced in each of the end uses over time
as needed to comply with the ODS phase out.
3. Estimation of emissions of the ODS substitutes:
The chemical use is estimated from the amount
of the substitutes that are required each year for
the manufacture, installation, use, or servicing
of products. The emissions are estimated from
the emission profile for each vintage of
equipment or product in each end use.
Applying the Vintaging Model to Other
Developed Countries
To apply the Vintaging Model to other countries,
EPA used the following methodology:
Historical ODS activity data: UNEP provided
estimates of 1990 ODS consumption by country. The
estimates for the European Economic Community
(EEC) were provided in aggregate and GDP was used
as a proxy to divide the consumption of the
individual member nations from the EEC total.3 The
UNEP report provided consumption data in terms of
ozone depletion potential (OOP) weighted totals for
the major types of ozone depleting substances: CFCs,
HCFCs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl
chloroform. To obtain unweighted ODS consumption
values, EPA followed the methodology outlined
below:
• CFCs: EPA applied the U.S. pattern of CFC
consumption for each individual CFC compound
to the aggregate OOP-weighted totals for each
country. As a check, the proportions of CFCs
produced globally in 1990 were also used to
estimate the unweighted total of CFCs from the
OOP-weighted totals (AFEAS, 1997). The total
unweighted CFC consumption calculated with
the U.S. and AFEAS proportions differed by less
than 1 percent.
• HCFCs: EPA applied the U.S. average OOP for
1989 HCFC consumption, which was 0.056.
• Methyl chloroform and carbon tetrachloride:
EPA used a straight conversion from
OOP-weighted totals to unweighted totals.
• Halons: Three different halons (Halon 1211,
Halon 1301, and Halon 2402) comprised the
OOP-weighted halons totals in the UNEP
estimates. EPA assumed that all of the countries
use both Halon 1211 and Halon 1301 but only
the Former Soviet Union countries use
Halon 2402. The OOP-weighted values were
separated into unweighted totals of Halon 1211
and Halon 1301 using ratios of 1211 production
to 1301 production in 1990 (UNEP, 1998). For
the Former Soviet Union, the total was separated
into all three halons based upon the 1990
consumption reported for the Russian Federation
(Russia MPENR, 1994).
Apportionment of historical ODS consumption to
end-use sectors: Data on the end-use distributions of
ozone depleting substances in 1990 were available
for the United States, the United Kingdom, and the
Russian Federation, as shown in Exhibit 5-3. The
1990 end-use sector distribution for the United States
was used for Canada. The United Kingdom's
distribution was applied to the EU-15, Australia and
New Zealand. The Russian Federation's distribution
was applied to the Former Soviet Union countries
and the non-EU-15 European countries.
ODS substitute emissions: EPA assumed for this
report that all countries will transition from ODS to
ODS substitutes in the same way as the United
States, with adjustments in later steps to account for
regional differences. Using the U.S. data, EPA
developed a relationship between the 1990 ODS
consumption and ODS substitute emissions using two
ratios: (1) the U.S. ratio of unweighted base year
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-9
-------
Exhibit 5-3
: End-Use Sector Distribution of 1990
Unweighted ODS Consumption (%)
CFCs
United
States
Russia
United
Kingdom
Refrigerant
21.2%
16.7%
21.3%
MDI
Aerosolsb
1.8%
0.9%
1.5%
Non-MDI
Aerosols
0.0%
53.7%
27.6%
Solvents
41.1%
21.1%
26.7%
Foams
16.2%
7.5%
21.5%
Sterilization
19.8%
0.0%
1.4%
HCFCs3
Refrigerant
100%
80%
69%
Aerosols
0.0%
10.0%
5.1%
Foams
0.0%
10.0%
25.9%
a The breakout of HCFCs in Russia is an estimate based on the fact that Russia had CFC use in refrigeration, aerosols, and foams, and
that in both the U.S. and U.K., HCFC use was more heavily weighted toward refrigeration than the other end-use sectors
' The pharmaceutical use of aerosols in Russia in 1990 is taken directly from Table 3.4.b of Phaseout of Ozone Depleting Substances in
Russia. EPA estimated the MDI use in United Kingdom to be 5 percent of the total 1990 CFC aerosol use. Though MDIs are expected to
account for the majority of HFC use in aerosols, limited HFC aerosol uses in other specialized applications are likely to include such
products as office equipment dusters.
Sources: U.S. end-use sector breakouts are calculated from results of EPA's Vintaging Model.
Russia's end-use sector breakouts are taken from MPNER (1994), pp. x-xi, 27-28.
U.K. end-use sector breakouts are from UK DEP (1996), pp. 4.4,4.6.
(1990) ODS consumption to unweighted substitute
consumption in a given year, for each of the twelve
end-use sectors; and (2) the U.S. ratio of unweighted
U.S. ODS substitute consumption in a given year to
GWP-weighted U.S. ODS substitute emissions in the
same year. The two ratios, when multiplied together,
form a ratio of unweighted 1990 U.S. ODS
consumption (metric tons) to weighted U.S. ODS
substitute emissions (MMTCO2) in a given year.
However, these two ratios are valid only if they result
in real, non-zero numbers, therefore, the U.S.
substitute emissions and the 1990 U.S. ODS
consumption values must both be non-zero. This
criteria was not met in two instances and adjustments
were made:
• Non-medical dose inhaler (Non-MDI) aerosols:
The U.S. phased out non-MDI use of CFCs in
aerosols prior to 1990, therefore, the 1990
consumption was zero. In order to determine a
non-zero ratio for this step, the unweighted U.S.
consumption of non-MDI ODS substitutes
(including a large market segment that
transitioned into non-GWP, non-ODP
substances) was used as a proxy for U.S. 1990
non-MDI ODS consumption, for this step only.
This assumption is valid if the market size of
U.S. non-MDI aerosols was not affected by the
transition from ODS to ODS substitutes. The
result is that this analysis assumes that the
transition of non-MDI aerosols out of ODS was
completed by 1995 for both Russia and the
United Kingdom, where CFC usage in non-MDI
aerosols is significant.
• HCFCs in foam blowing and non-MDI aerosols:
In 1990, the U.S. was not using HCFCs in foam
blowing or in non-MDI aerosols, leading to a
zero value for HCFC consumption. For the
purposes of developing these ratios, EPA
assumed that the ODS substitutes for HCFCs in
these two markets would follow the same
transition scenarios as U.S. CFC-blown foams
and non-MDI aerosols, respectively.
The country-specific unweighted 1990 consumption
of ODS is divided by the ratio of unweighted 1990
ODS consumption to GWP-weighted substitute
emissions, as described above. This calculation is
performed for each of the twelve end-use sectors for
each country for each year.
Transition adjustment factors: To account for
country differences in the transition from ODS to
ODS substitutes, EPA adjusted other countries'
emissions estimates based upon qualitative
information about how their substitution will likely
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-10
-------
Exhibit 5-4: Adjustment Factors Applied to ODS Emissions for Each Country
Country
Australia
and New
Zealand
Canada
FSU
EU-15
Europe
(non-EU-15)
Japan
Refrig-
erant
0.90
1.00
0.75
0.80
0.75
1.00
Aerosol
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
CFCs
Solvent
1.00
1.00
0.50
0.80
0.50
1.00
Foams
0.50
1.00
0.20
0.40
0.20
1.00
Steril-
ization
1.00
1.00
0.50
0.90
0.50
1.00
HCFCs
Refrig-
erant
0.90
1.00
0.75
0.80
0.75
1.00
Aerosol
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Foams
0.50
1.00
0.20
0.40
0.20
1.00
Halons
Fire
Extingu-
ishing
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
CT
Solvent
1.00
1.00
0.50
0.80
0.50
1.00
MCF
Solvent
1.00
1.00
0.50
0.80
0.50
1.00
differ from that of the US. Each country's emissions
were multiplied by an adjustment factor, which is
between 0 and 1.0. In other words, the U.S.
substitution in each end-use sector was assumed to be
a maximum. For example, an adjustment factor of
less than one was applied to end-uses such as
refrigerants in Europe, because EPA is aware that
European appliances are more likely to use
hydrocarbon refrigerants in place of HFCs. Overseas
foam use is also adjusted downward in some cases
because of the use of cyclopentane in lieu of HFCs.
Exhibit 5-4 presents the adjustment factors that were
applied for each country or group of countries.
Timing factors: In addition to the adjustment factors
for each end-use sector, a timing adjustment was
applied for the Former Soviet Union countries (FSU)
and non-EU-15 European countries. Since these
nations will transition to substitutes more slowly,
EPA multiplied the emission estimates by a timing
factor to reflect the anticipated delay in their
transition. Exhibit 5-5 shows the timing factors
applied to the emissions in each year.
Exhibit 5-5: Timing Factors Applied to ODS Emissions
Estimates
Country/
Country Group
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
FSU 0 0 0.25 0.5 0.75
Europe (non-EU-15) 0 0 0.25 0.5 0.75
Adjustment factor for refrigerant recycling: A
third adjustment was required to account for
increased emissions, compared to the U.S., which
may result from a lack of recycling or recovery of
refrigerants in non-EU-15 European countries and the
FSU. Exhibit 5-6 presents these adjustment factors.
Exhibit 5-6: Recycling Adjustment Applied to
Refrigeration Emissions Estimates
Country/Country Group
Adjustment
Australia and New Zealand
Canada
FSU
EU-15
Europe (non-EU-15)
Japan
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.0
5.4.2 HFC-23 Emissions as a
Byproduct of HCFC-22
Production
For Norway, Japan, the U.K., and the U.S., emissions
estimates are available and taken directly from
national reports (Norway MOE, 1997; METI, 2001;
WS Atkins Environment, 2000; and EPA, 200la, c).
Historical HFC-23 Emissions
For developed countries without estimates,
consumption and production data of HCFC-22 were
available for 1989 and all years from 1992 to 1998,
as reported to the Secretariat by the Parties to the
Montreal Protocol (UNEP, 1999). The reported
production and consumption is expressed in ozone
depletion potential (ODP) weighted units and was
aggregated with all HCFCs.4 EPA developed
estimates for 1990 by linearly interpolating between
1989 and 1992. The Alternative Fluorocarbon
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-11
-------
Environmental Acceptability Study (AFEAS, 1999)
was used to compare 1990 HCFC-22 production
estimates with UNEP production data by country. In
addition, EPA made the following assumptions:
1. As the consumption estimates from UNEP do
not include HCFC-22 produced for use as
feedstock, EPA adjusted reported estimates to
include an additional 35 percent of HCFC-22
production (AFEAS, 1999).5
2. The 1995 and 1998 HCFC consumption
numbers from UNEP included more than
HCFC-22. The AFEAS study used sales of
HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and HCFC-141b to
determine the proportion of HCFC-22 within
total HCFC sales. This proportion by region
was then applied to HCFC consumption
reported under UNEP. Again, the estimates
were adjusted for 35 percent to account for
feedstock.
HFC-23 Projected Emissions
EPA used 1998 HFC-23 emissions as a baseline to
project emissions into the future. The method for
projecting the baseline data was as follows:
• End-use breakdown of HCFC-22 for 1998. EPA
assumed that 65 percent of current global HCFC-
22 production is used to produce refrigeration,
air-conditioning, and foam products. The other
35 percent of HCFC-22 production was assumed
to be used as feedstock material, which is not
controlled by the Montreal Protocol.
Manufacturers have the incentive to increase
production for feedstock material use to keep
plants producing at capacity.
• Growth rate for feedstock and other uses: EPA
assumed that production of HCFC-22 for
feedstock materials would grow at a 1.5 percent
annual rate in each country. The rate of growth
for production of HCFC-22 for regulated end-
uses (i.e., for refrigeration) was determined by
linearly decreasing production so that complete
phase-out occurred based on the phase-out
schedule for each country.
• Emissions for each country through 2010: Since
production and HFC-23 emissions are directly
linked, emissions related to non-feedstock uses
were decreased at the phase-out rate while the
emissions related to feedstock use were
increased at the 1.5 percent annual rate, for each
country.
The resulting emissions estimates are presented in
Exhibit D-3.
5.4.3 Perfluorocarbon (RFC)
Emissions from Primary
Aluminum Production
The emissions estimates for Austria, Canada,
Germany, Norway, Japan, the UK, and the U.S. are
taken directly from National Communications or
country reports (Radunsky, 2000, Environment
Canada 1997, Germany FME 1997, Norway MOE
1997, WS Atkins Environment 2000, and EPA,
200la, c). The methodologies employed included
smelter-specific information and provided estimates
and projections with a lower level of uncertainty.
Exhibit 5-7:1990 and 1995 HCFC-22 Production
in Developed Countries (metric tons)
Country
Australia
Canada
France
Germany
Greece
Italy
Netherlands
Russia
Spain
UK
1990 HCFC-22
Production
2,352
3,570
22,000
9,800
1,606
6,824
10,479
16,091
8,267
12,952
1995 HCFC-22
Production
1,259
480
47,141
5,212
3,065
3,764
6,862
3,345
6,025
11,123
Source: UNEP (1997), AFEAS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-12
-------
The methodology used to estimate PFC emissions
from aluminum production for the remaining
countries was as follows.
Historical Primary Aluminum Production by
Country
Primary aluminum production data for developed
countries for 1990 and 1995 was taken from the
background materials used for the report entitled
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Aluminum
Industry (IEA, 2000). EPA adjusted the data for
countries in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and the
Former Soviet Union based upon personal
communication with Eirik Nordheim from the
European Aluminum Association (1999).
Projected Primary Aluminum Production by
Country
This analysis aggregated individual smelter
production data to provide regional-level,
technology-specific production projections through
2010. Projections are based upon anticipated smelter
openings, smelter closings, and changes in aluminum
demand, which was modeled using regional Gross
Domestic Product estimates. Within each region and
technology type, production totals were divided
among the respective countries depending upon their
historically reported proportion of regional
production. Exhibit 5-8 shows aluminum producing
countries within each region.
For Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and the Former
Soviet Union, the regional production totals could not
be used since the historical data were adjusted.
Expected smelter opening and closing information
was combined with technology-specific growth rates
(2.5 percent per year for prebake cells, 0.5 percent
per year for Soderberg cells) to forecast future
regional production. The regional production was
then apportioned according to each country's
historical share of regional production within a given
technology type, as stated above.
Exhibit 5-8: Regional Categories for Developed
Countries
Region
Aluminum Producing
Developed Countries
Asia
Australasia
Japan
Australia, New Zealand
North America
Western Europe
Canada, United States
Austria, France, Germany,
Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy,
Netherlands, Norway, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, United
Kingdom _
PFC Emission Factors
The Aluminum Annual Review 1998 (Anthony Bird
Associates 1998) provides the cell technology type
for individual smelters within each country; by
combining this information with forecasts of regional
technology upgrades, emission factors gained both
regional and technological sensitivity.
EPA estimated emission factors using the Tier 2
IPCC good practice methodology for calculating PFC
emissions from primary aluminum production (IPCC,
2000). This methodology is shown mathematically
below:
Emission Factor (kg CF4 or C2F6per tonne Al) =
Slope-coefficient x AE Minutes/Cell-Day
Where,
AE Minutes/Cell-Day = Anode Effect Frequency
x Anode Effect Duration
Anode Effect Frequency = Number of Anode
Effects per Cell-Day
Anode Effect Duration = Average Anode Effect
Duration in Minutes
Since operating parameter (i.e. average anode effect
(AE) duration and AE frequency) and slope-
coefficient (S-value) information were not available
for all smelters, technology-specific regional default
values for AE Minutes/Cell-Day (IPAI, 1999) and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-13
-------
technology-specific S-values were used (IPCC,
2000).
The emission factors were projected through 2010 by
extending recent trends in AE Minutes/Cell-Day. The
future AE Minutes/Cell-Day values differ among the
various regions according to estimated technology
diffusion rates.
Exhibit 5-9: 1990 and 1995 AE Minutes/Cell-Day Values
By Tech Type
Technology Type
Vertical Stud-Soderberg (VSS)
Horizontal Stud-Soderberg (HSS)
Side Work-Prebake (SWPB)
Center Work-Prebake (CWPB)
Point Feed-Prebake (PFPB)
AE Minutes/Cell-Day
1990
10.3
3.5
6.5
3.4
2.3
1995
7.1
3.1
5.3
1.6
1.1
Source: IPAI, 1999.
PFC Emissions
EPA calculated emissions by multiplying the
emission factors by the aluminum production.
A summary of emissions is presented in Exhibit D-4.
