Targets IMage Energy Regional (TIMER) Model, Technical ...

page 142 of 188 RIVM report 461502024
Tg/yr
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
VOC
0
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
time (years)
industry-proces
bunkers
losses/leakages
power generation
energy transformation
other
services
residential
transport
industry
)LJXUH7KHJOREDOHQHUJ\DQGLQGXVWU\UHODWHGHPLVVLRQVRI&2 &+ 1 212 [Ã 62 &2
DQG1092&IRUWKHHQHUJ\VHFWRUVDQGWKHRYHUDOOLQGXVWU\VHFWRUIRUWKHSHULRG
XVLQJWKHVLPXODWHGHQHUJ\FRQVXPSWLRQDQGSURGXFWLRQRI7,0(5
In more detail, we analyse the emissions of CO 2 and SO 2 , and compare our estimates from
literature. For the other energy- and industry-related emissions of other greenhouse gases and
compounds there is no regional historical data available, except for the 1990 emissions
estimate.
We consider two cases for the simulated values of the TEM-model: energy-production and
consumption data of the (ii) IEA-statistics for the period 1970/1971-1995 (IEA, 1999) and (iii)
TIMER-model. This has been done to differentiate between the differences with literature data
caused by the differences in historical energy production and consumption data by the IEA
database and TIMER model, and caused by the differences in historical emissions factors by
the literature and the TEM-model.
&2 : The simulated regional energy-industry related emissions of CO 2 (excluding the feedstock
and bunker emissions) for both cases are compared with the regional CO 2 emissions database
of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) (see )LJXUH). This database is also referred
to as ORNL-CDIAC (CO 2 Data and Information Assessment Centre) (Marland and Rotty,
1984; Marland HW DO, 1999a; Andres HW DO, 1999). The ORNL-CDIAC database has a long
tradition of compiling CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion (and cement production)
based on the annually updated UN energy statistics on total domestic fuel consumption per
country for coal, oil, and gas. The data set does not contain CO 2 emission estimates for land
use. More information on the ORNL-CDIAC data set can be found on the CDIAC website
(http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov, and in Marland HWDO (1984, 1994).
The differences between the regional TEM and CDIAC data are marginal, except for the former
Soviet Union are less than 5 %. This implies that also the sum of all regional energy-industry
related emissions of CO 2 of the CDIAC and TEM are comparable (differences less than 5%).
However, at the global level, the energy-industry related emissions of CO 2 now also include the
feedstock and bunker emissions ()LJXUH ), and now the TEM-model data are somewhat
higher than the CDIAC data. The differences are mainly caused by the differences in the
historical feedstock CO 2 -emissions factors between EDGAR (used in TEM) and CDIAC.