Commission Staff Working Document: Impact Assessment Accompanying the documents Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and he Committee of the Regions a Clean Air Programme for Europe, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from medium combustion plants, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants and amending Directive 2003/35/EC, Proposal for a Council Decision on the acceptance of the Amendment to the 1999 Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone

COUNCIL OF Brussels, 23 December 2013

THE EUROPEAN UNION (OR. en)

18167/13 ADD 4

ENV 1235 ENER 600 IND 388 TRANS 693 ENT 356 SAN 555 PARLNAT 325 CODEC 3086

COVER NOTE

From: Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director date of receipt: 20 December 2013

To: Mr Uwe CORSEPIUS, Secretary-General of the Council of the European

Union

No. Cion doc.: SWD(2013) 531 final PART 3/4

Subject: Commission Staff Working Document: Impact Assessment Accompanying

the documents Communication from the Commission to the Council, the

European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and he

Committee of the Regions a Clean Air Programme for Europe, Proposal for

a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the limitation

of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from medium combustion

plants, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the

Council on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric

pollutants and amending Directive 2003/35/EC i, Proposal for a Council

Decision on the acceptance of the Amendment to the 1999 Protocol to the

1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution to Abate

Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone

Delegations will find attached document SWD(2013) 531 final PART 3/4.

Encl.: SWD(2013) 531 final PART 3/4

18167/13 ADD 4 CM/ach

DG E 1A EN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 18.12.2013 SWD(2013) 531 final

PART 3/4

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Accompanying the document

Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the

European Economic and Social Committee and he Committee of the Regions a Clean

Air Programme for Europe

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the limitation

of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from medium combustion plants

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction

of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants and amending Directive

2003/35/EC

Proposal for a Council Decision on the acceptance of the Amendment to the 1999

Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution to Abate

Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone

{COM(2013) 917 final i} {COM(2013) 918 final i} {COM(2013) 919 final i} {COM(2013) 920 final i} {SWD(2013) 532 final}

EN EN

5. BASELINE

5.1 Compliance with NO2 limit values

The decline in NO x emissions projected by the baseline should significantly improve future compliance with NO 2 air quality limit values.

A new methodology has been developed to estimate with the GAINS model future NO 2 concentrations at traffic stations (Kiesewetter et al. 2013). This enables the assessment of the impacts of the Europe-wide emission reduction scenarios on compliance with the air quality limit values for each of these stations.

However, due to data gaps, this approach could not be implemented for all monitoring sites in Europe, but is restricted for NO 2 to 2000 sites for which sufficient monitoring data have been provided to AIRBASE, and for PM10 for 1900 sites. Obviously, this sub-set of stations is not necessarily representative, and there are large differences in station numbers across Member States. To facilitate representative conclusions, stations have been allocated to their respective air quality management zones established under the Air Quality Daughter Directive. The analysis presented here determines the compliance status of each zone along the highest concentration modelled at any AIRBASE monitoring site located within the zone.

It has been shown for NO 3 2 that achievement of the annual limit value of 40 μg/m is more demanding than compliance with the hourly limit value of 200 μg/m 3 . Thus, modelling for

NO 2 is restricted to the annual limit value.

To reflect unavoidable uncertainties in monitoring data, modelling techniques and future meteorological conditions, three compliance categories with the annual limit value are distinguished.

Computed annual mean concentrations of NO 3 2 below 35 μg/m indicate likely compliance. If concentrations are computed in the range between 35 and 45 μg/m 3 , compliance is possible

but uncertain due to the factors mentioned above. This is also the range where additional local measures (e.g., traffic management) have a realistic chance to achieve safe compliance, even under unfavourable conditions. In contrast, compliance is unlikely if computed NO 2 concentrations exceed 45 μg/m 3.

On this basis, it is estimated that the number of air quality management zones in the EU-28 where compliance with the current limit values is unlikely will decline from about 100 zones (21%) in 2010 to 38 zones (8%) in 2020 under baseline conditions (for this, 500 zones have been considered). However, this estimate is conservative as it does not consider benefits from local measures (e.g., traffic management or low emission zones), which could be quite effective for reducing the large share of NO 2 from near-by emission sources.

Conversely, in 2020 safe compliance will be achieved in 80% of the zones, compared to 63% in 2010 (Table 3). Obviously, by 2020 Europe will not fully reach the ultimate target of bringing all Europe in compliance. However, as shown in Figure A5.2, Europe will be on track towards such a target, with non-compliances rapidly decreasing following fleet renewal. For the baseline projection, which does not consider additional local measures, the number of

170

non-compliance zones is estimated to decline to 13 in 2025 and five in 2030 (Figure A5.3).

The additional measures of the MTFR scenario could eliminate 99% of the robust noncompliance

cases.

Figure A5.2: Compliance with air quality limit values for NO in the air quality management zones 2

500 100% Compliance likely (<35μg)

Compliance uncertain (35-45μg) 90% Compliance unlikely (>45μg)

400 80%

70%

s 300 60% ne es

zo 50% on f z # of % o

200 40%

30%

100 20%

10%

0 0% 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Figure A5.3: Compliance with air quality limit values for NO 2 in the air quality management zones

Table A5.7: Compliance with NO 2 limit values (number and % of zones). Note that this calculation does not include effects of additional local policies, such as low-emission zones.

Compliance

unlikely uncertain likely unlikely uncertain Likely

2010 103 82 315 21% 16% 63%

2020 38 64 398 8% 13% 80%

2025 13 39 448 3% 8% 90%

2030 5 28 467 1% 6% 93%

171

2030 MTFR 4 22 474 1% 4% 95%

Table A5.8: Population living in air quality management zones with different compliance with the NO limit values 2 (million people, % of European population)

Compliance

unlikely uncertain likely unlikely uncertain likely

2010 124.6 63.3 238.6 29% 15% 56%

2020 68.7 55.6 302.1 16% 13% 71%

2025 30.8 49.7 345.9 7% 12% 81%

2030 8.9 48.0 369.5 2% 11% 87%

2030 MTFR 8.1 33.5 384.7 2% 8% 90%

5.2 Compliance with PM10 limit values

For PM10, the limit on 35 allowed daily exceedances of 50 μg/m 3 is more difficult to attain than the annual mean limit value of 40 μg/m 3 . However, there is a strong linear correlation between the 36 th highest daily values and the annual mean concentrations, both in observations and model results. As an annual mean of 30 μg/m 3 corresponds well to the 36 th highest daily concentration of 50 μg/m 3 , this threshold is used as the criteria for the GAINS

modelling, which is conducted on an annual mean basis. As for NO 2 , uncertainty ranges of ±5 μg/m 3 are employed.

For the 516 zones for which sufficient monitoring data are available, it is calculated that in 2010 about 60 zones (12%) did not comply with the PM10 limit value. The decrease in precursor emissions of the TSAP-2013 Baseline should halve this number to about 30 by 2020 (Figure A5.4). As for NO 2 , this estimate does not consider additional measures at the urban scale, which could achieve further improvements.

However, in contrast to NO 2 , the TSAP-2012 baseline does not suggest additional reductions beyond 2020. Remaining problems will prevail in the new Member States where, due to continued reliance of solid fuels for domestic heating, only little further declines in the emissions from the domestic sector are anticipated.

Technical emission control measures, together with the switch to cleaner fuels and/or to centralized heating systems could bring down PM10 concentrations below the limit value also in urban areas in the new Member States. The third panel in Figure A5.5 illustrates the MTFR case that does not assume additional expansion of central heating systems.