5.4.4 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
Emissions from Magnesium
Production
Austria, Canada, Germany, Japan, Norway, the
United Kingdom, and the U.S. included partial or
complete SF6 estimates from magnesium. EPA used
these estimates to replace or inform the estimates for
those countries (Radunsky, 2000, Environment
Canada 1997, Germany FME 1997, Norway MOE
1997, WS Atkins Environment 2000, and EPA,
2001c). For the remaining countries, the following
method was used:
Historical Magnesium Production by Country
The U.S. Geological Survey publishes data for
primary production of magnesium by country
through 1998 (USGS, 1999). For those countries that
produce magnesium, die casting production was
estimated by applying the U.S. proportion of primary
production to diecasting consumption, shown in
Exhibit 5-10, to each country's primary production
for each year. Estimates of magnesium diecasting
production for countries with no primary magnesium
production (i.e., importers) were taken from their
National Communications to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change,
information on commerce activities from the USGS
(1999), and estimates of magnesium casting activities
in car producing countries. These countries include
Austria, Germany, Japan, Sweden, and the United
Kingdom. Additionally, total die casting production
is in agreement with the USGS' estimate that die
casting accounts for roughly 30 percent of
magnesium consumption globally.
Exhibit 5-10: Portion of U.S. Primary
Magnesium Production Processed by
Die Casting Industry (%)
Year
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
Percent
6.5%
7.4%
7.5%
9.5%
12.2%
10.7%
12.3%
16.5%
23.9%
Historical and Projected Emission Factors
The emission factor for diecasting (4.1 kg SF6/metric
ton Mg) was taken from Gjestland and Magers
(1996). The primary production emission factor
(0.95 kg SFe/metric ton Mg) was estimated by
dividing the total sales of SF6 to the magnesium
industry by the total magnesium primary production
in each country. (Global sales data were voluntarily
provided by major chemical manufacturers.)
Although the Russian Federation is a major producer
of magnesium metal, EPA assumed it did not
transition to SF6 from the older method, which used
sulfur dioxide (SO2), during the time frame of the
analysis. EPA assumed these emission factors
remained constant over time.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-14
-------
SFe Emissions
EPA assumed that all the SF6 used is emitted.
Emissions were calculated by multiplying the
primary magnesium production data and die-casting
production data by the corresponding emission factor
for each country for each year.
Exhibit D-5 presents the emissions estimates.
5.4.5 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
Emissions from Electric Utilities
Estimates for the UK, Japan and the United States
were taken directly from recent country reports (WS
Atkins Environment, 2000; METI, 2001; and EPA
2001b, c). These recent estimates were made using
country-specific data, and are considered more
reliable than the results of the global apportionment
outlined below. Several countries report emissions
from this sector in their National Communications
but these data were not used in the current analysis
because the National Communications do not take
into consideration recent SF6 sales information.
The following methodology was used to determine
SF6 emissions from utilities.
Countries That Use SFe in Their Utilities
Industry
This list was determined from conversations with
equipment manufacturers and from National
Communications.
Electricity Consumption
EIA provides country specific electricity
consumption, region specific growth rates, and a few
country specific growth rates (EIA, 2001). Individual
countries have their electricity consumption
estimated using the region specific growth rates or,
where available, country-specific growth rates. Each
country's electricity consumption was normalized as
a fraction of the world total.
Historical and Projected Global SF6 Emissions
Historical global emissions of SF6 from electrical
utilities for 1990 to 1999 were estimated from global
sales of SF6 to electrical utilities (Rand, 2000).
Future global emissions are projected assuming a 4.5
percent annual decrease for 1999 through 2002
(Rand, 2000) and a 0.7 percent annual increase for
2002 through 2020. The 0.7 percent growth rate is a
combination of (1) a growth rate of 1.7 percent for
U.S. electric generating capability between 1999 and
2020 (EIA, 2001) and (2) a growth rate of -1.0
percent per year for the charge of SF6 contained in a
typical piece of electrical equipment of a given
voltage capacity (Sauer, 2001). The sum of gas
purchases from electric utilities is assumed to equal
the total global emissions of SF6 from electrical
equipment.
Global SFe Emission Apportionment
EPA assumed that SF6 emissions are proportional to
electricity consumption. Emissions of SF6 are
allocated to each country based on their share of total
world electricity consumption.
Exhibit D-6 presents SF6 emissions estimates from
electric utilities.
5.4.6 Emissions from Semiconductor
Production
Estimates for Canada, Japan, and the U.S. are taken
from country submitted reports (Environment Canada
1997; METI, 2001; and EPA, 2001b, c). For the
remaining countries, the following methodology was
used to estimate emissions of high GWP gases
(PFCs) from the semiconductor industry.
1. Analytical Approach: Throughout this
analysis, EPA assumed that emissions from
semiconductor manufacturing are proportional
to MSI-Si layers processed6 (and to MSI-Si
layer processing capacity) in the world and in
each country. In its analyses of the U.S.
industry, EPA has found that emissions are
closely correlated with MSI-Si layers processed.
2. Global Emissions: To develop estimates of
global emissions from 1990 through 2010, EPA
began with estimates of U.S. emissions for 1990
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-15
-------
through 2010. These U.S. estimates have been
developed based on emissions information
supplied by participants in EPA's PFC
Reduction/Climate Partnership with the
semiconductor industry, and on estimates of
MSI-Si layers processed in the U.S. To scale up
these estimates to the global level, EPA
estimated the share of world MSI-Si layer
capacity accounted for by the U.S. World and
U.S. MSI-Si layer capacity were estimated
using SEMI's 2001 Fabs on Disk database for
the linewidth technologies in place in 2000.
The International Technology Road map
(SEMATECH, 2000) provided the number of
layers associated with each linewidth
technology. EPA then divided the emissions
projections for the U.S. by the U.S. share of
MSI-Si layers to obtain emissions projections
for the world.
3. Country-Specific Apportionment: EPA used
the sources cited above to develop country-by-
country estimates of MSI-Si layer capacity.
EPA then multiplied the emissions projections
for the world by the country-specific shares of
world MSI-Si layers to obtain the country-by-
country emissions estimates.
Emissions from semiconductor production are
presented in Exhibit D-7.
5.5 Explanatory Notes
1. The Corinair method is an emissions inventory
methodology developed by the European Union.
A description of the methodology can be found at
the following website:
http://www.pti-ae.atmoterm.pl/index.html
2. Norway's National Communication provided an
emission estimate for 1990 and 1995; however
the 1995 estimate was projected from earlier
estimates based on results of "significant" efforts
by the magnesium industry to reduce SF6
emissions. To be consistent with "business as
usual," only the 1990 estimate was used.
Estimates for the years 1991-1994 were
interpolated to the 1995 value that resulted from
this analysis. Estimates for 1995 forward were
consistent with the methodology outlined in this
chapter.
3. In 1990, the European Economic Community
(EEC) included 12 nations: Belgium, Denmark,
France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and
United Kingdom. The EEC is now called the
European Union (EU). The EU currently has 15
members, the 12 from the EEC plus Austria,
Finland, and Sweden.
4. Ozone depletion potentials (ODPs) are used to
quantify the relative damage done to the ozone
layer by different compounds. By definition,
CFC-11 is assigned an OOP of 1. The use of
ODPs, with CFC-11 assigned the value 1, is
similar to the use of global warming potentials
(GWP) to quantify the relative impact of
compounds on radiative forcing, with carbon
dioxide assigned a global warming potential of 1.
5. In the UNEP report, the consumption for
European Union member nations are aggregated
into one EU consumption estimate. In addition,
in this analysis the results for the nations that are
designated countries with economies in transition
(CEIT) are grouped together as one, Australia
and New Zealand are reported as one, and the
non-EU European countries are reported together
as one.
6. MSI-Si layers processed refers to millions of
square inches of silicon processed times the
number of interconnect layers contained in the
semiconductors produced.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Methodology 5-16
-------
6. References
AAMA (American Automobile Manufacturers Association). 1998. World Motor Vehicle Data,
1998 Edition.
AAPFCO (Association of American Plant Food Control Officials). 1996. Commercial
Fertilizers 1996. University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
AEA Technology. 2001 a. Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Methane in Waste in
the EU. Website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/enveco/studies2.htm
AEA Technology. 200 Ib. Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU. Website:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/enveco/studies2.htm
AFEAS. 1999. Production, Sales and Atmospheric Release of Fluorocarbons. Alternative
Fluorocarbons Environmental Acceptability Study. Website: http://afeas.org.
Aluminum Federation. UK, 1998. The UK Primary Aluminum Industry Reduces Its Emissions
of Greenhouse Gases by 65 Percent. Press Release, May 13.
Aluminum Industry Association. 1997. The Canadian Aluminum Industry and the Environment.
Third Quarter.
Ameeri, J.G. 1998. Personal communication with Mr. J. G. Ameeri, March and June.
Australian National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee. 1996. Workbook for Industrial
Processes and Solvent and Other Product Use. Australian National Greenhouse Gas
Inventory Committee, Commonwealth of Australia.
Barnard, G.W. and L.A. Kristoferson. 1985. Agricultural Residues as Fuel in the Third World.
Technical Report No. 5. Earthscan. London, UK.
Bouzat, G., J.C. Carraz, and M. Meyer. 1996. Measurements ofCF4 and C2Fg Emissions from
Prebaked Pots. Light Metals 1996, p. 413-417.
C&EN. 1992. "Production of Top 50 Chemicals Stagnates in 1991." Chemical & Engineering
News, 70(15): 17. April 13.
C&EN. 1993. "Top 50 Chemicals Production Recovered Last Year." Chemical & Engineering
News, 71(15): 11. April 12.
C&EN. 1994. "Top 50 Chemicals Production Rose Modestly Last Year." Chemical &
Engineering News, 72(15): 13. April 11.
C&EN. 1995. "Production of Top 50 Chemicals Increased Substantially in 1994." Chemical &
Engineering News. 73(15): 17. April 10.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 References 6-1
-------
C&EN. 1997. "Facts and Figures." Chemical & Engineering News, 75(25):42. June 23.
C&EN. 1997. "Nitric Acid Buyers Scramble in Shrinking Merchant Market." Facts and
Figures. Chemical and Engineering News. June 23.
CMR. 1998. "Chemical Profile: Adipic Acid." Chemical Marketing Reporter, y.33. June 15.
CONCAWE. 1995. Motor Vehicle Emission Regulations and Fuel Specifications in Europe and
the United States: 1995 Update.
Courts, D. 1998. Personal communication with Mr. David Courts, Australian Aluminum
Council, January and June 1998.
Chemical Week. 1999. "Product focus: adipic acid/adiponitrile." Chemical Week, p 31. March
10.
Denmark MOEE. 1997. Denmark's Second National Communication on Climate Change.
Submitted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Ministry of
Environment and Energy, Danish Environment Protection Agency. 1997.
Dlugokencky, E.J., K.A. Masarie, P.M. Lang, and P.P. Tans. 1998. "Continuing Decline in the
Growth Rate of the Atmospheric Methane Burden", Nature (393), 4 June 1998
Ecofys, 2001. Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Methane in the Extraction,
Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in the EU. Website:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/enveco/studies2.htm
Ecofys, 2001. Economic Evaluation of CO2 and A^O Reductions in Industry in EU. January
2001.
EEA. 2000. European County and Member States GHG Emissions Trends: 1990-1998. Topic
Report 10, 2000.
EIA. 1997. Country Study on Climate Change in Ukraine. U.S. Country Studies Program.
EIA. 2001. International Energy Outlook 2001. Energy Information Administration, Office of
Integrated Analysis, and Forecasting, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC. March.
Environment Canada. 1997. Trends in Canada's Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990-1995. April.
EPA. 1993a. Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in the United States: Estimates for 1990. K.B.
Hogan, ed., Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C., EPA 430-R-93-003.
EPA. 1993b. User's Guide for the MOBILE 5 a Emission Factor Model. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources. May, 1993.
EPA. 1997a. MOBILESa Emission Factor Model. US Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Mobile Sources.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 References 6-2
-------
EPA. 1997b. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC, October.
EPA. 1998. Memo from Office of Mobile Sources. Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, B.C., August.
EPA. 1999a. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-1997. Office of Policy,
Planning, and Evaluation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC; EPA
236-R-99-003. (Website: http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/emissions).
EPA. 1999b. U.S. Methane Emissions 1990-2010: Inventories, Projections, and Opportunities
for Reductions. Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C.
EPA. 1999c. Current and Future Coalbed Methane Emissions in Russia: Final Draft. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
EPA. 200 la. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-1999. Office of Air and
Radiation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (Website:
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/emissions)
EPA. 200 Ib, draft. Addendum to the U.S. Methane Emissions 1990-2020: 2001 Update for
Inventories, Projections and Opportunities for Reductions.
EPA. 200 Ic. U.S. Adipic Acid and Nitric Acid N2O Emissions 1990-2020: Inventories,
Projections and Opportunities for Reductions. December 2001.
EPA/GRI. 1995. Venting and Flaring Emissions from Production, Processing, and Storage in
the U.S. Natural Gas Industry. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Gas Research
Institute.
FAO. 1998a. Food and Agriculture Organization. FAOSTAT: Means of Production, Fertilizers.
Website: http://www.fao.org.
FAO. 1998b. Food and Agriculture Organization. FAOSTAT: Agricultural Production,
Primary Crops. Website: http://www.fao.org.
FAO. 1998c. Food and Agriculture Organization. FAOSTAT: Agricultural Production, Live
Animals. Website: http://.www.fao.org.
FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization. 1998d. FAO World Fertilizer Outlook.
www.fao.org.
FAPRI, Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute. 1997. FAPRI World Agricultural
Outlook 1997. Staff Report #1-97.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 References 6-3
-------
Germany FME. 1997. Climate Protection in Germany. Second Report of the Government of
the Federal Republic of Germany Pursuant to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change. Federal Minister for the Environment. April 1997.
Gjestland, H. and D. Magers. 1996. Practical Usage of Sulphur [Sulfur] Hexafluoride for Melt
Protection in the Magnesium Die Casting Industry. #13, 1996 Annual Conference
Proceedings, Ube City, Japan, International Magnesium Association.
Hayhoe, K. et al. 1999. "Costs of Multi-greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets for the USA",
Science, pp. 905-906, October 29, 1999.
IEA. 1997a. International Energy Outlook 1996. International Energy Agency, Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
IEA. 1997b. Energy Statistics and Balances. International Energy Agency. Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, May, 1997.
IEA 2000. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Aluminum Industry. The International Energy
Agency Greenhouse Gas Research & Development Program, Cheltenham, United Kingdom,
January 2000.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 1995. IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 3 volumes: Vol. 1, Reporting Instructions; Vol. 2, Workbook;
Vol. 3, Reference Manual. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, United Nations
Environment Programme, Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development,
International Energy Agency. Paris, France.
IPCC. 1997. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 3 volumes: Vol.1,
Reporting Instructions; Vol. 2, Workbook; Vol. 3, Reference Manual. Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, United Nations Environment Programme, Organization for
Economic Co-Operation and Development, International Energy Agency. Paris, France.
IPCC. 2000. Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse
Gas Inventories, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2000.
Jacobs, Cindy. 1994. Preliminary Method for Estimating Country Emissions ofCF4 and C2F$.
Draft Version, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation,
Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Division, July, 1994.
Labarre, M. 1998. Personal communication with Mr. Michel Labarre, Aluminum Pechiney,
May and July 1998.
MCPC, 1993. Chemical Products Synopsis - Nitric Acid. (Mannsville Chemical Products
Corp.). June 1993.
MCPC, 1996. Chemical Product Synopsis - Nitric Acid.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 References 6-4
-------
METI. 2001. The Fifth to Seventh Meetings Reports of the Committee for Prevention of Global
Warming, The Chemical Products Council, METI, Japan (May 29, 1998, May 21, 1999, May
23, 2000,). The 3rd Meeting Report of Sub-committee for prevention of Global Warming,
Chemicals and Biology Branch, The Industrial Structure Council, METI, Japan (May 31,
2001),
Mausbach, M.J. and L.D. Spivey. 1993. Significance of Two Soil Components of the
Pedosphere as Carbon Sinks. Paper presented at the NATO Advanced Research Workshop
on Soil Responses to Climate Change, Silsoe, Bedfordshire, UK, 20-24 September.
Mosier, Arvin. 1998. Email communication between Karen Lawson of ICF Inc. and Arvin
Mosier of the United States Department of Agriculture, Colorado. April 1.
New Zealand Ministry for the Environment. 1997. Climate Change: The New Zealand
Response II. New Zealand's Second National Communication under the FCCC. New
Zealand Ministry for the Environment.
Norway MOE. 1997. Norway's Second National Communication Under the Framework
Convention on Climate Change. Norway Ministry of Environment.
Pepper, W., W. Barbour, A. Sankovski, and B. Braatz. 1998. No-policy greenhouse gas
emission scenarios: revisiting IPCC 1992. Environmental Science and Policy.
PEER (Partners for Energy and Environmental Reform). 2001. Inventory of Methane Emissions
from Coal Mines in Ukraine: 1990-2000. Report can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/coalbed
Radian. 1992. Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Adipic Acid Manufacturing - Final Report.
Radian Corporation, Rochester, NY.
RAND Environmental Science & Policy Center, 2000: Production and Distribution ofSF6 by
End-Use Application. K.D. Smythe, Proceedings of "SF6 and Environment: Emission
Reduction Strategies," http://www.epa.gov/highgwpl/sf6/proceedings.html
Raptsoun, N., N. Kaletnik, D. Kostenko, N. Parasyuk, N. Gnedol, N. Ivaneko, B. Kostyukovski,
M. Kulik, and V. Laskarevski. 1996. Mitigation Analysis for Ukraine. State Committee for
Energy Conservation, Ministry of Forestry, Agency of Rational Energy Use and Ecology,
Institute of Energy Saving Problems.
Reilly, J., R.G. Prinn, J. Harnisch, J. Fitzmaurice, H.D. Jacoby, D. Kicklighter, and P.H. Stone.
1999. Multi-Gas Assessment of the Kyoto Protocol, Nature 401, pp. 549-555, October 7.
A.P. Sokolov and C. Wang. 1999b. "Multi-Gas Assessment of the Kyoto Protocol." Report No.
45, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Boston, MA, January.
Website: http://web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/rpt45.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 References 6-5
-------
Reimer, R.A., R.A. Parrett, and C.S. Slaten. 1992. Abatement of^O Emissions Produced in
Adipic Acid Manufacture. Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Nitrous Oxide
Emissions. Tsukuba, Japan. July 1-3.
Reimer, Ron. 1995 & 1997. Personal communication between Heike Mainhardt of ICF Inc. and
Ron Reimer of DuPont, Sabine River Laboratory.
Reimer, Ron, C.S. Slaten, M. Seapan, T.A. Koch, and V.G. Triner. 1999. Adipic AcidIndustry-
A/20 Abatement: Implementation of Technologies for Abatement offyO Emissions
Associated with Adipic Acid Manufacture. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. Draft Paper.
July 29.
Reimer, Ron. 1999a. Personal communication between Ron Reimer of DuPont, USA and Heike
Mainhardt of ICF, Inc., USA. May 19.
Reimer, Ron. 1999b. Personal communication between Ron Reimer of DuPont, USA and Heike
Mainhardt of ICF, Inc., USA. February 8.
Republique Franfaise. 1997. Second National Communication of France under the Climate
Convention. Republique Franfaise, November.
RFSHEM. 1997. Russian Federation Climate Change Country Study: Final Report, Volume 1,
Inventory of Technogenic GHG Emissions. Russian Federal Service for Hydrometeorology
and Environmental Monitoring.
Russia MPENR, and Danish Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. Phaseout of Ozone
Depleting Substances in Russia. Ministry for Protection of the Environment and Natural
Resources of the Russian Federation, and the Danish Environmental Protection Agency.
August, p. 28.
Salomon, N. 1998. Personal communication with Dr. Salomon, Federal Ministry for the
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, February and July.
S chafer, A and D.G. Victor. 1997. The Future Mobility of the World Population. Discussion
Paper 97-6-4. September.
SRI. 1995. 1995 Directory of Chemical Producers — United States of America. Stanford
Research Institute.
SRI. 1999 Quoted in "Product focus: adipic acid/adiponitrile." Chemical Week, March 10, p.
31.
SRI. 1997. SRI. Website: http://chems-energy.sriconsulting.com.
Strehler, A. and W. Stiitzle. 1987. Biomass Residues. In: Hall, D.O. and Overend, R.P. (eds.)
Biomass. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Chichester, UK.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 References 6-6
-------
Swedish EPA. 1997. Sweden's Second National Communication on Climate Change. Swedish
Environmental Protection Agency.
Thiemens, M.H. and W.C. Trogler. 1991. Nylon Production: An Unknown Source Of
Atmospheric Nitrous Oxide. Science: 251:932-934.
UKDEP. 1997. Climate Change: The United Kingdom Programme. The United Kingdom's
Second Report under the Framework Convention on Climate Change. United Kingdom
Department of the Environment, February.
UNEP. 1997. Production and Consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances 1986-1995. United
Nations Environment Programme, September.
UNEP. 1998. Halon Bank Estimates, Halon Technical Options Committee. United Nations
Environment Programme.
UNFCCC. 2000. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Database. United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change, September. Website: http://unfcc.de
UNPIN. 1998. United Nations Population Information Network. Website:
http://www.un.org/Depts/unsd/
USD A (United States Department of Agriculture). 1996. Long-term Agricultural Projections.
Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
USDA. 1998. "Crop Production Summary, 1997 Summary". USDA National Agricultural
Statistics Service, January. GPO, Washington, D.C.
USGS. 1997. Aluminum. U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Information.
USGS. 1998a. USGS Minerals Yearbook. U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Information, 1998,
Website: http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs.
USGS. 1998b. USGS Mineral Industry Surveys, U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Information,
1997, Website: http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs.
USGS. 1999. 1998 USGS Minerals Yearbook: Volume 1-Metals and Minerals. U.S. Geological
Survey, Minerals Information, 1999, Website:
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/myb/.
WS Atkins Environment. 2000. Projections ofNon-CO2 Greenhouse Gases for the United
Kingdom. November.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-December 2001 References 6-7
-------
Appendix A: Summary of Total Emissions Estimates and
Projections for I\lon-C02 Gases
Appendix A summarizes total emissions estimates and projections for non-CCh gases in the
following exhibits:
• Exhibit A-l: Combined Methane, Nitrous Oxide, and High Global Warming Potential
Gas Emissions (MMTCCh)
• Exhibit A-2: Total Methane, Nitrous Oxide, and High Global Warming Potential Gas
Emissions for Developed Countries (MMTCO2)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix A A-1
-------
Exhibit A-1: Combined Methane, Nitrous Oxide, and High Global Warming Potential Gas
Emissions (MMTCCh)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Total Emissions: Methane, Nitrous Oxide, High GWP (MMTCO2)
1990
136
12
21
53
146
5
26
17
3
12
158
190
17
17
1
22
87
63
4
0
10
1
-
55
48
18
80
17
64
636
14
4
82
15
9
246
153
1,132
858
27
636
526
183
63
146
1,132
3,573
1995
134
11
22
36
163
5
19
16
2
10
150
152
17
17
1
23
86
82
3
0
9
1
-
51
46
16
71
17
44
563
10
5
80
9
8
174
133
1,185
778
25
563
393
180
82
163
1,185
3,354
2000
148
12
23
42
159
5
20
17
2
12
138
154
18
17
1
24
98
88
3
0
9
1
-
55
44
18
73
17
48
592
10
5
81
10
9
186
108
1,205
766
28
592
422
193
88
159
1,205
3,454
2005
165
13
24
48
174
6
23
17
3
12
144
166
18
18
2
27
107
118
4
0
10
1
-
57
45
21
77
17
53
642
12
5
86
11
9
188
109
1,307
809
32
642
445
210
118
174
1,307
3,739
2010
176
14
25
54
187
6
25
18
3
13
150
175
18
19
2
29
115
149
5
0
11
1
-
59
45
26
80
18
60
686
13
5
89
13
9
184
110
1,415
846
38
686
464
221
149
187
1,415
4,009
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix A A-2
-------
U.S.
me
CD
O
5'
I
CD
3
O
><
co
CD
T3
CD"
o-
CD
Exhibit A-2: Total Methane. Nitrous Oxide, and High Global Warming Potential Gas Emissions for Developed Countries (MMTCCh)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Methane Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
112
10
12
30
73
4
16
6
2
7
61
116
7
15
<0.5
13
39
32
4
-
7
1
-
27
35
7
59
13
42
537
8
1995
110
9
12
19
86
3
13
6
1
6
57
82
8
16
<0.5
13
39
31
2
-
7
<0.5
-
25
34
7
52
13
31
497
6
2000
120
10
12
22
82
3
13
6
1
6
56
94
8
16
<0.5
14
42
34
2
-
7
<0.5
-
26
32
8
51
13
34
517
6
2005
129
10
12
25
84
3
13
6
2
6
56
90
8
16
<0.5
14
43
33
2
-
7
<0.5
-
26
33
8
51
13
37
542
7
2010
138
10
11
27
87
3
14
6
2
6
56
86
8
16
<0.5
15
44
33
2
-
7
<0.5
-
26
33
7
51
13
42
559
7
Nitrous Oxide Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
18
2
8
24
60
1
9
11
1
4
87
65
9
1
<0.5
9
42
16
1
<0.5
2
-
-
19
12
5
21
3
19
79
6
1995
19
2
9
17
66
1
6
10
1
4
82
63
8
1
<0.5
9
42
18
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
-
21
12
5
20
3
12
51
3
2000
23
2
9
20
64
2
7
10
1
5
68
43
8
1
<0.5
10
44
24
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
-
22
11
5
22
4
13
57
4
2005
27
2
9
23
69
2
8
10
1
5
69
45
8
1
<0.5
10
45
28
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
-
22
11
5
25
4
14
67
4
2010
27
2
10
26
73
2
9
9
1
5
70
45
8
1
<0.5
10
46
29
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
-
22
12
5
28
4
16
74
5
Total High GWP Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
6
1
<0.5
_
14
<0.5
-
<0.5
-
<0.5
11
8
1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
6
15
-
-
-
<0.5
-
9
1
6
<0.5
<0.5
3
20
<0.5
1995
5
<0.5
<0.5
_
11
<0.5
-
<0.5
-
<0.5
11
7
1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
5
34
-
-
-
<0.5
-
5
1
4
<0.5
<0.5
1
15
<0.5
2000
6
1
2
<0.5
13
<0.5
<0.5
1
-
1
14
17
2
<0.5
<0.5
1
11
31
<0.5
-
<0.5
<0.5
-
7
1
5
<0.5
1
1
18
<0.5
2005
10
1
3
<0.5
21
<0.5
1
2
-
1
19
31
2
1
1
2
19
58
1
-
1
<0.5
-
10
1
8
1
1
2
33
<0.5
2010
11
2
4
1
27
<0.5
2
2
-
1
25
43
3
2
2
4
25
88
2
-
2
<0.5
-
11
1
14
2
1
2
53
1
1
Q.
'
-------
Crt
Exhibit A-2: Total Methane. Nitrous Oxide, and High Global Warming Potential Gas Emissions for Developed Countries (MMTCCh) (Continued)
Developed Country
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
4
34
6
5
201
77
645
430
12
537
391
147
32
73
645
2,267
1995
4
38
6
5
147
61
659
375
12
497
301
144
31
86
659
2,105
2000
4
35
6
5
152
52
642
379
13
517
312
152
34
82
642
2,131
2005
4
36
6
5
147
48
645
373
13
542
314
162
33
84
645
2,164
2010
4
36
6
4
138
44
649
367
11
559
313
171
33
87
649
2,189
Nitrous Oxide Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
<0.5
40
8
3
44
65
389
371
8
79
130
29
16
60
389
1,082
1995
1
37
2
3
25
55
423
347
8
51
89
31
18
66
423
1,033
2000
1
38
2
3
33
43
424
307
8
57
106
34
24
64
424
1,024
2005
1
39
3
3
40
43
437
314
8
67
122
38
28
69
437
1,083
2010
1
40
3
3
44
44
454
318
8
74
136
39
29
73
454
1,130
Total High GWP Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
<0.5
8
1
<0.5
1
11
98
57
6
20
4
8
15
14
98
223
1995
<0.5
5
1
<0.5
1
10
100
46
4
15
2
5
34
11
100
223
2000
<0.5
8
1
<0.5
1
14
140
80
5
18
2
6
31
13
140
298
2005
<0.5
11
2
1
2
20
220
120
10
33
8
11
58
21
220
489
2010
<0.5
13
3
2
2
25
310
160
18
53
15
12
88
27
310
685
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
CD
HT
a
o
<£}
(D
o
I
CD
-
ro
o
I
Q.
S'
i.
-------
Appendix B: Methane Emissions for Years 1990-2010 for
Developed Countries
Appendix B summarizes methane emissions for developed countries from 1990 through 2010 in
the following exhibits:
• Exhibit B-l: Total Methane Emissions from Developed Countries (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-2: Methane Emissions from Landfilling of Solid Waste 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-3: Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Activities 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-4: Methane Emissions from Combined Natural Gas/Oil Systems 1990-2010
(MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-5: Methane Emissions from Livestock Manure Management 1990-2010
(MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-6: Methane Emissions from Livestock Enteric Fermentation 1990-2010
(MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-7 Methane Emissions from Wastewater Treatment 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-8: Methane Emissions from Other Agricultural Sources 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit B-9: Methane Emissions from Other Non-Agricultural Sources 1990-2010
(MMTCO2)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix B B-1
-------
Exhibit B-1: Total Methane Emissions from Developed Countries (MMTCCb)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane Emissions (MMTCCh)
1990
112
10
12
30
73
4
16
6
2
7
61
116
7
15
0
13
39
32
4
_
7
1
_
27
35
7
59
13
42
537
8
4
34
6
5
201
77
645
430
12
537
391
147
32
73
645
2,267
1995
110
9
12
19
86
3
13
6
1
6
57
82
8
16
0
13
39
31
2
_
7
0
_
25
34
7
52
13
31
497
6
4
38
6
5
147
61
651
376
12
497
301
144
31
86
651
2,098
2000
120
10
12
22
82
3
13
6
1
6
56
94
8
16
0
14
42
34
2
_
7
0
_
26
32
8
51
13
34
517
6
4
35
6
5
152
52
642
380
13
517
312
152
34
82
642
2,131
2005
129
10
12
25
84
3
13
6
2
6
55
90
8
16
0
14
43
33
2
_
7
0
_
26
33
8
51
13
37
542
7
4
36
6
5
147
48
646
373
13
542
313
161
33
84
646
2,165
2010
138
10
11
27
87
3
14
6
2
6
55
86
8
16
0
15
44
33
2
_
7
0
_
26
33
7
50
13
42
559
7
4
36
6
4
138
44
651
367
12
559
313
171
33
87
651
2,192
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-2
-------
Exhibit B-2: Methane Emissions from Landfilling of Solid Waste 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Landfilling of Waste (MMTC02)
1990
13.6
5.4
3.6
15.1
18.5
0.5
1.7
1.3
0.6
4.8
16.4
38.7
2.2
-
<0.05
1.8
9.1
8.1
0.4
-
3.4
0.1
-
11.8
2.9
3.8
16.1
5.6
4.4
37.8
1.1
1.0
8.7
1.8
1.4
18.6
23.5
217.0
135
5
38
63
17
8
19
217
501
1995
14.0
4.9
3.9
8.4
20.4
0.5
1.7
1.3
0.5
3.2
13.9
21.6
2.2
1.4
<0.05
1.9
9.7
7.7
0.5
-
3.4
<0.05
-
10.1
2.8
4.0
15.9
5.9
4.4
37.8
1.1
1.0
12.0
1.3
1.4
20.2
19.2
223.0
111
5
38
59
17
8
20
223
481
2000
15.0
5.7
3.7
12.4
20.0
0.5
2.1
1.2
0.5
3.7
17.0
40.6
2.3
1.4
<0.05
1.8
9.1
8.5
1.1
-
3.4
0.1
-
11.6
2.3
4.5
15.9
5.7
4.5
37.8
1.2
1.0
8.5
1.6
1.7
20.5
14.0
209.0
127
6
38
65
17
8
20
209
490
2005
16.1
5.8
3.8
14.1
21.1
0.5
2.7
1.2
0.5
3.8
17.5
42.1
2.4
1.4
<0.05
1.9
9.2
8.7
1.1
-
3.4
0.1
-
12.0
2.4
4.9
15.9
5.8
4.7
37.8
1.4
1.0
8.6
1.7
1.5
22.7
10.3
203.0
126
6
38
69
19
9
21
203
492
2010
18.2
5.9
3.9
15.8
21.8
0.5
3.4
1.3
0.5
3.9
18.0
42.9
2.4
1.4
<0.05
1.9
9.3
8.6
1.1
-
3.4
0.1
-
12.3
2.5
4.0
15.9
5.8
4.8
37.8
1.6
1.0
8.7
1.7
1.0
25.0
7.5
202.0
126
5
38
75
21
9
22
202
496
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-3
-------
Exhibit B-3: Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Activities 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Coal Mining Activities (MMTCCh)
1990
15.9
<0.05
<0.05
1.6
1.9
0.2
7.6
0.1
_
O.05
4.3
25.8
0.9
3.5
_
O.05
0.1
2.2
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.3
0.1
16.8
0.1
4.4
53.2
0.7
1.0
2.3
<0.05
_
55.4
17.2
87.9
51
0
53
91
16
2
2
88
303
1995
16.7
<0.05
<0.05
1.4
1.7
0.2
5.8
0.1
_
O.05
4.4
17.6
1.0
2.2
_
O.05
0.1
1.9
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.4
0.1
15.6
<0.05
5.5
38.2
0.5
1.0
1.9
NO
_
30.1
7.6
74.6
33
0
38
62
17
2
2
75
229
2000
19.7
<0.05
<0.05
1.2
1.4
0.2
5.0
0.1
_
O.05
1.0
14.7
1.1
2.2
_
O.05
O.05
1.9
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.3
0.1
14.8
0.1
6.3
31.9
_
1.0
1.7
<0.05
_
28.1
5.2
77.9
24
0
32
59
20
2
1
78
216
2005
22.6
<0.05
<0.05
1.2
1.3
0.2
4.7
0.1
_
<0.05
0.4
12.8
1.0
2.2
_
<0.05
<0.05
2.0
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.3
0.1
14.1