172

Figure A5.4: Compliance of the air quality management zones with air quality limit values for PM10

500 Compliance likely (<25μg)

Compliance uncertain (25-35μg)

400 Compliance unlikely (>35μg)

s 300

ne zo of # 200

100

0 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Table A5.9: Compliance with PM10 limit values in 2025 (number and % of zones)

Compliance

unlikely uncertain likely unlikely uncertain likely

2010 62 172 282 12% 33% 55%

2020 31 96 389 6% 19% 75%

2025 26 97 393 5% 19% 76%

2030 25 96 395 5% 19% 77%

2030 MTFR 17 56 443 3% 11% 86%

Table A5.10: Population living in air quality management zone with different compliance with PM10 limit values (million people, % of European population)

Compliance

unlikely uncertain likely unlikely uncertain likely

2010 81.3 132.0 213.5 19% 31% 50%

2020 48.8 85.3 292.7 11% 20% 69%

2025 39.5 92.6 294.6 9% 22% 69%

2030 40.3 86.8 299.7 9% 20% 70%

2030 MTFR 21.4 74.1 331.3 5% 17% 78%

173

Figure A5.5: Compliance with the air quality limit values for PM10 in the air quality management zones

Alternatively to the MTFR, a hypothetical scenario assuming a complete switch of coal and biomass domestic heating to natural gas starting 2020 in four countries: Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bulgaria, which are the countries with largest projected compliance problems for PM10, where domestic solid fuel combustion plays a significant role.

Figure A5.6 compares the 2030 current legislation baseline (CLE) case with the MTFR and with the domestic solid fuel phase out case in the four countres mentioned. Furthermore, this simulation assumes that 75% of the unexplained PM2,5 component in the four countries is

related to domestic solid fuel combustion 307 .

Figure A5.6: Compliance with the air quality limit values for PM10 in the air quality management zones in 2030 for the CLE, MTFR and domestic coal phase-out scenarios. 75% of unexplained component linked to doemstic heating is assumed

The results confirm that eliminating the most polluting domestic sources would be able to resolve almost entirely the PM non-compliance problems even in the currently most affected areas. Once reasonable assumptions are made for the linkage between domestic heating and the fraction of PM concentrations that models cannot explain with existing emission

307 Explaining the high observed PM10 concentrations in regions such as Southern Poland poses a

considerable challenge to CTM models even with the most recent gridded emission inventory.

Concentrations of 50-60µg/m3 annual mean are measured at several background stations in this area, and

state of the art models in many cases can only explain less than 50% of these concentrations. From the

annual cycles of observed concentrations (closely following temperature-heating cycles) and from

evidence provided by local experts to IIASA, it is highly likely that roughly 75% of the unexplained

component be linked to combustion of solid fuels not reported in the inventories.

174

inventories, it becomes apparent that -even without fuel switching- the application of state-ofthe-art

solid fuel combustion techniques would be able to resolve the majority of noncompliance

situations related to domestic solid fuel use.

5.3 Compliance with PM2,5 standards

For PM2,5, the 25 µg/m 3 target value will become a binding limit value. For PM 2.5 the

baseline projections show very high projected compliance in 2015 (Figure A5.7), with around 96% of stations meeting the standard. The AAQD provides for the tightening of the PM 2,5 LV

3

from 25 to 20 µg/m in 2020, subject to feasibility; 99% of stations would comply with the 25 µg standard but only 92% of them with the tighter 20 µg standard. Note that even the 20 µg

standard is well above the WHO guideline value of 10µg/m 3 .

Figure A5.7: Projected compliance with PM 2.5 limit values (2015 and 2020)

With a view to examining the range of PM2,5 limit values that could be set and ralistically enforced furhter in the future, Figure 0.11 shows the projected compliance picture further in

the future; the left panel shows that in 2009 almost 90% of stationswere below 25 µg/m 3 and only 10% below the WHO guideline value of 10 µg/m 3 . The situation is projected to gradually improve up to 2030, when 99% of stations would be below 25 µg/m 3 and 35%

below the WHO guidance value. The MTFR would be able to bring 60% of stations below the WHO guidance value. The right panel shows the compliance situation projected for policy option 6C, taking into account also the uncertainty range due to possible different assumptions on the fraction of PM2,5 concentration that is not explained by CTM modelling.

Under this case, the 25 µg/m 3 limit value would be safely met virtually by all stations. A tighter LV of 20 µg/m 3 would be complied with by 94-99% of stations. The uncertainty range progressively increases, with 80-96% of stations below 15 µg/m 3 and 40-65% below 10

175

Figure A5.8: Projected compliance with PM 2.5 limit values in: [LHS] 2009, 2020 (CLE), 2030 (CLE) and 2030 (MTFR); and [RHS] 2025 for option 6C. In the latter case, the uncertainty range is related to assumptions for the component unexplained by CTM modelling

6. F UTURE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS UNDER THE BASELINE SCENARIO

6.1 Health impacts from PM2,5

The decrease in the precursor emissions of ambient PM2.5 of the TSAP-2013 Baseline projection suggests a decline of the loss of statistical life expectancy attributable to the exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) from 8.5 months in 2005 to 5.3 months in 2025. However, in Belgium, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania people would still lose more than six months even in 2030 (See Annex 7 Appendix).

It is noteworthy that the PRIMES2012-3 baseline results in larger future health impacts compared to the PRIMES2010 baseline, mainly due to higher primary emissions of PM2.5 from expanded biomass combustion in small installations. Thereby, higher primary PM2.5 emissions compensate the benefits from lower precursor emissions of secondary PM2.5, i.e., SO 2 , NO x , NH 3 and VOC.

With the additional technical measures that could be implemented within the EU, life shortening could be further reduced by up to 1.4 months, or by 2030 down to about 3.6 months on average.

Overall, despite implementation of current emission control legislation, population in the EU- 28 would still lose between 200 and 220 million years of life after 2020 (See Annex 7 Appendix). The additional measures could gain approximately 60-70 million life years.

176

Figure A5.9: Loss in statistical life expectancy from exposure to PM2.5 from anthropogenic sources; top: 2005, mid: 2025 CLE, bottom: MTFR 2030

2005 2025 CLE

2030 MTFR

Figure A5.10: Years of life lost (YOLLs) due to exposure to fine particulate matter, EU-28

400 CLE-MTFR

350 TSAP target MTFR 300 -47% from 2000

full s

O LL

Y 250

ill ion M 200

150

100

50

0

-2013 -2012 -2013 -2012 AP AP AP AP TS TS TS TS

2005 2020 2025 2030

Despite progress, the TSAP-2013 Baseline would not meet the environmental target for health impacts from PM that has been established in the 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution for 2020. Instead of the 47% improvement in years of life lost (YOLL) relative to 2000, the current legislation case of the TSAP-2013 would reach only a 45% reduction.

177

6.2 Health impacts from ground level ozone

The TSAP-2013 Baseline suggests for 2025 approximately 18,000 cases of premature deaths from exposure to ground-level ozone in the EU-28 (Figure A5.11). This is safely below the 10% reduction target (25,000 cases) that was established by the 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution for 2020 relative to 2000, mainly due to more optimistic expectations on the development of hemispheric background ozone levels.

Additional emission reduction measures within the EU-28 could save another 2,500 cases of premature deaths.