0.1
6.5
31.3
0.5
1.0
1.7
<0.05
_
26.1
5.0
81.8
21
0
31
56
23
2
1
82
217
2010
28.6
<0.05
<0.05
1.2
1.3
0.2
3.8
0.1
_
O.05
0.3
10.9
0.9
2.2
_
O.05
O.05
2.1
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.3
<0.05
13.4
0.1
6.5
30.5
0.5
1.0
1.4
<0.05
_
24.1
4.9
82.0
19
<0.05
30
53
29
2
1
82
216
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-4
-------
Exhibit B-4: Methane Emissions from Combined Natural Gas/Oil Systems 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Combined Natural Gas/Oil Systems
1990
6.9
0.1
0.7
3.7
26.2
0.4
0.7
0.2
_
<0.05
2.2
7.0
<0.05
4.2
_
0.1
7.0
1.2
1.1
_
_
<0.05
_
3.8
0.3
0.3
4.1
<0.05
19.4
338.0
1.8
0.1
1.0
<0.05
0.3
71.8
11.3
148.0
33
1
338
107
7
1
26
148
663
1995
6.9
0.1
0.7
3.2
35.1
0.4
0.8
0.2
_
<0.05
2.1
7.5
<0.05
6.1
_
0.1
5.9
1.7
0.5
_
_
<0.05
_
3.7
0.3
0.5
3.9
<0.05
12.3
338.0
1.8
0.1
1.5
<0.05
0.3
55.2
10.6
149.0
32
1
338
84
7
2
35
149
648
2000
8.2
0.1
0.9
2.5
28.9
0.4
0.7
0.2
_
<0.05
2.2
6.7
<0.05
6.1
_
0.2
8.4
1.7
<0.05
_
_
<0.05
_
3.8
0.4
0.4
3.2
<0.05
13.4
361.0
2.2
0.1
1.6
<0.05
0.3
60.3
9.7
154.0
34
1
361
89
9
2
29
154
678
2005
9.5
0.1
0.9
2.5
26.3
0.4
0.8
0.2
_
<0.05
2.2
6.8
<0.05
6.1
_
0.2
8.6
1.8
<0.05
_
_
<0.05
_
3.8
0.4
0.4
2.5
<0.05
14.9
376.0
2.4
0.1
1.8
<0.05
0.3
50.0
9.5
156.0
34
1
376
80
10
2
26
156
684
MMTC02)
2010
12.0
0.1
0.9
2.7
25.9
0.4
0.9
0.2
_
<0.05
2.2
6.8
<0.05
6.1
_
0.2
8.8
1.8
<0.05
_
_
<0.05
_
3.8
0.4
0.3
1.8
<0.05
19.2
391.0
2.6
0.1
2.0
<0.05
0.2
39.5
9.2
157.0
34
1
391
73
12
2
26
157
696
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-5
-------
Exhibit B-5: Methane Emissions from Livestock Manure Management 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Livestock Manure Management (MMTCCh)
1990
1.6
0.6
2.7
1.5
4.6
0.5
1.0
0.9
0.2
0.2
3.5
13.2
0.5
0.9
<0.05
1.3
4.0
2.5
0.3
-
0.5
<0.05
-
2.2
0.4
0.3
1.2
3.5
1.6
10.3
0.4
0.1
7.0
0.3
0.4
4.7
2.3
26.4
42
1
10
13
2
2
5
26
102
1995
1.6
0.6
2.7
0.7
5.0
0.4
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.2
3.6
10.8
0.6
-
<0.05
1.4
3.9
2.3
0.1
-
0.4
<0.05
-
2.1
0.4
0.3
1.0
3.2
1.3
7.8
0.3
0.1
7.8
0.4
0.4
3.6
2.3
31.0
40
1
8
9
2
2
5
31
98
2000
1.8
0.5
2.7
1.4
5.5
0.4
1.0
0.9
0.1
0.2
3.6
10.1
0.5
-
<0.05
1.5
3.7
2.8
0.1
-
0.4
<0.05
-
2.0
0.3
0.3
1.1
3.1
1.4
8.1
0.3
0.1
8.2
0.4
0.4
3.7
2.2
34.5
40
1
8
10
2
3
6
35
107
2005
1.8
0.5
2.6
1.5
6.3
0.5
1.0
0.9
0.1
0.2
3.6
9.4
0.5
-
<0.05
1.5
3.5
2.5
0.1
-
0.4
<0.05
-
1.9
0.3
0.3
1.1
3.0
1.5
9.2
0.3
0.1
8.6
0.4
0.4
4.2
2.1
36.2
39
1
9
11
2
2
6
36
107
2010
1.8
0.5
2.5
1.6
6.8
0.5
1.0
0.9
0.1
0.2
3.7
8.7
0.5
-
<0.05
1.6
3.4
2.5
0.1
-
0.4
<0.05
-
1.8
0.3
0.3
1.1
2.9
1.6
9.5
0.3
0.1
9.0
0.3
0.4
4.4
2.0
38.5
38
1
10
11
2
2
7
39
109
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-6
-------
Exhibit B-6: Methane Emissions from Livestock Enteric Fermentation 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Livestock Enteric Fermentation (MMTCCh)
1990
64.4
3.2
5.0
3.8
16.0
1.5
3.3
3.2
1.2
1.7
30.0
26.2
2.9
2.6
0.2
9.5
13.6
7.3
2.1
_
3.3
0.3
_
8.4
31.0
1.8
16.7
2.6
9.5
92.6
2.4
0.8
12.4
3.1
2.7
42.3
19.2
130.0
141
5
93
90
95
7
16
130
576
1995
60.4
2.8
4.5
1.7
18.1
1.2
2.1
3.0
0.6
1.5
28.5
21.4
3.0
2.4
0.2
9.8
13.4
7.1
0.8
_
3.0
0.3
_
7.9
29.8
1.9
11.9
2.5
6.7
70.3
1.5
0.8
12.1
3.8
2.7
32.1
18.9
136.0
133
5
70
65
90
7
18
136
525
2000
64.3
2.8
4.2
2.5
20.2
1.2
2.5
3.0
0.7
1.4
27.9
19.7
2.8
2.4
0.2
10.3
12.8
9.0
1.1
_
3.0
0.3
_
7.6
28.4
1.9
12.3
2.5
7.0
72.9
1.4
0.8
12.3
3.7
2.7
33.3
18.6
129.0
130
5
73
68
93
9
20
129
527
2005
67.2
2.7
4.0
2.8
22.7
1.4
2.5
3.0
0.8
1.4
27.3
18.1
2.7
2.4
0.2
10.8
12.3
8.4
1.1
_
3.0
0.3
_
7.4
28.7
1.9
14.0
2.4
7.9
82.7
1.4
0.8
12.6
3.6
2.7
37.8
18.4
130.0
127
5
83
76
96
8
23
130
547
2010
65.3
2.6
3.8
2.9
24.9
1.4
2.5
3.1
0.8
1.3
26.7
16.4
2.5
2.4
0.2
11.2
11.7
8.3
1.1
_
3.0
0.3
_
7.1
28.8
1.9
14.5
2.4
8.8
85.9
1.4
0.8
12.9
3.6
2.6
39.3
18.1
132.0
124
5
86
79
94
8
25
132
552
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-7
-------
Exhibit B-7: Methane Emissions from Wastewater Treatment 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Wastewater
1990
1.2
0.3
<0.05
3.5
0.4
0.1
0.5
<0.05
0.3
0.2
0.3
1.1
0.1
3.9
_
<0.05
2.4
0.1
_
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
0.1
0.1
<0.05
2.9
0.9
0.4
2.9
0.8
0.5
0.9
<0.05
<0.05
1.0
0.7
11.2
7
<0.05
3
14
1
0
0
11
37
1995
1.3
0.3
0.1
3.0
0.4
0.1
0.4
<0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.9
0.1
3.9
_
<0.05
2.6
0.1
_
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.1
<0.05
1.9
1.1
0.4
2.9
0.6
0.5
1.1
_
<0.05
1.0
0.7
11.8
7
<0.05
3
12
1
0
0
12
36
2000
1.4
0.3
<0.05
2.3
0.4
0.1
0.5
<0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.7
0.1
3.9
_
<0.05
3.1
0.1
_
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.1
<0.05
1.9
1.1
0.4
2.9
0.6
0.5
1.1
_
<0.05
1.0
0.7
12.4
8
<0.05
3
11
2
0
0
12
36
MMTC02)
2005
1.5
0.3
<0.05
2.3
0.4
0.1
0.6
<0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.6
0.1
3.8
_
<0.05
3.1
0.1
_
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.2
<0.05
1.9
1.1
0.4
2.9
0.6
0.5
1.1
_
<0.05
1.0
0.7
12.9
7
<0.05
3
12
2
0
0
13
37
2010
1.7
0.3
<0.05
2.3
0.4
0.1
0.8
<0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
3.8
_
<0.05
3.1
0.1
_
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.2
<0.05
1.9
1.1
0.4
2.9
0.6
0.5
1.1
_
<0.05
1.1
0.7
13.5
7
<0.05
3
12
2
0
0
13
38
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-8
-------
Exhibit B-8: Methane Emissions from Other Agricultural Sources 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Other Agricultural Sources (MMTCCh)
1990
5.8
<0.05
<0.05
0.1
-
-
<0.05
<0.05
-
<0.05
0.2
<0.05
0.2
0.1
-
<0.05
1.6
7.9
-
-
-
<0.05
-
<0.05
<0.05
-
<0.05
0.3
0.6
2.1
-
<0.05
0.3
<0.05
-
0.3
0.3
9.2
3
-
2
1
6
8
-
9
29
1995
6.6
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
-
-
<0.05
<0.05
-
<0.05
0.2
<0.05
0.3
-
-
<0.05
1.7
8.1
-
-
-
<0.05
-
<0.05
-
-
<0.05
0.2
-
2.1
-
<0.05
0.2
<0.05
-
0.2
<0.05
10.0
3
-
2
0
7
8
-
10
30
2000
6.9
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
-
-
<0.05
<0.05
-
<0.05
0.3
<0.05
0.4
-
-
<0.05
1.9
7.3
-
-
-
<0.05
-
<0.05
-
-
<0.05
0.1
-
2.1
-
<0.05
0.1
<0.05
-
0.3
<0.05
11.5
3
-
2
0
7
7
-
12
31
2005
7.1
<0.05
<0.05
0.1
-
-
<0.05
<0.05
-
<0.05
0.3
<0.05
0.5
-
-
<0.05
2.1
6.8
-
-
-
<0.05
-
<0.05
-
-
<0.05
0.1
-
2.1
-
<0.05
0.1
<0.05
-
0.3
<0.05
10.5
3
-
2
0
7
7
-
11
30
2010
7.0
<0.05
<0.05
0.1
-
-
<0.05
<0.05
-
<0.05
0.4
<0.05
0.7
-
-
<0.05
2.4
6.8
-
-
-
<0.05
-
<0.05
-
-
<0.05
0.1
-
2.1
-
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
-
0.3
<0.05
10.3
4
-
2
0
7
7
-
10
30
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-9
-------
Exhibit B-9: Methane Emissions from Other Non-Agricultural Sources 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Methane from Other Non-Agricultural Sources (MMTCCh)
1990
2.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
5.4
0.3
1.5
0.2
0.1
0.4
3.7
4.5
0.3
0.1
_
0.1
1.5
2.9
0.1
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
0.8
0.2
0.3
1.1
0.5
1.2
_
0.4
0.1
1.6
0.8
0.1
6.4
2.5
14.7
18
0
_
12
3
3
5
15
55
1995
2.5
0.4
0.2
0.2
5.8
0.3
0.9
0.3
<0.05
0.5
3.8
2.3
0.3
0.2
_
0.1
2.1
2.1
0.1
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
0.8
0.2
0.3
1.4
0.5
0.6
_
0.2
0.1
1.4
0.8
0.1
4.6
1.9
15.3
15
0
_
9
3
2
6
15
51
2000
2.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
5.8
0.3
1.0
0.4
<0.05
0.5
3.8
1.2
0.3
0.2
_
0.1
2.8
2.2
<0.05
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
0.9
0.2
0.3
1.5
0.4
0.7
_
0.2
0.1
1.3
0.8
0.1
5.0
1.9
14.2
15
0
_
9
3
2
6
14
50
2005
2.9
0.3
0.2
0.1
5.8
0.3
1.1
0.5
<0.05
0.6
3.9
0.6
0.4
0.2
_
<0.05
3.7
2.3
<0.05
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
0.9
0.2
0.3
1.7
0.4
0.8
_
0.2
0.1
1.2
0.8
0.1
4.5
1.9
15.1
15
0
_
9
3
2
6
15
51
2010
3.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
5.8
0.3
1.2
0.6
<0.05
0.6
4.0
0.3
0.4
0.2
_
<0.05
5.0
2.4
<0.05
_
0.1
<0.05
<0.05
1.0
0.2
0.3
1.8
0.3
0.9
_
0.2
0.1
1.1
0.7
0.1
4.6
1.9
15.8
16
0
_
10
4
2
6
16
54
Note: Other non-agriculture includes: fossil fuel combustion, industrial processes, biomassfuel
combustion. Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix B B-10
-------
Appendix C: Nitrous Oxide Emissions for Years 1990-2010
for Developed Countries
Appendix C summarizes nitrous oxide emissions for developed countries from 1990 through
2010 in the following exhibits:
• Exhibit C-l: Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Developed Countries (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit C-2: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agricultural Soils 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit C-3: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Industrial Processes 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit C-4: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manufacturing and Construction 1990-2010
(MMTCO2)
• Exhibit C-5: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Electric Utilities 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit C-6: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit C-7 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Mobile Sources 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit C-8: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manure Management 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix C C-1
-------
Exhibit C-1: Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Developed Countries (MMTCCb)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide Emissions
1990
18
2
8
24
60
1
9
11
1
4
87
65
9
1
<0.5
9
42
16
1
<0.5
2
_
_
19
12
5
21
3
19
79
6
<0.5
40
8
3
44
65
389
371
8
79
130
29
16
60
389
1,082
1995
19
2
9
17
66
1
6
10
1
4
82
63
8
1
<0.5
9
42
18
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
_
21
12
5
20
3
12
51
3
1
37
2
3
25
55
423
347
8
51
89
31
18
66
423
1,033
2000
23
2
9
20
64
2
7
10
1
5
68
43
8
1
<0.5
10
44
24
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
_
22
11
5
22
4
13
57
4
1
38
2
3
33
43
424
307
8
57
106
34
24
64
424
1,024
MMTC02)
2005
27
2
9
23
69
2
8
10
1
5
69
45
8
1
<0.5
10
45
28
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
_
22
11
5
25
4
14
67
4
1
39
3
3
40
43
438
314
8
67
122
38
28
69
438
1,084
2010
27
2
10
26
73
2
9
9
1
5
70
45
8
1
<0.5
10
46
29
1
<0.5
2
<0.5
_
22
12
5
28
4
16
74
5
1
40
3
3
44
44
455
318
8
74
136
39
29
73
455
1,131
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-2
-------
Exhibit C-2: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agricultural Soils 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide from Agricultural Soils (MMTC02)
1990
14.5
1.0
3.4
16.7
36.0
0.9
5.8
9.8
0.6
3.1
53.0
26.4
6.4
1.2
0.2
6.4
20.2
1.2
0.5
<0.05
1.3
_
_
6.7
11.5
2.8
9.9
2.5
11.5
49.8
4.0
0.4
18.0
4.7
2.5
24.5
29.5
269.0
191
5
50
77
26
1
36
269
656
1995
14.6
1.0
2.9
11.5
39.1
1.1
3.0
8.6
0.4
2.9
50.3
23.7
5.7
0.6
0.2
6.9
20.9
1.0
0.5
<0.05
0.9
0.1
_
8.3
11.5
2.8
10.0
2.2
7.0
29.0
2.2
0.4
15.8
0.1
2.2
13.4
28.1
285.0
178
5
29
51
26
1
39
285
614
2000
15.8
1.0
2.9
13.3
42.8
1.4
3.8
8.4
0.5
2.8
49.8
23.1
5.4
0.7
0.2
7.1
20.6
1.2
0.7
<0.05
1.1
0.1
_
8.0
11.1
2.7
12.2
2.2
8.2
33.8
2.5
0.6
15.9
0.1
2.1
16.1
27.4
299.0
175
5
34
61
27
1
43
299
645
2005
16.8
1.0
2.9
15.7
46.8
1.7
4.5
8.1
0.6
2.6
49.4
22.5
5.1
0.9
0.2
7.3
20.4
1.3
0.8
<0.05
1.3
0.1
_
7.7
11.3
2.6
14.5
2.2
9.5
40.5
2.9
0.7
15.9
0.1
2.1
20.3
26.7
308.0
172
5
40
73
28
1
47
308
675
2010
16.7
1.0
2.9
17.7
50.6
2.0
5.1
7.9
0.7
2.5
48.9
21.9
4.8
1.0
0.2
7.4
20.1
1.3
1.0
<0.05
1.4
0.1
_
7.4
11.5
2.6
16.8
2.1
10.8
45.3
3.3
0.8
16.0
0.1
2.0
23.8
26.1
317.0
169
5
45
84
28
1
51
317
701
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-3
-------
Exhibit C-3: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Industrial Processes 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide from Industrial Processes (MMTCCh)
1990
0.5
0.2
3.6
2.2
11.5
-
1.0
0.0
-
0.0
27.8
25.7
0.7
-
0.0
1.0
7.3
7.7
-
-
0.3
0.0
-
9.8
-
2.2
5.0
0.6
4.0
-
0.6
-
2.9
0.9
-
7.1
29.1
36.1
110
2
-
20
1
8
11
36
188
1995
0.4
0.2
4.3
1.9
11.5
-
1.1
0.0
-
0.0
25.3
25.4
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.8
7.3
7.8
-
-
0.3
0.0
-
9.8
-
1.6
5.0
0.6
1.9
-
0.6
-
2.3
0.0
-
2.2
18.9
40.2
95
2
-
13
0
8
11
40
170
2000
0.4
0.2
4.3
2.0
1.3
-
0.9
0.0
-
0.0
9.8
2.6
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.8
8.4
9.9
-
-
0.3
0.0
-
9.9
-
2.0
5.0
0.6
1.9
-
0.7
-
2.3
0.0
-
7.0
5.6
29.7
45
2
-
18
0
10
1
30
106
2005
0.4
0.2
4.4
2.4
1.3
-
0.9
0.0
-
0.0
9.9
2.7
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.8
8.9
10.7
-
-
0.3
0.0
-
9.9
-
2.0
5.0
0.6
1.9
-
0.8
-
2.3
0.0
-
8.0
4.9
32.0
45
2
-
19
0
11
1
32
111
2010
0.4
0.2
4.4
3.0
1.3
-
0.9
0.0
-
0.0
10.1
2.8
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.8
9.3
10.7
-
-
0.3
0.0
-
10.0
-
2.0
5.0
0.6
1.9
-
0.9
-
2.3
0.0
-
8.0
4.9
34.6
46
2
-
20
0
11
1
35
115
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed. Industrial processes
emissions includes emissions from nitric acid and adipic acid production.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-4
-------
Exhibit C-4: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manufacturing and Construction 1990-2010 (MMTCCb)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide from Manufacturing and Construction
1990
0.2
<0.05
0.5
0.6
0.3
<0.05
0.6
0.1
<0.05
0.4
0.8
1.9
0.5
_
<0.05
0.1
3.1
1.4
0.0
_
<0.05
_
_
<0.05
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.1
1.8
_
<0.05
1.8
0.6
0.0
1.4
0.0
-
10
<0.05
2
3
0
1
0
-
17
1995
0.3
0.1
0.6
0.3
0.6
<0.05
0.2
0.1
<0.05
0.5
0.8
1.3
0.4
0.0
<0.05
0.1
2.2
1.7
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
_
<0.05
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.9
_
<0.05
2.1
0.7
0.0
0.6
0.0
-
9
<0.05
1
1
0
2
1
-
14
2000
0.3
0.1
0.6
0.4
0.7
<0.05
0.2
0.1
<0.05
0.5
0.8
1.4
0.4
0.0
<0.05
0.1
2.2
1.8
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
_
<0.05
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.1
1.0
_
<0.05
2.1
0.7
0.0
0.7
0.0
-
9
<0.05
1
2
0
2
1
-
14
2005
0.3
0.1
0.6
0.4
0.7
<0.05
0.2
0.1
<0.05
0.5
0.8
1.4
0.5
0.0
<0.05
0.1
2.2
1.9
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
_
<0.05
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.1
1.1
_
<0.05
2.2
0.7
0.0
0.8
0.0
-
9
<0.05
1
2
0
2
1
-
15
MMTC02)
2010
0.3
0.1
0.6
0.5
0.8
<0.05
0.2
0.1
<0.05
0.6
0.8
1.4
0.5
0.0
<0.05
0.1
2.3
2.0
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
_
<0.05
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.1
0.1
1.3
_
<0.05
2.2
0.7
0.0
0.9
0.0
-
9
<0.05
1
2
0
2
1
-
16
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-5
-------
Exhibit C-5: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Electric Utilities 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide from Electric Utilities (MMTC02)
1990
0.4
<0.05
0.7