Figure A5.11: Cases of premature deaths due to exposure to ground-level ozone, EU-28

30 TSAP target for 2020 CLE-MTFR -10% from 2000

25 MTFR

yr

s / 20

se

ca 15

1000 10

5

0

-2013 -2012 -2013 -2012 AP AP AP AP TS TS TS TS

2005 2020 2025 2030

The spatial pattern of the health-relevant SOMO35 indicator, and how this will be influenced by the different emission reduction scenarios, is presented in Figure A5.12

Figure A5.12: The SOMO35 indicator that is related to premature mortality from ground-level ozone

2005 2030 MTFR

2025 CLE

178

6.3 Eutrophication and biodiversity

Threat to biodiversity of Natura2000 areas

In addition to fragmentation and climate change, excess nitrogen deposition constitutes an important threat to biodiversity in areas that are protected under the Birds Directive and the Habitat Directive (i.e., Natura2000 areas).

Figure A5.13: Percentage of Natura2000 areas with nitrogen deposition above their critical loads for eutrophication. Top: 2005, mid: 2025 CLE, bottom: MTFR 2030

2005 2025 BL

2030 MTFR

For 2005, it is calculated that biodiversity was under threat from excess nitrogen deposition

in 77% (423,000 km 2 ) of the protected zones. By 2025, the expected declines in NO x

2

emissions would reduce the threatened area to 62%, leaving 343,000 km unprotected. By 2030, full application of the available reduction measures, especially for ammonia emissions,

2

could provide protection to another 95,000 km of the nature protection areas in Europe (See Annex 7 Appendix).

179

Threat to biodiversity of all ecosystems

In 2005, more than 1.1 million km 2 (i.e., 66%) of the European ecosystems were exposed to

nitrogen deposition that exceeded their critical loads for eutrophication. The future development will be mainly influenced by the fate of NH 3 emissions. In 2025, the TSAP2013

Baseline would reduce the area under threat to about 0.9 million km 2 , while higher NH 3 emissions in the TSAP-2012 Baseline would leave about 0.94 million km 2 unprotected. The

available additional emission reduction measures could safeguard another 180,000 to 200,000

km 2 .

Due to less progress in the reduction of NH 3 emissions than anticipated, the TSAP-2013 Baseline would fail to meet the environmental targets for eutrophication that have been established in the 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution for 2020. Instead of the 31% improvement in ecosystems area with nitrogen deposition above critical loads for eutrophication relative to 2000, the current legislation case of the TSAP-2013 would achieve only a 24% reduction (Figure A5.14).

Figure A5.14: Ecosystems area with nitrogen deposition in excess of the critical loads for eutrophication, EU-28

1400 TSAP target for 2020 CLE-MTFR 1200 -31% from 2000 MTFR

1000

800

1000 km2 600

400

200

0

-2013 -2012 -2013 -2012 AP AP AP AP TS TS TS TS

2005 2020 2025 2030

Figure A5.15: Percentage of ecosystems area with nitrogen deposition above their critical loads for eutrophication.

180

2005 2025 BL

2030 MTFR

6.4 Acidification

Acidification of forest soils

With the 2012 data set on critical loads (Posch et al. 2011), it is calculated that in 2005

critical loads for acidification have been exceeded in a forest area of 160,000 km 2 , i.e., in

about 12% of the forests within the EU-28 for which critical loads have been reported.

181

Figure A5.16: Percentage of forest area with acid deposition above the critical loads for acidification. Top: 2005, mid: 2025 CLE, bottom: MTFR 2030

2005 2025 BL

2030 MTFR

Especially the anticipated further decline in SO 2 emissions will resolve the threat for another 110,000 km 2 up to 2025. Additional measures could provide sustainable conditions for

2

another 30,000 km up to 2030, and leave only 0.45% of European forests threatened by acidification (See Annex 7 Appendix). These measures would especially benefit the former ‘black triangle’ (i.e., in Poland, Czech Republic and the eastern parts of Germany), while residual problems would remain in the Netherlands due to high ammonia density. Thereby in 2020, the Baseline would achieve the 74% target for acidification of the TSAP 2005 (Figure A5.17).

Figure A5.17: Forest area with acid deposition in excess of the critical loads for acidification, EU-28

182

180

160 TSAP target for 2020

CLE-MTFR

-74% from 2000 MTFR

140

2

m 120

1000 k 100

80

60

40

20

0

-2013 -2012 -2013 -2012 AP AP AP AP TS TS TS TS

2005 2020 2025 2030

ANNEX 6 E LEMENTS OF A F UTURE E UROPEAN C LEAN A IR P ROGRAMME TO SUPPORT M EMBER S TATE A CTION ON R EDUCING A IR P OLLUTION

1. I NTRODUCTION

The ex-post analysis of the present EU air quality policy framework assessed in detail the reasons for the outstanding compliance issues with respect to the AAQD and NECD. The analysis is documented in detail in Annex 4 with projections underpinning the compliance prospects further developed in Annex 5. The main conclusions are brought forward in Chapter 3 of the main impact assessment report.

In addition to a number of pollutant specific drivers of the problems, a number of drivers causing the outstanding were attributed to "governance" related issues, including the lack of capacity to effectively assess local air pollution problems and manage them efficiently and the scope for increasing synergies between national and local air pollution management efforts driven respectively by the NECD and the AAQD. The following key areas merited further attention (see in particular the description of options in Chapter 5.1):

• Enhanced capacity building for "local" air quality assessment and management to enable developing and implementing better targeted and cost-effective air pollution reduction strategies and policies for the purpose of reaching compliance and avoiding penalties resulting from ongoing infringement cases; • Fostering enhanced synergies between local and/or national air quality management and

other relevant plans developed and implemented at the national and/or local level (e.g. on climate change mitigation, sustainable energy, mobility, and urban development);

• Broadening the toolbox available to national and local authorities for assessing and managing air pollution and supporting best practice exchange nationally and across the EU (notably related to urban AQ management); • Fostering enhanced public awareness, participation, and support for national and local

action on air pollution, including the marketing and sales of "green" products;

183

It was suggested in Chapter 5 that the above actions could be usefully grouped into a future

European Clean Air Programme also for the purpose of engaging all relevant bodies involved

in implementing air quality measures. Considering the specific target groups, these actions

are regrouped as follows:

• Action to improve the urban air quality • Action to abate ammonia emissions • Action at EU level to promote exchange of good practice and broaden the air quality management tool box • Action at international level

It is furthermore noted that addressing the governance related issues hampering full compliance by 2020 will also benefit the proper implementation of the policy framework defined for the period beyond 2020 (as described in Chapter 6) inter alia by offering a platform for early action and dedicated stakeholder consultations.

2. A CTION T O I MPROVE T HE U RBAN A IR Q UALITY

Many of the air quality-related problems are related to and concentrated in urban "hotspot areas", i.e. areas with a dense population, high levels of economic activity, and intense traffic. To address the challenges facing these areas, a combination of action is needed at all policy levels.