3.1
0.9
<0.05
0.9
0.3
0.0
0.4
0.6
4.4
0.8
_
<0.05
0.4
6.0
0.6
0.0
_
0.1
_
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.1
0.9
4.4
0.3
<0.05
0.9
0.3
0.0
1.7
0.0
-
15
<0.05
4
8
0
1
1
-
29
1995
0.5
<0.05
0.7
2.8
0.9
<0.05
1.1
0.3
0.2
0.5
0.6
3.9
1.0
0.0
<0.05
0.5
6.3
1.1
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.1
0.9
4.1
0.0
0.1
1.0
0.4
0.0
1.5
0.0
-
16
<0.05
4
8
0
1
1
-
30
2000
0.5
<0.05
0.7
3.2
1.0
<0.05
1.2
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.6
4.2
1.0
0.0
<0.05
0.6
6.7
1.2
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.1
1.0
4.6
0.0
0.1
1.1
0.4
0.0
1.7
0.0
-
16
<0.05
5
9
0
1
1
-
32
2005
0.5
<0.05
0.7
3.6
1.0
<0.05
1.4
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.6
4.2
1.1
0.0
<0.05
0.6
6.7
1.2
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.2
0.1
1.2
5.3
0.0
0.1
1.1
0.4
0.0
1.9
0.0
-
16
<0.05
5
10
1
1
1
-
34
2010
0.5
<0.05
0.7
4.1
1.0
<0.05
1.6
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
4.2
1.1
0.0
<0.05
0.6
6.8
1.3
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.3
0.1
1.3
6.1
0.0
0.1
1.1
0.4
0.0
2.2
0.0
-
17
<0.05
6
11
1
1
1
-
37
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-6
-------
Exhibit C-6: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide from Stationary Sources (MMTCCh)
1990
0.7
0.1
1.2
3.7
1.2
<0.05
1.6
0.3
<0.05
0.7
1.3
6.3
1.3
_
<0.05
0.5
9.1
2.0
0.0
_
0.2
_
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.2
0.1
1.0
6.1
0.3
<0.05
2.7
0.9
0.0
3.1
3.8
13.6
29
<0.05
6
11
1
2
1
14
64
1995
0.7
0.1
1.3
3.1
1.6
<0.05
1.3
0.4
0.3
1.0
1.4
5.3
1.4
0.0
<0.05
0.6
8.5
2.9
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.2
0.1
1.0
4.9
0.0
0.1
3.1
1.0
0.0
2.1
3.5
14.3
28
<0.05
5
9
1
3
2
14
61
2000
0.8
0.1
1.3
3.5
1.6
<0.05
1.4
0.4
0.3
1.1
1.4
5.5
1.5
0.0
<0.05
0.7
8.9
3.0
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.2
1.1
5.6
0.0
0.1
3.2
1.1
0.0
2.3
3.7
15.7
29
<0.05
6
10
1
3
2
16
66
2005
0.8
0.1
1.3
4.0
1.7
<0.05
1.6
0.4
0.3
1.1
1.4
5.6
1.5
0.0
<0.05
0.7
8.9
3.1
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.6
0.2
1.2
6.4
0.0
0.1
3.3
1.1
0.0
2.7
3.8
17.0
30
<0.05
6
12
1
3
2
17
70
2010
0.9
0.1
1.4
4.5
1.8
<0.05
1.8
0.4
0.4
1.1
1.5
5.6
1.5
0.0
<0.05
0.7
9.1
3.3
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.2
1.4
7.4
0.0
0.1
3.3
1.1
0.0
3.0
3.9
17.8
30
<0.05
7
13
1
3
2
18
74
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-7
-------
Exhibit C-7: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Mobile Sources 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide from Mobile Sources (MMTC02)
1990
1.6
0.3
0.2
0.0
6.5
<0.05
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.5
1.2
3.2
0.2
_
0.0
0.1
1.1
4.0
0.0
_
0.1
_
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
1.4
0.0
<0.05
0.9
0.9
0.3
0.2
1.3
54.3
12
1
1
1
2
4
7
54
82
1995
3.1
0.6
0.4
0.0
8.7
<0.05
0.1
0.3
<0.05
0.6
2.1
5.4
0.3
_
0.0
0.2
1.7
4.4
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
2.3
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.6
0.0
<0.05
1.3
0.9
0.6
0.1
2.8
66.8
19
1
1
1
3
4
9
67
104
2000
5.6
0.7
0.6
0.0
12.5
<0.05
0.1
0.5
<0.05
0.9
3.9
9.3
0.4
_
0.0
0.3
2.6
7.7
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
3.2
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.6
0.0
<0.05
2.3
1.2
0.9
0.1
4.7
62.2
31
1
1
1
6
8
13
62
122
2005
8.1
0.8
0.7
0.0
13.3
<0.05
0.1
0.6
<0.05
1.3
5.2
11.6
0.5
_
0.0
0.4
3.6
11.0
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
3.5
0.0
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.1
0.6
0.0
<0.05
3.3
1.5
0.9
0.1
6.4
61.8
40
1
1
1
8
11
13
62
137
2010
8.7
0.9
0.7
0.0
12.8
<0.05
0.2
0.7
<0.05
1.6
5.9
12.3
0.7
_
0.0
0.5
4.5
11.8
0.0
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.0
3.8
0.0
0.4
0.9
1.0
0.1
0.7
0.0
<0.05
4.1
1.8
0.9
0.1
7.1
65.9
46
1
1
1
9
12
13
66
148
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-8
-------
Exhibit C-8: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manure Management 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Nitrous Oxide from Manure Management (MMTCCh)
1990
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.9
4.3
0.2
1.0
0.5
0.2
_
3.2
3.4
0.1
_
<0.05
0.6
3.8
1.5
0.0
<0.05
0.6
_
_
0.2
0.0
_
4.2
<0.05
2.7
21.3
1.2
0.0
15.2
0.6
0.3
9.4
1.6
16.0
29
0
21
21
0
1
4
16
94
1995
0.5
0.0
0.1
0.6
5.0
0.2
0.8
0.5
0.2
_
3.1
2.7
0.2
_
<0.05
0.7
3.8
1.4
0.2
<0.05
0.5
0.0
_
0.2
0.0
_
3.2
<0.05
1.7
16.6
0.6
0.2
14.5
_
0.3
7.3
1.6
16.4
27
0
17
16
1
1
5
16
83
2000
0.5
0.0
0.1
0.6
5.5
0.3
1.0
0.5
0.2
_
3.1
2.5
0.2
_
<0.05
0.7
3.6
1.7
0.2
<0.05
0.5
0.0
_
0.2
0.0
_
3.2
<0.05
1.7
17.2
0.6
0.2
14.5
_
0.3
7.6
1.6
17.4
27
0
17
16
1
2
6
17
86
2005
0.6
0.0
0.1
0.7
6.2
0.3
1.0
0.5
0.2
_
3.1
2.4
0.2
_
<0.05
0.7
3.5
1.6
0.2
<0.05
0.5
0.0
_
0.2
0.0
_
3.2
<0.05
1.7
19.5
0.6
0.2
14.5
_
0.3
8.6
1.6
19.0
27
0
20
17
1
2
6
19
91
2010
0.6
0.0
0.1
0.8
6.8
0.3
1.0
0.5
0.2
_
3.1
2.3
0.2
_
<0.05
0.7
3.3
1.6
0.2
<0.05
0.5
0.0
_
0.2
0.0
_
3.2
<0.05
1.7
20.3
0.6
0.2
14.5
_
0.3
9.0
1.6
19.9
27
0
20
17
1
2
7
20
94
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix C C-9
-------
Appendix D: High GWP Gas Emissions for Years 1990-2010
for Developed Countries
Appendix D summarizes high GWP gas emissions for developed countries from 1990 through
2010 in the following exhibits:
• Exhibit D-l: Total High GWP Gas Emissions from Developed Countries (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit D-2: ODS Substitute Emissions 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit D-3: HFC-23 Fugitive Emissions 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit D-4: Aluminum PFC Emissions 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit D-5: SF6 Emissions from Magnesium 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit D-6: SF6 Emissions from Electric Utilities 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
• Exhibit D-7 Emissions from Semiconductor Production 1990-2010 (MMTCO2)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix D D-1
-------
Exhibit D-1: Total High GWP Gas Emissions from Developed Countries (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
High GWP Gas Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
6.2
0.6
0.3
0.0
13.6
0.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.3
10.7
8.3
1.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
6.4
14.6
_
_
_
<0.05
0.0
9.4
1.3
6.1
0.2
0.1
3.5
20.4
0.1
0.1
7.8
1.0
0.4
1.1
10.6
98.2
57
7
20
5
7
15
14
98
223
1995
4.5
0.3
0.5
0.0
10.8
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.4
11.2
6.9
1.4
0.1
0.1
0.4
4.9
33.7
_
_
_
<0.05
0.0
5.4
0.7
3.8
0.1
0.2
1.1
14.7
0.1
0.1
5.2
1.0
0.3
1.3
10.1
104.0
48
4
15
3
5
34
11
104
223
2000
5.5
0.7
1.5
0.1
12.8
0.1
0.3
0.9
0.0
0.6
13.9
16.8
2.0
0.4
0.4
0.9
11.4
30.9
0.3
_
0.2
0.1
0.0
7.4
0.8
5.1
0.4
0.5
1.3
18.2
0.2
0.1
8.2
1.3
0.4
0.9
14.3
139.0
81
6
18
4
6
31
13
139
298
2005
9.7
1.4
2.8
0.4
20.5
0.2
1.1
1.8
0.0
1.1
19.4
30.6
2.3
1.0
1.3
2.3
19.1
58.2
0.9
_
0.8
0.2
0.0
9.8
0.9
8.1
1.1
1.0
1.5
33.0
0.5
0.1
10.9
2.2
0.9
1.5
19.6
223.0
124
10
33
9
11
58
21
223
489
2010
10.8
2.1
3.7
0.8
26.7
0.3
2.0
2.3
0.0
1.4
25.2
43.4
2.5
1.9
2.0
4.3
25.2
88.1
1.7
_
1.5
0.2
0.0
11.3
1.1
14.4
2.0
1.2
1.8
52.6
0.8
0.2
12.8
3.4
1.6
2.3
25.1
308.0
164
18
53
15
12
88
27
308
685
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix D D-2
-------
Exhibit D-2: OPS Substitute Emissions 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
ODS Substitute Emisisons (MMTC02)
1990
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.4
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.7
0.9
1
_
_
_
_
_
_
1
2
1995
0.7
0.1
0.2
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.5
1.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
<0.05
1.1
9.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.1
0.0
0.0
1.3
24.7
6
0
0
0
1
10
1
25
42
2000
1.9
0.4
1.3
0.1
3.3
<0.05
0.3
0.8
0.0
0.4
3.6
10.9
0.6
0.3
0.0
0.3
7.3
10.6
0.3
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.0
1.9
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.1
6.0
0.1
<0.05
3.3
0.4
0.2
0.3
5.0
64.0
37
0
6
2
2
11
3
64
125
2005
3.8
0.8
2.5
0.4
7.3
0.1
1.1
1.7
0.0
0.9
8.1
21.3
1.1
1.0
<0.05
0.6
14.2
22.3
0.9
0.0
0.8
0.1
0.0
3.7
0.4
0.2
1.0
0.9
0.3
20.9
0.4
0.1
6.4
1.0
0.6
0.9
8.4
125.0
72
1
21
7
4
22
7
125
260
2010
5.2
1.1
3.5
0.8
10.7
0.2
2.0
2.3
0.0
1.2
11.8
28.7
1.5
1.9
0.1
0.8
19.1
37.3
1.7
0.0
1.5
0.2
0.0
5.0
0.6
0.6
1.9
1.2
0.7
40.8
0.7
0.1
8.7
1.4
1.1
1.7
9.6
176.0
96
2
41
13
6
37
11
176
382
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix D D-3
-------
Exhibit D-3: HFC-23 Fugitive Emissions 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
HFC-23 Fugitive Emissions (MMTC02)
1990
0.7
_
_
_
1.1
0.0
_
_
_
_
7.0
3.1
0.5
_
_
_
2.2
11.2
_
0.0
_
_
0.0
3.3
_
_
_
_
_
5.1
_
0.0
2.6
_
_
_
8.2
34.8
27
0
5
0
1
11
1
35
80
1995
0.4
_
_
_
0.2
0.0
_
_
_
_
7.5
1.7
1.0
_
_
_
1.2
17.0
_
0.0
_
_
0.0
2.2
_
_
_
_
_
1.6
0.0
_
1.9
_
_
_
7.0
27.1
22
0
2
0
0
17
0
27
69
2000
_
_
_
_
0.2
0.0
_
_
_
_
7.0
1.9
1.2
_
_
_
1.6
12.4
_
0.0
_
_
0.0
2.5
_
_
_
_
_
0.6
0.0
_
2.3
_
_
_
6.0
30.2
22
0
1
0
_
12
0
30
66
2005
_
_
_
_
0.1
0.0
_
_
_
_
5.8
1.6
1.0
_
_
_
1.3
16.8
_
0.0
_
_
0.0
2.1
_
_
_
_
_
0.5
0.0
_
1.9
_
_
_
4.9
27.1
19
0
1
0
_
17
0
27
63
2010
_
_
_
_
0.1
0.0
_
_
_
_
4.6
1.3
0.8
_
_
_
1.0
19.5
_
0.0
_
_
0.0
1.6
_
_
_
_
_
0.5
0.0
_
1.5
_
_
_
3.9
20.9
15
0
0
0
_
20
0
21
56
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix D D-4
-------
Exhibit D-4: Aluminum PFC Emissions 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Aluminum PFC Emissions
1990
4.7
0.4
_
_
8.0
0.3
_
_
_
_
1.6
2.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
_
2.8
<0.05
_
_
_
_
_
5.3
1.1
2.5
0.2
_
3.5
15.4
0.1
0.1
4.4
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.7
19.3
18
3
15
5
6
0
8
19
74
1995
2.7
0.0
_
_
5.7
0.1
_
_
_
_
0.9
0.7
0.2
0.1
0.1
_
1.4
<0.05
_
_
_
_
_
2.5
0.5
1.4
0.1
_
1.1
10.0
0.1
0.1
2.1
0.2
<0.05
0.3
0.4
11.2
8
2
10
2
3
0
6
11
42
2000
3.2
0.0
_
_
6.0
0.1
_
_
_
_
1.0
0.7
0.2
0.1
0.1
_
1.4
0.1
_
_
_
_
_
2.6
0.6
1.3
0.1
_
1.1
9.8
0.1
0.1
2.1
0.1
<0.05
0.3
0.2
9.7
8
1
10
2
4
0
6
10
41
MMTC02)
2005
3.5
0.0
_
_
6.6
0.1
_
_
_
_
1.0
0.8
0.2
0.1
0.1
_
1.4
0.1
_
_
_
_
_
2.6
0.5
1.2
0.1
_
1.2
9.5
0.1
0.1
2.2
0.1
<0.05
0.3
0.1
10.2
8
1
10
2
4
0
7
10
42
2010
3.1
0.0
_
_
6.1
0.1
_
_
_
_
1.0
0.8
0.2
<0.05
0.3
_
1.4
0.1
_
_
_
_
_
2.6
0.4
1.2
<0.05
_
1.1
8.7
0.1
0.1
2.1
0.1
<0.05
0.2
0.1
10.4
8
2
9
2
4
0
6
10
40
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix D D-5
-------
Exhibit D-5: SFe Emissions from Magnesium 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
SFe Emissions from Magnesium (MMTCCh
1990
_
_
_
_
2.1
_
_
_
_
_
0.4
_
_
_
_
_
0.1
0.3
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
3.1
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.6
0.5
5.5
1
3
_
1
_
0
2
6
13
1995
_
_
_
_
2.1
_
_
_
_
_
0.4
0.2
_
_
_
_
_
0.5
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
2.0
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.2
_
0.3
0.6
5.5
1
2
_
0
_
0
2
6
12
2000
_
_
_
_
2.3
_
_
_
_
_
0.6
0.4
_
_
0.2
_
_
1.0
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
3.5
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.4
_
O.05
0.8
6.8
2
4
_
0
_
1
2
7
16
2005
2.0
_
_
_
5.3
_
_
_
_
_
0.9
0.8
_
_
1.1
_
_
2.0
_
_
_
_
_
0.6
_
6.5
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0.8
_
O.05
0.8
11.3
4
8
_
0
2
2
5
11
32
2010
2.1
_
_
_
8.6
_
_
_
_
_
1.6
1.6
_
_
1.6
_
_
4.0
_
_
_
_
_
0.6
_
12.5
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
1.6
_
<0.05
0.8
20.3
6
14
_
0
2
4
9
20
55
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix D D-6
-------
Exhibit D-6: SF6 Emissions from Electric Utilities 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
SFe Emissions from Electric Utilities (MMTCCh)
1990
0.7
0.2
0.3
_
2.3
_
_
0.2
_
0.3
1.7
2.6
0.2
_
<0.05
0.1
1.2
1.8
_
_
_
<0.05
_
0.4
0.2
0.5
_
0.1
_
0.0
_
_
0.7
0.7
0.3
0.0
0.2
34.8
9
1
<0.05
0
1
2
2
35
50
1995
0.6
0.2
0.3
_
2.0
_
_
0.1
_
0.3
1.5
2.0
0.2
_
<0.05
0.1
1.0
1.4
_
_
_
<0.05
_
0.3
0.1
0.4
_
0.1
_
3.1
_
_
0.6
0.6
0.2
0.7
0.2
29.5
8
1
3
1
1
1
2
30
46
2000
0.4
0.1
0.2
_
1.1
_
_
0.1
_
0.2
0.9
1.1
0.1
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.6
0.5
_
_
_
<0.05
_
0.2
0.1
0.2
_
0.1
_
1.6
_
_
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.3
17.3
4
0
2
0
0
1
1
17
26
2005
0.4
0.1
0.2
_
1.1
_
_
0.1
_
0.2
0.9
1.1
0.1
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.6
2.5
_
_
_
<0.05
_
0.2
0.1
0.2
_
0.1
_
1.4
_
_
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.3
16.6
4
0
1
0
0
3
1
17
27
2010
0.3
0.1
0.1
_
1.0
_
_
0.1
_
0.2
0.8
1.0
0.1
_
<0.05
<0.05
0.5
4.5
_
_
_
<0.05
_
0.2
0.1
0.2
_
0.1
_
1.4
_
_
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
16.1
4
0
1
0
0
5
1
16
28
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix D D-7
-------
Exhibit D-7: Emissions from Semiconductor Production 1990-2010 (MMTC02)
Developed Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
EU-15
Other Western Europe
Russia
Other Eastern Europe
AUS/NZ
Japan
Canada
US
Total
Emissions from Semiconductor Production (MMTCCh)
1990
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
_
<0.05
_
_
_
_
_
0.1
0.3
_
<0.05
_
<0.05
0.1
1.3
_
_
_
_
_
0.1
_
_
_
_
_
O.05
_
_
O.05
O.05
O.05
_
0.4
2.9
1
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
1
<0.05
3
5
1995
<0.05
0.1
<0.05
_
<0.05
_
_
_
_
_
0.4
0.8
_
<0.05
_
0.3
0.2
5.2
_
_
_
_
_
0.1
_
_
_
_
_
0.1
_
_
O.05
O.05
O.05
_
0.7
5.5
2
<0.05
0
<0.05
<0.05
5
<0.05
6
13
2000
<0.05
0.2
<0.05
_
<0.05
_
_
_
_
_
1.0
1.8
_
<0.05
_
0.6
0.6
6.3
_
_
_
_
_
0.2
_
_
_
_
_
0.2
_
_
O.05
O.05
0.1
_
2.1
11.3
6
0
0
<0.05
<0.05
6
0
11
24
2005
<0.05
0.5
0.1
_
0.1
_
_
_
_
_
2.8
5.1
_
<0.05
_
1.7
1.6
14.5
_
_
_
_
_
0.7
_
_
_
_
_
0.6
_
_
0.1
0.1
0.2
_
5.1
32.0
15
0
1
<0.05
<0.05
15
0
32
65
2010
<0.05
0.9
0.2
_
0.3
_
_
_
_
_
5.5
10.2
_
O.05
_
3.4
3.2
22.7
_
_
_
_
_
1.3
_
_
_
_
_
1.2
_
_
0.2
0.1
0.4
_
10.3
64.2
35
0
1
<0.05
<0.05
23
0
64
124
Note: Dashes indicate that emissions for the respective country were not analyzed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix D D-8
-------
Appendix E: Methane Emissions: Data Sources and Methods
Appendix E summarizes the data sources and methods used to project methane emissions in the
following exhibits:
• Exhibit E-l: Methane Emissions from Landfills, Data Sources and Methods
• Exhibit E-2: Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Activities, Data Sources and Methods
• Exhibit E-3: Methane Emissions from Natural Gas and Oil Systems, Data Sources and
Methods
• Exhibit E-4: Methane Emissions from Livestock Manure Management, Data Sources and
Methods
• Exhibit E-5: Methane Emissions from Livestock Enteric Fermentation, Data Sources and
Methods