2.1. Action better identify and address key air pollution sources in urban areas

Based also on the outcome of the Air Implementation Pilot, and effective urban clean air action programme would include the exchange of good practice and, where appropriate, the development of common guidelines, for the following components:

• High quality and comparable local emission inventories, including enhanced

synergies with the national emission inventories;

• High quality monitoring networks, including deriving the maximum information from

existing networks;

• Source apportionment, i.e. the identification of key pollutant sources contributing to

the air quality exceedances (based on matching emission inventories and monitoring

data and using models to map the relative importance and abatement potential)

• Emission and air quality forecasting tools capable also ex-ante cost-effectiveness

analysis;

• Air pollution abatement options applied across European (and possibly international)

urban areas, including technical and non-technical costs and benefits;

• Integrated cost-benefit analysis integrating national and local conditions based on

better understood trends in transboundary air pollution levels;

• Enhanced public information, including the development of harmonized and easy to

understand air quality indexes to promote greater public awareness and guiding

purchase decisions;

Enhanced capacity in these areas would serve to better integrate (and monitor) air quality

consideration in other policy initiatives notably in the field of sustainable mobility and energy

184

at national and local level. It could help assessing the air quality related benefits (or needs)

related to upgrading (retrofitting) municipal transport fleets, plans for promoting alternative

means of transport including cycling and walking as well as the roll out of e-mobility

initiatives. It could furthermore help developing (more) effective low emission zones

combined with road pricing schemes or access restrictions, optimized inter-modality plans,

etc.

EU level support would be built around the new integrated projects foreseen under the new LIFE regulation which would also offer better access to other EU funds for more targeted action such as fuel switching programmes in certain particularly challenging areas in the

EU. 308

Project-based initiatives would be supported by horizontal services including the regular hosting of EU-wide platforms for reviewing progress, exchange of good practice, and identifying common challenges and solutions. Horizontal services could also deliver common guidelines in other fields than those mentioned above such as guidelines for air-qualityrelated retrofit programmes (possibly also including certification standards for practitioners); Voluntary programmes identifying and supporting the uptake of "Super Ultra Low Emission Standards" (SULES) to further limit emissions from industrial activities, vehicles, and heating appliances emission heaters, as a voluntary tool for national and local authorities to help achieve compliance with EU air quality legislation, and at the same time promote technical innovation, etc.

2.2. Action to improve the governance of air quality management at national and EU level

A major cause behind non-compliance has been attributed to poor or lacking co-ordination between the various levels of government whose actions affect air pollution. For example, national vehicle taxation policies have brought about the preponderance of diesels which – emphasized by the real world emissions problem for the Euro standards – has made it more challenging to reach the NO2 air quality standards. For particulates, more than half of concentrations in many locations can be due to pollution from outside the urban borders which makes it challenging to adequately address the situation without effective coordination of policies and measures at national level.

Eligibility for EU support of integrated programmes could be made subject to commitments made by the various national governance level in the Member States to tackle air pollution in a more integral and coherent way, including also appropriate arbitrage platforms to ensure that local air quality management needs are taking into account at regional and national level. Such provisions could also be made part of an amended NECD.

308 The Partnership Agreements with Member States on priorities for the ‘big five’ EU funding instruments include a strong air quality component. Several Member States with particular air quality problems often have favourable access to structural funds (in terms of co-financing rate), and these funds can have an instrumental role in tackling urban air quality problems, e.g. by promoting fuel switching to reduce pollution from the domestic combustion sector.

185

3. A CTION TO ABATE AGRICULTURAL AIR POLLUTION EMISSIONS

One of the main conclusions drawn from the ex-post evaluation of EU air quality policy is the need to give higher priority abating emissions from the agricultural sector, notably related to ammonia where there is a large untapped potential for cost-effective action.

Focal areas would include emission reductions from livestock manures during various stages of the animal production and manure management chains linked to animal feeding, manure management, manure storage systems and manure application to crop land, as well as inorganic fertilizer application (especially from urea-based nitrogen fertilizers).

Advanced ammonia abatement methodologies are available and have been tried and tested for many years, but have yet to be applied at a wider scale. Costs incurred are often offset by the combined benefits to the farmer, such as increased nitrogen use efficiency, whereby nutrients are taken up by the crops rather than emitted to the air, reduced need for costly mineral fertilizers, improved agronomic flexibility, reduced emissions of other environmental pollutants, a healthier working environment for the farmer, and limited odours. While some Member States have taken the lead by developing national standards and good practice, others have done little to address the issue as yet. At EU level, ammonia emissions are largely unregulated, and support measures through the Common Agricultural Policy have so far been limited. To further reduce ammonia emissions in future, the following elements for action will be instrumental.

• Formulation of national emission reduction potential and emission reduction options

available (also for the purpose of assisting implementation of the ammonia ceilings

contained in a revised NECD);

• Listing cost-effective source control measures to abate ammonia emissions from

agriculture and assessing them in a national context, including their impacts on urban air

quality challenges. Defaults options could include manure management options (storage,

application techniques), feeding strategies, animal housing, fertilizer management (e.g.

urea substitution), and balanced fertilization through national nitrogen budgets,

extending nitrate vulnerable zones under the Nitrates Directive and/or applying the same

rules outside designated nitrate vulnerable zones,

Horizontal support at EU level could entail the hosting of regular sector specific exchange platforms (e.g. a Agriculture Clean Air Forum) that could form the basis for discussing possible regulatory or quasi regulatory option including a review and update of the existing Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference Document for pigs and poultry under the IED by 2014, including the adoption of new BAT Conclusions, consideration of appropriate labelling provisions as well as requirements for urease inhibitors in the context of the ongoing revision of the Fertilizers Regulation, regulation of manure management on the basis of the conclusions and recommendations from a recent study on the collection and analysis of data for the control of emissions from the spreading of manure.

Initiatives would be linked to relevant initiatives and funding opportunities under the new Common Agricultural Policy, notably for those related to food production, sustainable management of natural resources and climate action, and balanced territorial development.

186

4. A CTION AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL

EU air quality is largely influenced by emission sources outside the EU, and to achieve the long-term air quality objectives to protect human health and the environment, future international cooperation to reduce air pollution outside the EU and to and address short-lived climate pollutants (SLCP) is of crucial importance to limit background and hemispheric air pollution in the EU.

The regional cooperation in Europe and North America on air pollution has a long history, with the 1979 UNECE Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) providing the main framework. Early work was focussing on improving and coordinating air pollution research and monitoring, but over the last few decades a range of legally binding multilateral agreements and protocols have been agreed that set out reduction measures and cap national air pollution emissions. More recently, the CLRTAP has also reached out to other regional initiatives and frameworks, particularly in Asia.

In order to enhance international cooperation to reduce emissions from EU neighbouring countries and regions, future work should focus on the following elements for action.

• Broadening ratification of the (new) amended Gothenburg Protocol and supporting

neighbouring countries with the implementation of the new Gothenburg Protocol by

enabling targeted technical assistance by the CLRTAP secretariat, subsidiary groups,

EMEP, and International Cooperate Programmes and promoting bilateral and

multilateral development and cooperation programmes in the EECCA countries, in

particular those under development and assistance programmes under EU

neighbourhood policy, such as the EU Air Quality Governance Project

(http://www.airgovernance.eu).

• Improve the global cooperation on air quality, incuding through information sharing

platforms such as Global Atmospheric Pollution Forum (GPF) under the International

Union of Air Pollution Associations, the UNEP Climate and Clean Air Coalition

(CCAC), the Global Methane Initiative (GMI), the Task Force on Hemispheric

Transport of Air Pollution (TF HTAP) under the CLRTAP, and the World Health

Organization (WHO)

• Promote further action on air quality within the IMO and the newly established the

European Sustainable Shipping Forum focusing in particular on full and rapid

implementation of the new sulphur standards in existing and possibly new Sulphur

Control Areas, the creation of Nitrogen Emission Control Areas in the EU regional

seas, Monitoring, Reporting and Verification of key air pollutants (SOx, NOx and

PM), possibly also the establishment of an EU NOx Fund or maritime shipping to

promote rapid uptake of abatement technologies.