• Exhibit E-6: Methane Emissions from Wastewater Treatment, Data Sources and Methods
• Exhibit E-7: Methane Emissions from Other Agricultural Sources, Data Sources and
Methods
• Exhibit E-8: Methane Emissions from Other Non-Agricultural Sources, Data Sources and
Methods
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix E E-1
-------
Exhibit E-1: Methane Emissions from Landfills, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Data Sources
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Corinair
Second NC/
1999 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
Second NC
Method / Adjustments
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Landfill emissions estimates for 1990 were broken out of the 1990
Corinair aggregate waste estimates using Hungary's disaggregated
percentages. Future emissions were estimated by applying Croatia's
population growth rate to 1990 emission estimates.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 1999
Inventory submission. Projected landfill emissions were broken out of
aggregate waste projections using 1995 percentages.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
1990 and 1995 reported for municipal landfills. Emissions assumed to
remain constant at 1995 levels for the period 2000-2010.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second NC reported emissions estimates for 1990-1994, and projections
for 2000, 2005, and 2010. The 1994 estimate was used for 1995.
Projected emissions were adjusted to account for mitigation efforts.
Refer to Chapter 5 for a discussion of the approach.
Second National Communication provided estimates only to 2000.
Estimates from 2005 -2010 kept constant at 2000 levels.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-2
-------
Exhibit E-1: Methane Emissions from Landfills, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Sources
First NC /
1999 Inventory Submission
Second NC
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
Second NC/
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
Country Study
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Mitigation Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Method / Adjustments
No reported data.
First National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to the 2000 Inventory
Submission. Projections were adjusted to account for mitigation efforts.
Refer to Chapter 5 for a detailed discussion of the approach.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Emissions and Projections from Second National Communication. 1995-
2010 aggregate waste numbers broken down by 1990 percentages.
Emissions and Projections from Country Study.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
First National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in Waste in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to the 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission. Landfill emissions estimates were calculated by
applying the 1995 landfill percentage of waste to projected waste
emissions. Projections reflect measures to divert waste and were
adjusted to Business As Usual. Refer to Chapter 5 for a discussion of
the approach.
Mitigation Study emissions and projections.
Emissions and Projections from UK study - 'Projections of Non-C02
Greenhouse Gases for the UK', March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-3
-------
Exhibit E-2: Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Activities, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Data Sources
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
—
1999 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Method/ Adjustments
Second National Communication projections scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission. Estimates for 2000 and 2005 were interpolated.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication aggregate projections
of fugitive emissions broken down using historical percentages and then
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 1999
Inventory submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-4
-------
Exhibit E-2: Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Activities, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Data Sources
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
—
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC/
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
2000 Russian Coalbed
EPA Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Method/ Adjustments
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission. Projections were a part of aggregate emissions
from fugitive fuels (coal & oil/gas). These estimates were broken down
using 1995 fugitive emission proportions.
No reported data.
No reported data.
No reported data.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission. 2000, 2005, and 2010 projections are aggregate
fugitive emissions, broken down using 1995 percentages.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission. 2000, 2005, and 2010 projections are aggregate
fugitive emissions, broken down using 1995 percentages.
Emissions from second National Communication and are projected to
decrease by 15% from 1995 levels by 2010, a 5% reduction every 5
years. Refer to Chapter 5 for details.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Emissions and Projections from Second National Communication.
Emissions and Projections from EPA study.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
First National Communication provided only 19901 emissions. Estimates
from 1995-2010 kept constant at 1990 levels. Nearby countries also
have constant emission projections.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-5
-------
Exhibit E-2: Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Activities, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Sources
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Mitigation Study /
PEER (2001)
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Method/ Adjustments
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from mitigation study scaled to Ukrainian historical emission
estimates.
Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse Gases for the UK,
March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-6
-------
Exhibit E-3: Methane Emissions from Natural Gas and Oil Systems, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Corinair
1999 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Second National Communication 2010 projection broken down using
historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Estimates for 2000 and 2005 were interpolated.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication aggregate projections
of fugitive emissions broken down using historical percentages and then
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 1999
Inventory submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission
numbers.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-7
-------
Exhibit E-3: Methane Emissions from Natural Gas and Oil Systems, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
—
First NC
Second NC
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
Country Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Mitigation study
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 1999 Inventory submission
numbers. Future emissions were a part of aggregate emissions from
fugitive fuels. These estimates were broken down using 1995
emissions.
Second National Communication reports fugitive emissions for 2000.
All fugitive emissions attributed to natural gas systems. 2000
emissions estimates were held constant for 2005 and 201 0.
No reported data.
No reported data.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections for fugitive emissions
broken down using historical percentages and then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections for fugitive emissions
broken down using historical percentages and then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections broken down using
historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided emissions and projections.
The Country Study reports disaggregate fugitive emissions for 1990.
The 1990 estimates were scaled to the consumption of natural gas fuel
use in Russia for 1995 and projected use through 2010.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only 1990 emissions.
Estimates from 1995 -2010 kept constant at 1990 levels.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Projections from 'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of
Methane in the Extraction, Transport, and Distribution of Fossil Fuels in
the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001) scaled to the 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections broken down using
historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Emissions and Projections from mitigation study.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-8
-------
Exhibit E-3: Methane Emissions from Natural Gas and Oil Systems, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
UK
US
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Emissions and Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse
Gases for the UK, March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-9
-------
Exhibit E-4: Methane Emissions from Livestock Manure Management, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Corinair
1999 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Second National Communication projections broken down using historical
percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission. Consistent
with livestock production data.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Projections from Second National Communication were aggregate.
Projections for 2000, 2005, and 2010 were disaggregated based on 1995
breakout of aggregate projections.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections for agricultural emissions assumed to be enteric and manure
only and Manure is 13% of total. Projections estimated by applying
Ukrainian growth rate to 1995 emission estimate.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-10
-------
Exhibit E-4: Methane Emissions from Livestock Manure Management, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Source
First NC
Second NC
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
second NC
Mitigation Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
First National Communication provided aggregate agricultural projections,
which were broken down by 1990 percentages. 1995 and 2005
interpolated. Used scenario II of projections for 20 10.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication aggregate projections broken down
using historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication aggregate projections broken down
using historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Projections estimated by applying Ukrainian growth rate to 1995
estimates.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Emissions and Projections from Second National Communication.
Historical emissions from First National Communication. Projections were
based on the Ukrainian growth pattern. Emissions estimates were
consistent with available livestock production data.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only 1990 emissions.
Estimates from 1995-2010 kept constant at 1990 levels.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections broken down using historical
percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Reported aggregate emissions from the Mitigation Study were broken out
using Estonia and Poland's breakdown of agricultural emissions.
Emissions estimates were consistent with available livestock production
data.
Emissions and Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse
Gases for the UK, March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-11
-------
Exhibit E-5: Methane Emissions from Livestock Enteric Fermentation, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Corinair
1999 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Second National Communication projections broken down using
historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Consistent with livestock production data.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Projections from Second National Communication were aggregate.
Projections for 2000, 2005, and 2010 were disaggregated based on
1995 breakout of aggregate projections.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections for agricultural emissions assumed to be enteric and manure
only and Manure is 13% of total. Projections estimated by applying
Ukrainian growth rate to 1995 emission estimate.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections then scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-12
-------
Exhibit E-5: Methane Emissions from Livestock Enteric Fermentation, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Source
First NC
Second NC
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Mitigation Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
First National Communication provided aggregate agricultural
projections, which were broken down by 1990 percentages. 1995 and
2005 interpolated. Used scenario II of projections for 20 10.
Second National Communication provided only historical emissions.
Estimates from 2000-2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication aggregate projections broken down
using historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication aggregate projections broken down
using historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Projections estimated by applying Ukrainian growth rate to 1995
estimates.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Emissions and Projections from Second National Communication.
Historical emissions from First National Communication. Projections
were based on the Ukrainian growth pattern. Emissions estimates were
consistent with available livestock production data.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication provided only 1990 emissions.
Estimates from 1995-2010 kept constant at 1990 levels.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
'Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous Oxides and
Methane in Agriculture in the EU' (AEA Technology Environment, 2001)
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication projections broken down using
historical percentages and then scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Reported emissions broken out using Estonia and Poland's breakdown
of agricultural emissions.