• Further developing bilateral cooperation on air pollution with key EU trading partners

including the United States' Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Japan, and

China.

187

ANNEX 7 A NALYSIS OF P OLICY S CENARIOS R ELATED TO T ARGETS FOR THE

P ERIOD UP TO 2030

1. E MISSION REDUCTIONS DELIVERED BY THE RESPECTIVE OPTIONS

The measures listed in Error! Reference source not found. of chapter 6 would reduce pollutant emissions in different proportions in the various options.

Options 6A and 6B would mostly reduce primary PM emissions, SO2 and ammonia and rely only to a lesser extent on measures reducing NOx and VOCs; while deeper cuts in emissions of these two pollutants are delivered by options 6C and 6D.

These qualitative conclusions equally hold for emission reductions in 2025 and 2030.

Table A7.1: Emission reductions by pollutant delivered by the options for post 2020. Percentage changes vs year 2005 and Option 1.

2025 6A 6B 6C 6D

2005 Option1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1

SO2 8172 2446 2188 -73% -11% 1903 -77% -22% 1694 -79% -31% 1593 -81% -35%

NOx 11538 4616 4535 -61% -2% 4484 -61% -3% 4096 -64% -11% 3525 -69% -24%

PM2,5 1647 1266 1059 -36% -16% 960 -42% -24% 844 -49% -33% 690 -58% -46%

NH3 3928 3658 3390 -14% -7% 3122 -21% -15% 2767 -30% -24% 2566 -35% -30%

VOC 9259 5604 5322 -43% -5% 5157 -44% -8% 4648 -50% -17% 3308 -64% -41%

2030 6A 6B 6C 6D

2005 Option1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1 KT vs 2005 vs opt1

SO2 8172 2211 1999 -76% -10% 1720 -79% -22% 1510 -82% -32% 1383 -83% -37%

NOx 11538 4051 3970 -66% -2% 3921 -66% -3% 3544 -69% -13% 2947 -74% -27%

PM2,5 1647 1200 994 -40% -17% 904 -45% -25% 802 -51% -33% 607 -63% -49%

NH3 3928 3663 3375 -14% -8% 3099 -21% -15% 2762 -30% -25% 2568 -35% -30%

VOC 9259 5460 5199 -44% -5% 5043 -46% -8% 4569 -51% -16% 3191 -66% -42%

For individual Member States, the associated emission reductions per pollutant in 2025 and 2030 are listed in Appendix 7.1. In the Appendix, % emission reductions are expressed against the 2005 benchmark, since this is the benchmark year for emission reduction commitments in the Gothenburg Protocol.

188

2. I MPACT REDUCTIONS DELIVERED BY THE RESPECTIVE OPTIONS FOR POST

2020 TARGETS

2.1. Health and environmental impacts

The impact indicators summarising the health and environmental improvements delivered by options 6A-D are presented in table A7.3. As described in chapter 3.5, health impacts due to exposure to particulate matter and to ground-level ozone include both mortality and morbidity effects. Table A7.3 is restricted to the headline effects on premature mortality due to chronic PM effects and to acute ozone effects, while the impact on the full range of health effects is provided in Appendix 7.2.

As well as the 2005 level, the health impacts in 2025 under option 1 are indicated. So, option 6A would lead to a reduction in premature deaths of 21,000 due PM2.5 compared to option 1 (308,000 less 287,000) etc.

Table A7.2: Impact indicators of the options for 2025 and 2030, and compared to 2005. [premature deaths, ozone: cases of premature deaths/yr, eutrophication and acidification: 1000 km2 of forests/ecosystems left unprotected]. Changes refer to year 2005 and to Option 1 .

2025 6A 6B 6C 6D

2005 Option1 vs vs vs vs vs vs vs vs 2005 opt1 2005 opt1 2005 opt1 2005 opt1

PM2,5-chronicpremature

deaths 494000 307000 287000 -42% -7% 266000 -46% -14% 245000 -50% -20% 225000 -54% -27%

Ozone-acutepremature

deaths 24600 17800 17500 -29% -2% 17300 -30% -3% 16500 -33% -7% 15000 -39% -16%

Eutrophication,

unprotected '000 sq Km 1125 885 850 -24% -4% 814 -28% -8% 747 -34% -16% 684 -39% -23%

Acidification,

unprotected '000 sq Km 161 47 37 -77% -21% 31 -81% -30% 24 -85% -45% 20 -87% -52%

2030 6A 6B 6C 6D

2005 Option1 vs vs vs vs vs vs vs vs 2005 opt1 2005 opt1 2005 opt1 2005 opt1

PM2,5-chronicpremature

deaths 494000 304000 284000 -43% -7% 263000 -47% -13% 243000 -51% -20% 216000 -56% -28%

Ozone-acutepremature

deaths 24600 17200 17000 -31% -1% 16800 -32% -2% 16000 -35% -7% 14400 -41% -16%

Eutrophication,

unprotected '000 sq Km 1125 870 832 -26% -4% 794 -29% -9% 726 -35% -17% 665 -41% -24%

Acidification,

unprotected '000 sq Km 161 42 33 -79% -21% 27 -83% -36% 21 -87% -50% 18 -89% -57%

Detailed tables of impacts per MS are presented in Appendix 7.3.

2.2. Economic impacts

The economic analysis is undertaken by setting a constraint (a gap closure of 50%, say) and identifying the least-cost combination of available technical measures to achieve it. The modelling of the constraint also identifies the measures that meet it at least cost, which are then identified in Table A7.2.

189

At first, each percentage point of reduction is relatively cheap. However, the more

ambitious the option is, the more expensive each percentage point reduction becomes (in

economic terms, this is a standard marginal abatement cost curve).

Those factors are further analysed with the computable general equilibrium (CGE) model

GEM-E3 309 taking into account the interaction between different sectors, the labour and

capital markets and foreign trade. This is crucial to understand the full impacts of the direct compliance costs, which are investments as well as operation & maintenance costs, to all parts of the economy. Expenditure on pollution abatement is an economic opportunity for the sectors that produce the required capital goods; on the other hand, higher production costs in the complying sectors are reflected in price increases that reduce the domestic consumption and international competitiveness of the affected products.

2.2.1 Direct compliance costs

The direct cost of policy is the annualised investments required in different sectors to install pollution abatement equipment, as well as operation and maintenance (O&M) of that investment. These costs are presented in Tables A7.3 and A7.4 and are compared to the MTFR costs and to the baseline costs deriving from implementation of current pollution control legislation.

Table A7.3: compliance costs per Member state in 2025 by option, expressed in M€ and in % of GDP .

Option 2025 1 GDP% Opt 6A GDP% Opt 6B GDP% Opt 6C GDP% Opt 6D GDP%

Country additional additional additional additional

Austria 1908 0,53% 2 0,00% 7 0,00% 96 0,03% 1040 0,29%

Belgium 2333 0,53% 7 0,00% 22 0,01% 114 0,03% 759 0,17%

Bulgaria 1310 2,73% 1 0,00% 18 0,04% 76 0,16% 713 1,49%

Croatia 411 0,66% 1 0,00% 7 0,01% 34 0,05% 408 0,66%

Cyprus 140 0,65% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 48 0,22%

Czech Rep. 1912 0,95% 5 0,00% 18 0,01% 118 0,06% 1187 0,59%

Denmark 1105 0,38% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 26 0,01% 774 0,26%

Estonia 298 1,38% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 5 0,02% 323 1,50%

Finland 1373 0,60% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 13 0,01% 1006 0,44%

France 11880 0,48% 15 0,00% 59 0,00% 375 0,02% 7675 0,31%

Germany 13741 0,47% 23 0,00% 169 0,01% 835 0,03% 5265 0,18%

Greece 2030 0,84% 1 0,00% 32 0,01% 81 0,03% 1163 0,48%

Hungary 999 0,86% 2 0,00% 19 0,02% 93 0,08% 652 0,56%

Ireland 1044 0,46% 0 0,00% 2 0,00% 22 0,01% 456 0,20%

Italy 10515 0,58% 30 0,00% 261 0,01% 655 0,04% 3841 0,21%

Latvia 373 1,41% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 19 0,07% 592 2,24%

Lithuania 356 0,93% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 23 0,06% 601 1,58%

309 www.GEM-E3.net

190

Luxembourg 196 0,37% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 3 0,01% 41 0,08%

Malta 97 1,24% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 18 0,23%

Netherlands 3855 0,53% 1 0,00% 9 0,00% 63 0,01% 913 0,13%

Poland 9864 1,90% 70 0,01% 236 0,05% 715 0,14% 5910 1,14%

Portugal 1353 0,68% 4 0,00% 29 0,01% 82 0,04% 832 0,42%

Romania 2457 1,47% 4 0,00% 41 0,02% 215 0,13% 2905 1,73%

Slovakia 760 0,80% 1 0,00% 15 0,02% 86 0,09% 777 0,81%

Slovenia 447 0,99% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 48 0,11% 146 0,32%

Spain 7729 0,55% 9 0,00% 68 0,00% 306 0,02% 4747 0,34%

Sweden 1456 0,31% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 14 0,00% 602 0,13%

Un. Kingdom 7229 0,32% 45 0,00% 187 0,01% 511 0,02% 3610 0,16%

EU-28 87171 0,56% 221 0,00% 1202 0,01% 4629 0,03% 47007 0,30%

191

Table A7.4: compliance costs per Member state in 2030 by option, expressed in M€ and in % of GDP.

2030 Option GDP% Opt 6A GDP% Opt 6B GDP% Opt 6C GDP% Opt 6D GDP%

1 Country additional additional additional additional Austria 1983 0,51% 2 0,00% 7 0,00% 88 0,02% 1099 0,29% Belgium 2469 0,52% 7 0,00% 29 0,01% 113 0,02% 853 0,18% Bulgaria 1212 2,35% 1 0,00% 18 0,03% 55 0,11% 752 1,46% Croatia 423 0,63% 1 0,00% 7 0,01% 33 0,05% 440 0,65% Cyprus 155 0,64% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 49 0,20% Czech Rep. 1936 0,88% 4 0,00% 18 0,01% 108 0,05% 1269 0,58% Denmark 1117 0,35% 1 0,00% 1 0,00% 12 0,00% 814 0,26% Estonia 298 1,24% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 5 0,02% 363 1,51% Finland 1422 0,58% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 13 0,01% 1035 0,43% France 11905 0,44% 17 0,00% 58 0,00% 351 0,01% 7783 0,29% Germany 13101 0,44% 34 0,00% 182 0,01% 829 0,03% 5576 0,19% Greece 2051 0,80% 3 0,00% 18 0,01% 66 0,03% 1241 0,48% Hungary 1061 0,83% 2 0,00% 19 0,01% 93 0,07% 695 0,55% Ireland 1177 0,45% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 19 0,01% 516 0,20% Italy 11034 0,56% 26 0,00% 181 0,01% 572 0,03% 3950 0,20% Latvia 408 1,37% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 3 0,01% 621 2,09% Lithuania 397 0,95% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 13 0,03% 664 1,59% Luxembourg 204 0,35% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 3 0,01% 45 0,08% Malta 103 1,20% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 17 0,20% Netherlands 6977 0,91% 1 0,00% 9 0,00% 64 0,01% 1517 0,20% Poland 9993 1,77% 55 0,01% 173 0,03% 625 0,11% 6849 1,21% Portugal 1495 0,68% 4 0,00% 16 0,01% 69 0,03% 922 0,42% Romania 2605 1,46% 4 0,00% 45 0,03% 117 0,07% 3010 1,68% Slovakia 826 0,78% 1 0,00% 15 0,01% 86 0,08% 852 0,81% Slovenia 467 0,96% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 44 0,09% 147 0,30% Spain 8628 0,54% 13 0,00% 71 0,00% 313 0,02% 5131 0,32% Sweden 1484 0,29% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 15 0,00% 635 0,13% Un. Kingdom 7172 0,29% 36 0,00% 159 0,01% 473 0,02% 3836 0,16% EU-28 92103 0,55% 212 0,00% 1032 0,01% 4182 0,03% 50682 0,30%

2.2.2. Affected industries and sectorial impacts

Tables A7.5 and A7.6 show the distribution of compliance costs in 2025 and 2030 for air pollution control in the baseline and in the different policy scenarios based on a

technology-oriented classification of emission sources controlled 310 .

310 SNAP: Selected Nomenclature for Air Pollution

192

Table A7.5: effort required per SNAP sector in 2025 by option, expressed in M€ and in % increase compared to option 1.

2025, EU28 Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

Costs by SNAP sector

(million €/yr, increase compared to baseline)

Power generation 9561 44 0,46% 125 1,31% 470 4,92% 3519 37%

Domestic combustion 9405 74 0,78% 497 5,29% 1680 18% 17791 189%

Industrial combustion 2513 19 0,75% 156 6,20% 641 25% 1796 71%

Industrial Processes 5017 17 0,34% 125 2,49% 331 6,61% 3964 79%

Fuel extraction 695 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 6 0,81% 583 84%

Solvent use 1176 1 0,08% 2 0,15% 56 4,76% 12204 1038%

Road transport 48259 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Non-road machinery 8760 1 0,01% 5 0,06% 145 1,66% 1451 17%

Waste 1 6 786% 7 941% 9 1154% 9 1203%

Agriculture 1783 59 3,33% 285 16% 1292 72% 5675 318%

Total 87171 221 0,25% 1202 1,38% 4629 5,31% 46992 54%

Table A7.6: effort required per SNAP sector in 2030 by option, expressed in M€ and in % increase compared to option 1.