Emissions and Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse
Gases for the UK, March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-13
-------
Exhibit E-6: Methane Emissions from Wastewater Treatment, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
Corinair
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
The 2000 Inventory Submissions reports disaggregated waste
estimates for 1995, aggregate waste emissions for 1990 and a
wastewater emissions growth rate for 1 995 to 201 0. The 1 990
wastewater emissions were calculated by applying the 1995 waste
breakdown to the 1 990 total waste emissions. Projections were
estimated using the 1995 to 2010 reported growth rate.
No projections were available from the Second National
Communication.
Projections from Second National Communication for 2000 scaled to
2000 Inventory Submissions with 2005 and 2010 held constant at
2000 levels.
Projections from Second National Communication for 2000 scaled to
2000 Inventory Submissions with 2005 and 2010 held constant at
2000 levels.
Projections from Second National Communication for aggregate
waste emissions for 2000, 2005, and 2010. Waste projections
disaggregated by applying the 1995 breakout.
No reported data.
Projections from Second National Communication for aggregate
waste emissions for 2000, 2005, and 2010. Waste projections
disaggregated by applying the 1995 breakout.
Projections from Second National Communication scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission.
Emissions from Second National Communication for 1990 and 1995
municipal and industrial wastewater. Estimates for 2000 -2010
held constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions. Estimates for 2000,
2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions. Estimates for 2000,
2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Second National Communication aggregate waste projections
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission. Disaggregated waste
percentages from 1990 used to disaggregate 2000-2010.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions. Estimates for 2000,
2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions. Estimates for 2000,
2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from Second National Communication. Estimates for
2000, 2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission. 2005 interpolated from 2000 and 2010.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission. Japan reported disaggregated waste emissions for
1990 and 1994 and aggregate "all other" emissions for 2000, 2005,
and 2010. 1995 emissions were assumed to be the 1994 estimates.
Aggregate projections for "all other" emissions broken down using
1994 breakdown of emissions that make up this category in Second
NC.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-14
-------
Exhibit E-6: Methane Emissions from Wastewater Treatment, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Source
Second NC
—
1999 Inventory Submission /
First NC
Second NC
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Country Study
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Mitigation Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Emissions and Projections from Second National Communication.
No reported data.
Projections from First National Communication scaled to 1999
Inventory submission. Scenario II projections for 2000 and 2010with
2005 interpolated.
Emissions from Second National Communication. Projections for
2000, 2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
No reported data.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission. 1994 estimate used for 1995. Projections for 2000,
2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submission. Projections for 2000,
2005, and 2010 kept constant at 1995 levels, similar to
France/Spain.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
The Russia Country study reports disaggregated waste emissions
for 1990. Estimates for 1995-2010 kept constant at 1990 levels.
Emissions from Second National Communication
Emissions from First National Communication with 1995-2010 held
constant at 1 990 levels, similar to nearby countries of Hungary and
Austria.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Estimates from Second National Communication. 1995 breakout
used to disaggregate waste emissions estimates for 2000, 2005,
and 2010.
Emissions and projections from Mitigation Study.
Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse Gases for the
UK, March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-15
-------
Exhibit E-7: Methane Emissions from Other Agricultural Sources, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
Corinair
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
1999 Inventory Submission
Second NC
—
1999 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
1999 Inventory Submission
Country Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Second National Communication with 2010 broken down according to
1995 proportions. 2000 and 2005 interpolated.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Only includes rice for 1995.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second national Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Second National Communication
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions and Projections from Second National Communication.
Kept constant in projections.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Second National Communication scaled to 1999 Inventory submission.
No reported data.
No reported data.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
No reported data.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission
Second National Communication provides 1994 data, used for 1995.
Projections for 2000-20 10 held constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 1999 submission, which includes rice and field burning.
No projections for 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2010.
The Russia Country study reports disaggregate agricultural emissions
for 1990. The 1990 estimate was held constant into the future.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-16
-------
Exhibit E-7: Methane Emissions from Other Agricultural Sources, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
Mitigation Study
2000 Inventory Submission
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
No reported data.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission
Emissions and Projections from the Mitigation Study.
Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse Gases for the
UK, March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-17
-------
Exhibit E-8: Methane Emissions from Other Non-Agricultural Sources, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Corinair
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
First NC
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
1999 Inventory Submission
Second NC
—
1999 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory
Submission.
Projections from Second National Communication. Kept constant
from 2000-20 10 at 1995 levels.
Corinair provided disaggregate 1990 other non-agricultural emissions
estimates. These estimates were held constant into the future.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from Second National Communication, with 1995
emissions held constant for 2000, 2005, and 2010.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
First National Communication provides emission estimates.
Emissions for 2000, 2005, and 2010 held constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from Second National Communication, with projections
kept constant at 1995 levels.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Second national Communication projections scaled to 1999
Inventory. 2000, 2005, and 2010 disaggregated by 1995 historical
proportions.
Emissions and projections from Second National Communication.
No reported data.
Second National Communication using Scenario II, then scaled to
1999 Inventory submission.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
No reported data.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-18
-------
Exhibit E-8: Methane Emissions from Other Non-Agricultural Sources, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Source
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
Second NC
Country Study
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
Mitigation Study
2000 Inventory Submission
2001 Inventory Submission /
EPA 2001 b, draft
Inventory/Projection Estimate Adjustments
Second National Communication. 1990 includes fuel combustion
and industrial. 1 994 emissions used for 1 995. 2000-201 0
projections by Czech growth pattern.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions and projections from Second NC.
The Russia Country study does not report emissions from other non-
agricultural sources.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory.
Held constant after 1995 based on similar nearby countries such as
Italy, Austria, and Hungary.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Emissions from 2000 Inventory Submissions, with 1990-1995 growth
rate used to calculate future rates.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory.
Emissions and projections from the Mitigation Study were
disaggregated.
Projections from Projections ofNon-COi Greenhouse Gases for the
UK, March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 b, draft.
Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix E E-19
-------
Appendix F: Nitrous Oxide Emissions: Data Sources and
Methods
Appendix F summarizes the data sources and methods used to project nitrous oxide emissions in
the following exhibits:
• Exhibit F-l: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agricultural Soils, Data Sources and Methods
• Exhibit F-2: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Industrial Processes, Data Sources and
Methods
• Exhibit F-3: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Stationary Fossil Fuel Combustion (Electric
Utilities, Manufacturing and Construction Industries), Data Sources and Methods
• Exhibit F-4: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Mobile Fossil Fuel, Data Sources and
Methods
• Exhibit F-5: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manure Management, Data Sources and
Methods
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix F F-1
-------
Exhibit F-1: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agricultural Soils, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
1999 Inventory Submission
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Estimation/Projection Methods
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
1999 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-2
-------
Exhibit F-1: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agricultural Soils, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
Third NC
Estimation/Projection Methods
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 ) scaled
to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse Gases for the UK,
March 2000.
Emissions and Projections from draft Third National Communication
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-3
-------
Exhibit F-2: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Industrial Processes, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Corinair
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission
Second NC
Corinair
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
1999 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
Second NC
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
Second NC
Second NC
Estimation/Projection Methods
Projections from the Second National Communication scaled to 2000
Inventory Submission. Emissions from 2000-2010 held constant at 1995
levels as Australia reported in 2 NC that no emissions abatement options
were being considered.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Canada expects to reduce emissions from adipic acid production by 95% with
new technology phase in during 1997 through 2000. The 2000 emissions
projection was held constant to 2010.
No reported data.
No reported data.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
No reported data.
Emissions are reported for 1994 and kept constant at 1994 levels through
2010.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 1999 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
No reported data.
No reported data.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory. Reported
emissions for 2000. Emissions for 2005-201 0 held constant at 2000 levels.
Emissions from 2000-2010 kept constant from 2000-2010 at 1995 levels.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication.
No reported data.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-4
-------
Exhibit F-2: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Industrial Processes, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Data Source
2000 Inventory Submission /
Second NC
First NC
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Report
2000 Inventory Submission
Second NC
2000 Inventory Submission
2001 Inventory Submission/
EPA 200 1c
Estimation/Projection Methods
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
No reported data.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Options to Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions - Final Report: November 1998
(AEA Technology) scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Second National Communication. N20 emissions are not expected to drop
due to the increase of nitric acid and adipic acid production after 1995.
Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse Gases for the UK,
March 2000.
Projections from EPA 2001 c.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-5
-------
Exhibit F-3 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Stationary Fossil Fuel Combustion (Electric Utilities; Manufacturing and
Construction Industries), Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
1999 Inventory Submission
—
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
Estimation/Projection Methods
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
1990 and 1995 emission estimates for manufacturing and construction
industries, as well as all Projections determined as described in Section 5
of this report, scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
1999 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-6
-------
Exhibit F-3 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Stationary Fossil Fuel Combustion (Electric Utilities; Manufacturing and
Construction Industries), Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
—
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2001 Inventory Submission /
Third NC
Estimation/Projection Methods
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Emissions and Projections from draft Third National Communication.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-7
-------
Exhibit F-4: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Mobile Fossil Fuel, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
1999 Inventory Submission
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
Estimation/Projection Methods
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
1999 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
1999 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-8
-------
Exhibit F-4: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Mobile Fossil Fuel, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
—
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2001 Inventory Submission /
Third NC
Estimation/Projection Methods
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Emissions and Projections from draft Third National Communication.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-9
-------
Exhibit F-5: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manure Management, Data Sources and Methods
Country
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Monaco
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
1999 Inventory Submission
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
Estimation/Projection Methods
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
1999 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-10
-------
Exhibit F-5: Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Manure Management, Data Sources and Methods (Continued)
Country
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
US
Historical Data Source
(if not estimated by USEPA)
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
—
—
2000 Inventory Submission
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission /
EU Sector Report
2000 Inventory Submission
—
2000 Inventory Submission /
UK Study
2001 Inventory Submission /
Third NC
Estimation/Projection Methods
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections from Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Nitrous
Oxides and Methane in Agriculture in the EU (AEA Technology, 2001 )
scaled to 2000 Inventory Submission.
Projections determined as described in Section 5 of this report, scaled to
2000 Inventory Submission.
Refer to the methodologies described in Section 5 of this report.
Projections from Projections of Non-002 Greenhouse Gases for the UK,
March 2000.
Emissions and Projections from draft Third National Communication
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix F F-11
-------
APPENDIX G: Methodology and Adjustments to
Approaches Used to Estimate Nitrous
Oxide Emissions from Agricultural
Soils
This appendix presents the methodology and country-specific approaches that EPA used to estimate N2O emissions
from agricultural soils. EPA estimated N2O for five components of N2O emissions from agricultural soils:
• Direct Emissions from Commercial Synthetic Fertilizer Application;
• Direct Emissions from Cultivation of Nitrogen-Fixing Crops;
• Direct Emissions from the Incorporation of Crop Residues;
• Direct Emissions from Daily Spread Operations and Direct Deposition; and
• Indirect Emissions from Agricultural Soils.
Direct Emissions from Commercial Synthetic Fertilizer Application1
Historical activity data: FAO publishes historical commercial synthetic fertilizer consumption data for most
developed countries (FAO, 1998a). The following assumptions were made for countries without data:
• Luxembourg: FAO reported fertilizer consumption statistics for Belgium and Luxembourg together.
The N2O emissions from agricultural soils, as reported in each country's National Communications,
were used as a proxy to divide consumption among the two countries. This resulted in 98 percent of
the fertilizer consumption attributed to Belgium and 2 percent to Luxembourg.
• Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, Ukraine: The data for these countries were aggregated in
1990, as they were part of the Former Soviet Union. Disaggregated 1992 data replaced the data used
for 1990.
• Czech Republic and Slovakia: In 1990, the Czech Republic and Slovakia were part of Czechoslovakia,
and the fertilizer consumption data was reported jointly. The disaggregated 1995 data served as a
model to determine 1990 values for the Czech Republic.
• Liechtenstein: No data are available.
Projected activity data: Using the 1995 and 2000 regional fertilizer consumption data from FAO, EPA determined
the 1995-2000 growth rate for each region (FAO, 1998d). These regional growth rates were used to linearly
extrapolate fertilizer consumption to 2010.
Historical and Projected Emissions: As recommended in the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines, the assumption for
this analysis was that 1.25 percent of all nitrogen from fertilizer consumption, excluding the 10 percent of nitrogen
in fertilizer that volatilizes as NOX and NH3, is directly emitted as N2O (IPCC, 1997). Therefore, emissions were
calculated as follows:
Organic fertilizer application was not included due to a lack of available data.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix G G-1
-------
N20 = [Fcolmtry - (Fcolmtry * 10%)] * 1.25%
Where,
Fcountry is the nitrogen from fertilizer consumption for the specified year and country.
Direct Emissions from Cultivation of Nitrogen-Fixing Crops2
Historical activity data: The FAOSTAT database provided historical crop production statistics for soybeans and
pulses (FAO, 1998b).
Soybeans. In 1995, eighteen developed countries produced soybeans. For 1990, FAO reported data for the
Czech Republic and Slovakia together. Similarly, FAO only provided data for the former Soviet Republics as
a whole. In all cases, the disaggregated 1993 data served as a model to disaggregate the combined 1990 data.
Total Pulses. In 1995, 32 developed countries produced pulses.
• Croatia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, and Ukraine: Data for 1992
was used to determine production shares in 1990.
• Luxembourg: The Belgian pulse production data included Luxembourg. To determine percentage
allocations, EPA used N2O emissions from all agricultural sources, as reported in their individual
National Communications, as a proxy (98 percent Belgium; 2 percent Luxembourg).
Projected activity data:
Soybeans. FAPRI reported projected soybean production data for 2000 and 2005 for regions and a limited
number of countries, and at the global level (FAPRI, 1997). For countries without production projections, EPA
used the regional growth rates. The growth rates were also used from 2005 to 2010.
Total Pulses. In the absence of pulse production projections, EPA assumed that pulse production grew at the
same rate as soybean production. For countries growing pulses only, EPA applied the regional soybean
production growth rates (Exhibit F-9).
Historical and projected emissions: The crop production statistics account for only the mass of the crop product
rather than the entire plant. The data were expanded to total crop mass, in units of dry matter, by applying residue to
crop mass ratios and dry matter fractions for residue (Strehler and Stutzle, 1987). To convert to units of nitrogen,
EPA applied the IPCC recommendation that 3 percent of the total crop dry mass for all crops was nitrogen (IPCC,
1997).
Direct Emissions from the Incorporation of Crop Residues
Historical activity data: Residues from corn, wheat, beans and pulses are typically incorporated into soils. Bean
and pulse production were estimated in the previous section. FAO provided historical production data for corn and
wheat for most countries (FAO, 1998b). EPA made adjustments for several countries' corn and wheat production:
• Luxembourg: The Belgian production data included Luxembourg. To determine percentage
allocations, EPA used N2O emissions from all agricultural sources, as reported in their individual
National Communications, as a proxy (98 percent Belgium; 2 percent Luxembourg).
• Czech Republic and Slovakia: FAO provided the individual country's production statistics for 1995,
which were used to determine relative shares that EPA applied to the 1990 data reported for
Czechoslovakia.
Alfalfa was not included in the analysis due to lack of data.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix G G-2
-------
• Latvia, Lithuania, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Ukraine: The data reported for 1995 filled in the gap
for 1990.
• Croatia, Iceland, Liechtenstein: No data were available.
Historical emissions: As recommended in the Revised 1996IPCC Guidelines, EPA assumed that 55 percent of all
crop residues are returned to the soils (IPCC, 1997). Crop residue biomass, in dry matter mass units, was calculated
by applying residue to crop mass ratios and dry matter fractions for residue (Strehler and Stutzle, 1987). For beans
and pulses, an estimated 3 percent of the total crop residue was nitrogen (IPCC, 1997). For wheat and corn, Barnard
and Kristoferson (1985) report nitrogen contents. Using the IPCC default, 1.25 percent of all nitrogen from
incorporated residues is directly emitted as N2O.
Projected Emissions: Nitrous oxide emissions from incorporation of crop residue grew in proportion to production.
Using the growth rates from FAPRI and assuming that the growth-rate from 2000-2005 remains constant through
2010, EPA projected emissions to 2010.
Direct Emissions from Daily Spread Operations and Direct Deposition
Direct nitrous oxide emissions result from livestock wastes that do not enter the commercial fertilizer market but are
instead "applied" to soils, either through daily spread operations or direct deposition on pastures and paddocks by
grazing livestock.
Historical activity data: FAO reported historical animal population data for most countries (FAO, 1998c), with the
following exceptions:
• Luxembourg: The Belgian population data included Luxembourg. To determine percentage
allocations, EPA used N2O emissions from all agricultural sources, as reported in their individual
National Communications, as a proxy (98 percent Belgium; 2 percent Luxembourg).
• Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, and Ukraine: Data for 1990 are reported for the Former
Soviet Union. EPA allocated the 1990 livestock populations in the Former Soviet Union among
Estonia, Lithuania, Russia, and Ukraine based upon each country's relative share in 1995. The 1995
data filled the gap for 1990 for Croatia.
• Czech Republic and Slovakia: In 1990, production statistics were reported for Czechoslovakia. Each
country's 1995 production statistics were used to determine relative shares.
• Liechtenstein: No data were available.
Historical emissions: EPA divided total livestock nitrogen excretion, calculated for each animal type, among
animal waste management systems using IPCC default assumptions. EPA applied the IPCC default that 20 percent
of total annual excreted livestock nitrogen was volatilized (IPCC, 1997). Finally, the remainder of the excreted
livestock nitrogen was multiplied by IPCC default emission factors specific to the animal waste management
system.
Projected Emissions: Animal population forecasts were not available. EPA assumed that emissions would grow at
the same rate as methane emissions from manure, as reported in the National Communication.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix G G-3
-------
Indirect Emissions from Agricultural Soils
This component accounts for N2O that is emitted indirectly from nitrogen applied as fertilizer and excreted by
livestock. Nitrous oxide enters the atmosphere indirectly through one of two pathways: 1) leaching and runoff of
nitrogen from fertilizer applied to agricultural fields and from livestock excretion; and 2) atmospheric deposition of
NOX and NH3 (originating from fertilizer use and livestock excretion of nitrogen). Emissions from each of these
pathways are described below.
• Emissions from fertilizer consumption: Nitrogen consumption data and forecasts, determined for
the fertilizer application section, were used to calculate indirect N2O emissions. The IPCC
recommends that 10 percent of the applied synthetic fertilizer nitrogen volatilizes to NH3 and NOX,
and 1 percent of the total volatilized nitrogen is emitted as N2O (IPCC, 1997). To estimate emissions
from leaching and run-off, EPA uses the IPCC recommendation that 30 percent of the total nitrogen
applied is lost to leaching and surface runoff, and 2.5 percent of this lost nitrogen is emitted as N2O
(IPCC, 1997).
• Emissions from livestock excretion: Historical estimates of total livestock excretion, as calculated
under the nitrous oxide emissions from livestock manure section, were used to calculate the historical
emissions. According to the IPCC, 20 percent of nitrogen in livestock excretion volatilizes to NH3
and NOX, and one percent of the total volatilized nitrogen is emitted as N2O (IPCC, 1997). To estimate
emissions from leaching and run-off, EPA used the IPCC recommendation that 30 percent of the total
nitrogen applied is lost to leaching and surface runoff, and 2.5 percent of this lost nitrogen is emitted
as N2O (IPCC, 1997). Livestock excretion projections for 2000, 2005, and 2010 were not available.
Therefore, the indirect emissions from animal waste were expected to grow at the same rate as direct
emissions from animal waste, as determined in the methane emissions from livestock manure section.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix G G-4
-------
APPENDIX H: Methodology and Adjustments to
Approaches Used to Estimate Nitrous
Oxide Emissions from Mobile Sources
This appendix presents methodology and country-specific approaches that EPA used to estimate N2O emissions
from mobile sources. To estimate emissions of N2O from mobile sources, EPA estimated fuel consumption for each
country, assigned fuel consumption to different categories of vehicles, and then applied the Revised 1996 IPCC
Guidelines emission factors by vehicle type. The data sources and methodology are described below.
Historical Fossil Fuel Consumption Data
IEA (IEA, 1997b) reported transport-related fuel consumption for road transport and non-road transport for all
countries for 1995. The data are further divided by fuel-type, including gasoline and diesel for road vehicles, and
coal, oil, natural gas, and aviation fuel for other forms of transport.
Road Fleet Composition
The IPCC emission factors are technology-specific, consequently, EPA needed to assign the fuel consumption data
to different vehicles on the basis of the fleet composition in each country, and also the distance traveled by each
vehicle type. For road fleet composition, EPA divided each country's road fleet into gasoline and diesel vehicles.
The category of gasoline vehicles includes passenger cars, trucks, or motorcycles, and diesel vehicles include
passenger cars and trucks. For 1990 and 1995, EPA used the American Automobile Manufacturers Association
total vehicle registration data that is assembled for each country (AAMA, 1998). To estimate the size of the gas and
diesel vehicle fleets, total vehicle registrations for each country were disaggregated according to the share of
gasoline versus diesel car production in major car producing countries (AAMA, 1998). Japan's production
breakdown was applied to Japan, Australia and New Zealand. United Kingdom's production breakdown was
applied to all of Western Europe, Eastern Europe and Russia. Canada's fleet characteristics were based on default
national values (EPA, 1993b). Motorcycle population percentages were applied across all countries similarly, using
the EPA assumption that motorcycles are 0.5 percent of the passenger car population. (EPA, 1993b).
Fuel Consumption by Type
Using the fleet composition for each country as determined from the steps above, EPA estimated how much of each
fuel type was consumed by each road transport category and sub-category. To weight the shares of gasoline and
diesel consumed by heavy-duty vehicles and light-duty vehicles, EPA used the US Federal Highway Administration
(FWHA) ratio of vehicle miles traveled by each vehicle type. The FWHA estimated that heavy-duty vehicles travel
2.3 miles for each mile traveled by a light-duty vehicle.
Projected Activity Data
EPA projected fuel consumption by fuel type and transport mode.
• Growth Rates: For both road and non-road transport modes, growth rates for fuel consumption for
each country (based on regional estimates) were taken from Schafer and Victor (1997). For road
transport, average annual growth rates from Schafer and Victor are based upon projected increases in
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix H H-1
-------
personal income in industrialized, transitioning, and developing countries, using the historical
precedent that rising income leads to increased demand for mobility. Aircraft use was assumed to
grow at the same rate as that used for road transport, based upon the idea that personal income growth
affects the use of this travel mode in a manner that is similar to road transportation.
• These growth rates were applied to 1995 baseline consumption estimates to get 2000, 2005, and 2010
consumption by fuel type and transport mode.
Emissions Factors
For non-road transport, Tier 1 IPCC emission factors were assembled by transport mode. For road transport,
emissions factors were determined as follows:
• Technology Usage: Since N2O emission factors are highly dependent on pollution-abatement
technology, EPA needed to estimate the types of catalytic converters used in each country's vehicle
fleet. Six types of model fleets were developed to account for different patterns of catalyst usage.
The technology options considered included early three-way catalysts, advanced three-way catalysts,
oxidation catalysts, non-catalysts, uncontrolled and low-emitting vehicles (LEV).
• Projected Technology Use: Countries were divided into these technology groups based on type of
technology currently in place, type of technology planned for or anticipated, region of the world, and
the relative availability of leaded gasoline. This grouping was supported by information in Motor
Vehicle Emission Regulations and Fuel Specifications in Europe and the United States: 1995 Update
(CONCAWE, 1995). Countries with similar vehicle emissions legislation and available fuel types
were grouped together.
• Emissions factors by technology, transport mode, and fuel type: IPCC emissions factors by
technology, transport mode, and fuel type were assembled and used for nearly every country except
Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Sweden (IPCC, 1996). These countries have advanced
emissions control programs similar to the U.S., and therefore, the most recent US emissions factors
were used (EPA, 1999b).
• Technology adjustment: For each country, the emissions factors were weighted by the technology
composition assumed for the appropriate model fleet for each year.
Historical and Projected Emissions
For non-road transport, fuel consumption over time was multiplied by the IPCC emissions factors assembled by
transport mode and fuel type. For road transport, the technology-adjusted emissions factors were multiplied by the
fuel consumption projections by fuel type and transport mode for each year.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix H H-2
-------
APPENDIX I: U.S. EPA Vintaging Model Framework
1.1 Vintaging Model Overview
The Vintaging Model estimates emissions from six industrial sectors: refrigeration and air-conditioning, foams,
aerosols, solvents, fire extinguishing, and sterilization. Within these sectors, over 40 independently modeled end-
uses exist. The model requires information on the market growth for each of the end-uses, as well as a history of the
market transition from ozone depleting substances (ODS) to alternatives. As ODS are phased out, a percentage of
the market share originally filled by the ODS is allocated to each of its substitutes.
The model, named for its method of tracking the emissions of annual "vintages" of new equipment that enter into
service, is a "bottom-up" model. It models the consumption of chemicals based on estimates of the quantity of
equipment or products sold, serviced, and retired each year, and the amount of the chemical required to manufacture
and/or maintain the equipment. The Vintaging Model makes use of this market information to build an inventory of
the in-use stocks of the equipment in each of the end-uses. Emissions are estimated by applying annual leak rates,
service emission rates, and disposal emission rates to each population of equipment. By aggregating the emission
and consumption output from the different end-uses, the model produces estimates of total annual use and emissions
of each chemical. For the purpose of projecting the use and emissions of chemicals into the future, the available
information about probable evolutions of the end-use market is incorporated into the model.
The following sections discuss the forms of the emission estimating equations used in the Vintaging Model for each
broad end-use category. These equations are applied separately for each chemical used within each of
approximately 40 different end-uses. In the majority of these end-uses, more than one ODS substitute chemical is
used.
In general, the modeled emissions are a function of the amount of chemical consumed in each end-use market.
Estimates of the consumption of ODS alternatives can be inferred by extrapolating forward in time from the amount
of regulated ODS used in the early 1990s. Using data gleaned from a variety of sources, assessments are made
regarding which alternatives will likely be used, and what fraction of the ODS market in each end-use will be
captured by that alternative. By combining this information with estimates of the total end-use market growth, a
consumption value is estimated for each chemical used within each end-use.
1.2 Emissions Equations
1.2.1 Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning
For refrigeration and air conditioning products, emission calculations are split into two categories: emissions during
equipment lifetime, which arise from annual leakage and service losses, and disposal emissions, which occur at the
time of discard. Equation 1 calculates the lifetime emissions from leakage and service, and Equation 2 calculates
the emissions resulting from disposal of the equipment. These lifetime emissions and disposal emissions are added
to calculate the total emissions from refrigeration and air-conditioning (Equation 3). As new technologies replace
older ones, it is generally assumed that there are improvements in their leak, service, and disposal emission rates.
Lifetime emissions from any piece of equipment include both the amount of chemical leaked during equipment
operation and during service recharges. Emissions from leakage and servicing can be expressed as follows:
ESj=(la+ls)_ QCj-i+i fori=l_k Eq. 1
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix I 1-1
-------
Where:
ESJ - Emissions from Equipment Serviced. Emissions in year j from normal leakage and servicing
(recharging) of equipment.
la - Annual Leak Rate. Average annual leak rate during normal equipment operation (expressed as a
percentage of total chemical charge).
4 = Service Leak Rate. Average leakage during equipment servicing (expressed as a percentage of total
chemical charge).
QCJ - Quantity of Chemical in New Equipment. Total amount of a specific chemical used to charge new
equipment in a given year, j, by weight.
k - Lifetime. The average lifetime of the equipment.
The disposal emission equations assume that a certain percentage of the chemical charge will be emitted to the
atmosphere when that vintage is discarded. Disposal emissions are thus a function of the quantity of chemical
contained in the retiring equipment fleet and the proportion of chemical released at disposal:
Where:
rm
re
Edj = Qcj.k+ j _ [ 1 - (rm _ re)] Eq. 2
Emissions from Equipment Disposed. Emissions in yeary from the disposal of equipment.
Quantity of Chemical in New Equipment. Total amount of a specific chemical used to charge new
equipment in a given year, j, by weight.
Chemical Remaining. Amount of chemical remaining in equipment at the time of disposal (expressed
as a percentage of total chemical charge)
Chemical Recovery Rate. Amount of chemical that is recovered just prior to disposal (expressed as a
percentage of chemical remaining at disposal (rm))
Lifetime. The average lifetime of the equipment.
EJ = ESJ + Edj Eq. 3
Where:
Ej - Total Emissions. Emissions from refrigeration and air conditioning equipment in year/
ESJ - Emissions from Equipment Serviced. Emissions in year j from normal leakage and servicing
(recharging) of equipment.
Edj - Emissions from Equipment Disposed. Emissions in yeary from the disposal of equipment.
1.2.2
Aerosols
All HFCs and PFCs used in aerosols are assumed to be emitted in the year of manufacture. Since there is currently
no aerosol recycling, it is assumed that all of the annual production of aerosol propellants is released to the
atmosphere. Equation 4 describes the emissions from the aerosols sector.
Ej = QCJ Eq. 4
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001
Appendix I I-2
-------
Where:
Ej - Emissions. Total emissions of a specific chemical in yeary from use in aerosol products, by weight.
QCJ = Quantity of Chemical. Total quantity of a specific chemical contained in aerosol products sold in year
j, by weight.
1.2.3 Solvents
Generally, most solvents are assumed to remain in the liquid phase and are not emitted as gas. Thus, emissions are
considered "incomplete," and are a fixed percentage of the amount of solvent consumed in a year. The remainder of
the consumed solvent is assumed to be reused or disposed without being released to the atmosphere. Equation 5
calculates emissions from solvent applications.
Ej= I_ QCJ Eq. 5
Where:
EJ - Emissions. Total emissions of a specific chemical in yeary from use in solvent applications, by weight.
/ = Percent Leakage. The percentage of the total chemical that is leaked to the atmosphere.
QCJ = Quantity of Chemical. Total quantity of a specific chemical sold for use in solvent applications in the
year j, by weight.
1.2.4 Fire Extinguishing
Total emissions from fire extinguishing are assumed, in aggregate, to equal a percentage of the total quantity of
chemical in operation at a given time. For modeling purposes, it is assumed that fire extinguishing equipment leaks
at a constant rate for an average equipment lifetime. This percentage varies for streaming (Equation 6) and flooding
(Equation 7) equipment.
Streaming Equipment
Ej = l_ QCj-i+i fori=l_k Eq. 6
Where:
EJ - Emissions. Total emissions of a specific chemical in yeary for streaming fire extinguishing equipment,
by weight.
/ = Percent Leakage. The percentage of the total chemical in operation that is leaked to the atmosphere.
QCJ - Quantity of Chemical. Total amount of a specific chemical used in new streaming fire extinguishing
equipment in a given year, j, by weight.
k - Lifetime. The average lifetime of the equipment.
Flooding Equipment
Ej = l__ Qcj-i+1 fori= l_k Eq. 7
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix I I-3
-------
Where:
Ej - Emissions. Total emissions of a specific chemical in yeary for streaming fire extinguishing equipment,
by weight.
/ = Percent Leakage. The percentage of the total chemical in operation that is leaked to the atmosphere.
QCJ = Quantity of Chemical. Total amount of a specific chemical used in new streaming fire extinguishing
equipment in a given year, j, by weight.
k = Lifetime. The average lifetime of the equipment.
1.2.5 Foam Blowing
Foams are given emission profiles depending on the foam type (open cell or closed cell). Open cell foams are
assumed to be 100 percent emissive in the year of manufacture. Closed cell foams are assumed to emit a portion of
their total HFC or PFC content upon manufacture, a portion at a constant rate over the lifetime of the foam, and a
portion at disposal.
Open-Cell Foam
Ej = QCJ Eq. 8
Where:
Ej - Emissions. Total emissions of a specific chemical in year j used for open-cell foam blowing, by
weight.
QCJ - Quantity of Chemical. Total amount of a specific chemical used for open-cell foam blowing in year j,
by weight.
C/osec(-Ce//Foam
EJ = _ (efi _ QCj.i+1) fori=l_k Eq.9
Where:
Ej = Emissions. Total emissions of a specific chemical in yeary for closed-cell foam blowing, by weight.
eft = Emission Factor. Percent of foam's original charge emitted in each year (1 _k). This emission factor
is generally variable, including a rate for manufacturing emissions (occurs in the first year of foam
life), annual emissions (every year throughout the foam lifetime), and disposal emissions (occurs
during the final year of foam life).
QCJ - Quantity of Chemical. Total amount of a specific chemical used in closed-cell foams in year/
k = Lifetime. Average lifetime of foam product.
1.2.6 Sterilization
For sterilization applications, all chemicals that are used in the equipment in any given year are assumed to be
emitted in that year, as shown in Equation 10.
Ej = QCJ Eq. 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix I I-4
-------
Where:
Ej - Emissions. Total emissions of a specific chemical in year j from use in sterilization equipment, by
weight.
QCJ - Quantity of Chemical. Total quantity of a specific chemical used in sterilization equipment in year j,
by weight.
1.3 Model Output
By repeating these calculations from the years 1985-2030, the Vintaging Model creates annual profiles of use and
emissions for ODS and ODS substitutes. The results can be shown for each year in two ways: 1) on a chemical-by-
chemical basis, summed across the end-uses, or 2) on an end-use basis. Values for use and emissions are calculated
both in metric tons and in million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCO2). The conversion of metric
tons of chemical to MMTCO2 is accomplished through a linear scaling of tonnage by the global warming potential
(GWP) of each chemical. The GWP values that are used in the model correspond to those published in the IPCC
Second Assessment Report.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - December 2001 Appendix I I-5
-------