2030, EU28 Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

Costs by SNAP sector

(million €/yr, increase compared to baseline)

Power generation 7122 36 0,50% 99 1,39% 436 6,12% 3658 51%

Domestic combustion 8928 52 0,59% 305 3,41% 1217 14% 19622 220%

Industrial combustion 2567 24 0,93% 175 6,81% 672 26% 1850 72%

Industrial Processes 5032 17 0,34% 125 2,49% 334 6,64% 4054 81%

Fuel extraction 619 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 5 0,82% 556 90%

Solvent use 1147 14 1,20% 15 1,28% 72 6,25% 12214 1065%

Road transport 52633 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Non-road machinery 12271 1 0,01% 5 0,04% 146 1,19% 3007 25%

Waste 1 6 782% 7 938% 9 1148% 9 1196%

Agriculture 1784 61 3,44% 300 17% 1292 72% 5711 320%

Total 92103 212 0,23% 1032 1,12% 4182 4,54% 50682 55%

In option 1, the largest share of compliance costs implied by existing legislation is related to pollution control equipment in the transport sector (more than 50% of total costs),

193

followed by the power sector, the domestic sector 311 , non-road machinery and other

industries. It is noteworthy that the distribution of additional cost-effective control measures in more stringent pollution control scenarios is very different from the baseline, reflecting the relatively lesser residual potential in sectors that have been more stringently regulated in the past (such as the power sector) and the large untapped potential in other sectors such as agriculture, the domestic sector and solvent applications.

The pollution control expenditure above is expressed in terms of type of activities (combustion, process, etc.) requiring additional investment to abate pollution through technical measures. Further detail on the nature and costs of the technical measures that would be required of individual economic sectors for each of options 6A-6C is provided in Annex 10 (Sectorial impacts and competitiveness proofing).

The costs in tables A7.5 and A7.6 are allocated by type of activity (combustion, solvent use, etc.) but these activities can take place in different economic sectors as defined in national accounts (chemicals, refineries, etc). Table A7.7 presents the costs per economic sector, and Annex 9 provides further analysis of sectorial impacts and their competitiveness implications for each option.

Table A7.7: Effort required per economic sector in 2025 by option, expressed in M€ and in % of sector output. Household expenditure expressed as % of total household consumption. Total cost as % increased compared to option 1 (baseline).

6A 6B 6C 6D

Costs by economic sector

(million €/yr, % of sectorial output, % of total household consumption, or % of EU GDP)

Agriculture 64 0,01% 338 0,07% 1425 0,27% 5841 1,12%

Chemical Products 12 0,00% 36 0,00% 174 0,01% 9111 0,60%

Coal extraction 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 0 0,00%

Construction 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 25 0,00% 43 0,00%

Consumer Goods Industries 5 0,00% 15 0,00% 98 0,00% 5360 0,22%

Oil extraction 1 0,00% 1 0,00% 1 0,00% 6 0,01%

Electricity supply 16 0,00% 76 0,02% 264 0,07% 1572 0,44%

Ferrous and non-ferrous metals 11 0,00% 104 0,01% 231 0,02% 861 0,08%

Market Services 13 0,00% 24 0,00% 54 0,00% 669 0,01%

Non Market Services 2 0,00% 2 0,00% 3 0,00% 9 0,00%

Refineries 32 0,01% 103 0,04% 342 0,13% 1221 0,48%

Other energy intensive 14 0,00% 83 0,01% 389 0,03% 3854 0,34%

Transport 0 0,00% 3 0,00% 19 0,00% 60 0,01%

Transport equipment 0 0,00% 0 0,00% 1 0,00% 128 0,01%

Water Transport 1 0,00% 1 0,00% 102 0,05% 320 0,15%

Households 51 0,00% 416 0,01% 1501 0,02% 17937 0,27%

311 The domestic sector includes residential, commercial and institutional activities. The pollution control measures attributed to this sector are improvements to heating appliances. The corresponding expenditure is calculated as the cost premium for the improved appliance compared to the basic type. Note that the pollution abatement costs for private cars (such as the cost of catalytic exhaust systems) are attributed not to the domestic but to the transport sector.

194

Sum 221 0,00% 1202 0,01% 4629 0,03% 46992 0,31%

For a 25% gap closure (option 6A) the additional compliance cost is modest and concentrated in the household sector, agriculture and (to a lesser extent) energy intensive industries; for all sectors the additional effort required is less than or of the order of 0,01% of total output. For the 50% and 75% gap closures (options 6B and 6C), households and agriculture remain prominent, but energy intensive industries progressively contribute more. Option 6C (which delivers 75% of the maximum health benefits) requires additional expenditure of 0,27% of the sectorial output in agriculture, 0,13% for refineries, 0,07% for the power sector and much less for all other industries. The effort required of households is 0,023% of their total consumption, on average ca. €3/year per EU citizen.

Option 6D (MTFR) shows a rather different picture, reflecting the fact that all commercially available technical measures are tapped, irrespective of their cost. Highest additional costs are in the chemicals and consumer goods industries (food, clothing, furniture, etc.), related to relatively expensive VOC abatement measures.

2.2.3. Direct economic benefits due to reduced health and environmental impacts

Reducing air pollution delivers substantial direct economic benefits which are summarised in Tables A7.8 and A7.9.

• Labour productivity gains from reducing the lost working days: Avoided economic loss from improved productivity alone ranges between €0,7bn and almost €3bn. These can offset by more than a factor 2 the direct emission control expenditure on option 6A, fully compensates it on option 6B, and cover about half those on option 6C.

• Savings from reduced damage to the built environment: Benefits due to reduced corrosion and soiling of infrastructure and buildings range between about €53-162M per year in options 6A-6D.

• Savings from reduced crop losses: Ground-level ozone damages plants, hampering the growth of trees as well as food crops. The damage to potato and wheat alone is

currently estimated at about €2,6bn per year. 312 Emission reductions can reduce this

damage by between €61 and 630M per year (options 6A-D). Timber losses are not included.

• Savings from reduced healthcare costs: These are evaluated where data are available. However, due to the lack of sufficient data for a number of symptoms (including lower respiratory symptoms, restricted activity days and child morbidity), the estimate is not a full account of overall healthcare costs from air pollution. Even so, the benefits delivered by options 6A-D are substantial, ranging between €219 and 886M per year.

312 EU27 + CH and NO

195 196

Table A7.8: reducing direct economic damage due to air pollution in 2025 options.

2025, EU28 2005 Option 1 Opt. 6A Opt.6B Opt. 6C Opt. 6D

Lost working days, Million 136 82 76 71 65 60

Value of lost working days, M € 17,629 10,651 9,925 9,230 8,514 7,820

% of total labour days lost 0.30% 0.18% 0.17% 0.16% 0.15% 0.13%

Damage to built environment, M € 1,593 503 450 396 358 340

Crop value losses, M € 4,867 2,176 2,114 2,074 1,897 1,545

Respiratory and cardiac hospital admissions 850 641 609 580 542 494

Chronic bronchitis 3,782 2,762 2,574 2,386 2,204 2,023

Total healthcare where quantified 4,631 3,403 3,183 2,966 2,746 2,517

Table A7.9: reducing direct economic damage due to air pollution in 2030 options.

2030, EU28 2005 Option 1 Opt. 6A Opt.6B Opt. 6C Opt. 6D

Lost working days, Million 136 76 71 66 61 55

Value of lost working days, M € 17,629 9,902 9,237 8,594 7,942 7,097

% of total labour days lost 0.30% 0.17% 0.16% 0.15% 0.14% 0.12%

Damage to built environment, M € 1,593 452 408 356 317 293

Crop value losses, M € 4,867 1,985 1,926 1,887 1,716 1,354

Respiratory and cardiac hospital admissions 850 635 605 577 540 483

Chronic bronchitis 3,782 2,668 2,490 2,311 2,139 1,913

Total healthcare where quantified 4,631 3,303 3,094 2,888 2,679 2,396

2.2.4. Broader economic impacts

Direct compliance costs as presented in tables A7.5 and A7.6 are calculated as additional annualised capital and O&M expenditure in the various sectors. Such compliance costs are not to be interpreted as societal costs. This is on the one hand because the investment demand generated represents an economic opportunity for the manufacturers of those investment goods, and on the other hand because the costs of compliance impact production costs and may affect the competitiveness of the affected sectors including at the international level. The analysis needs therefore to take into account:

• Which sectors benefit from expenditure in pollution control by delivering the investment goods, and which other expenditure would be crowded out

• Price effects, and the consequences of price changes for international competitiveness and for consumers.

197

These aspects were analysed with the CGE model GEM-E3. The required investments

and other direct costs per industry were introduced as additional expenditure in the

corresponding sectors 313 . Additional benefits in terms of reduced loss of working days

are considered and presented separately by proportionately adjusting the labour supply (+0,012 to +0,048% in options 6A to 6D, see table A7.9) in the ‘health’ case in the table below. Other direct economic benefits such as improved crop yields, reduced healthcare expenditure, and damage to utilitarian buildings were not included in this analysis and are to be considered separately. The results in terms of GDP impact, sectorial output and exports by sector are presented in tables A7.10 and A7.11; the exact figures are for 2025 with the results, being calculated as percentage changes, are –considering also the error margin- not significantly different for 2030.

Table A7.10: GDP and sectorial output change in options, the effects of health benefits to labour productivity are presented seprately as “health”case

6A 6B 6C

Change in sectorial output in the EU28 (2025), and GDP change; % compared to option 1

base health base health base health

Agriculture -0,01% 0,00% -0,06% -0,04% -0,22% -0,20% Chemical Products 0,00% 0,01% 0,01% 0,03% 0,03% 0,05%

Construction 0,00% 0,01% 0,02% 0,03% 0,07% 0,08% Consumer Goods Industries 0,00% 0,00% -0,01% 0,00% -0,04% -0,01%

Electric Goods 0,00% 0,02% 0,03% 0,05% 0,10% 0,13% Electricity supply 0,01% 0,01% 0,02% 0,04% 0,10% 0,12% Ferrous and non-ferrous metals 0,00% 0,01% -0,01% 0,02% 0,00% 0,03%

Natural Gas 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,01% 0,02% Market Services 0,00% 0,01% 0,00% 0,01% 0,00% 0,02% Non Market Services 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,01% 0,00% 0,01%

Petroleum Refining -0,01% 0,00% -0,03% -0,02% -0,10% -0,08% Other energy intensive 0,00% 0,01% -0,01% 0,01% -0,02% 0,01% Other Equipment Goods 0,00% 0,01% 0,02% 0,05% 0,06% 0,11%

Transport 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,01% -0,01% 0,02% Transport equipment 0,00% 0,01% 0,01% 0,04% 0,04% 0,09%

GDP -0,001% 0,007% -0,007% 0,009% -0,025% -0,000%

Direct benefits not included 0.007% 0.002% 0.013% 0.004% 0.020% 0.007%

indicators calculated as relative changes do not differ significantly for 2025 and 2030. Exact figures reported are for 2025.

Excluding health effects on labour productivity (which, together with the other direct benefits of table 18, would be equivalent to 0,020% of GDP), the estimated aggregate GDP impact is very small even on Option 6C, at 0,025%. Including those productivity gains overturn the direct expenditure effect for options 6A and 6B, and still fully offset the negative impact on GDP making it neutral on option 6C. This is without considering other direct benefits (healthcare, crop yield, infrastructure impacts); as shown in Table A7.8, additional quantifiable direct benefits would amount in option 6C to 1080 M€, equal to 0,007% of GDP, and so option 6C would have an overall small positive effect on GDP.

313 Any possible measures with negative costs (i.e. no regret measures that would provide savings for

operators at no extra compliance cost) were removed and excluded from the analysis.

198

Several of the sectors that require additional efforts in terms of pollution abatement

investment, such as ferrous and non-ferrous metals, chemicals and the power sector, also

benefit from additional demand for the delivery of the required investment goods

throughout the economy and see a net output increase. The sectors that bear a

comparatively larger share of the burden are agriculture and the refinery sector.

2.3. Social impacts of gap-closure options

Table A7.11 summarises the employment impacts of options 6A to 6C by sector. In all cases the effect is essentially neutral (max 2000 jobs in option 6C, which is within the uncertainty range), even without taking labour productivity gains into consideration. When those are considered there is a net employment increase (37-112 thousand jobs). This result is the sum of additional productivity of existing jobs (accounting for around two-thirds of the total) and net creation of new jobs due to increased competitiveness of EU industries .

Table A7.11: Sectorial employment change in options, the effects of health benefits to labour productivity are presented seprately as “health”case. Last row shows the net welfare effect.

6A 6B 6C

Change in Sector employment in EU28 (2025) in '000 jobs; and welfare change in % compared to option 1

base health base health base health

Agriculture -1,697 0,631 -6,051 -1,644 -24,574 -17,589 Chemical Products 0,055 0,886 0,294 1,912 1,264 3,711

Construction 0,826 3,825 4,209 10,148 16,237 25,043 Consumer Goods Industries -0,095 1,668 -0,132 3,345 -0,878 4,398

Electric Goods 0,097 0,487 0,576 1,413 2,173 3,379 Electricity supply 0,127 0,355 0,428 0,855 2,387 3,066 Ferrous & non-ferrous metals 0,057 1,155 -0,883 1,234 0,697 3,947

Natural Gas 0,000 0,013 -0,031 -0,007 0,043 0,085 Market Services 0,008 10,299 -0,258 19,693 2,661 32,405 Non Market Services 0,102 6,268 0,427 12,165 3,283 21,101 Petroleum Refining -0,013 -0,003 -0,044 -0,025 -0,111 -0,082 Other energy intensive 0,014 0,785 -0,578 0,922 -1,405 0,867 Other Equipment Goods 0,464 2,727 2,357 6,638 9,602 16,223

Transport 0,025 2,400 0,106 4,729 1,471 8,450 Transport equipment 0,107 1,004 0,634 2,329 2,857 5,424

TOTAL -0,069 37,605 0,821 73,691 2,119 112,256 Impact on aggregate

household consumption -0,002% 0,012% -0,009% 0,017% -0,030% 0,008%

indicators do not differ significantly for 2025 and 2030. Exact figures reported are for 2025.

199

2.4. Monetised impacts of gap-closure options

Following the approach described in chapter 3, the health impacts described in table A7.3 can be translated into economic loss figures based on a well-established literature of contingent valuation studies (Tables A7.12 and A7.13 for 2025 and 2030). The direct health and non-health impact endpoints that are valued in the previous section are also reported.

Table A7.12: Monetised Air Quality impacts in 2005 and in options for the year 2025, in M€/year

metric 2005 Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

Chronic mortality, low estimate PM 268,792 160,066 149,167 138,448 127,643 117,023

Chronic mortality, high estimate PM 916,190 685,035 638,815 592,247 546,445 501,559

Acute mortality O3 16,121 11,774 11,057 10,247 9,460 8,732

Chronic Bronchitis PM 42,571 30,405 28,339 26,264 24,268 22,258

Restricted Activity Days (RAD) PM 9,341 6,656 6,391 6,143 5,793 5,279

Other morbidity PM 268,792 160,066 149,167 138,448 127,643 117,023

Total, low estimate 338,479 210,217 196,250 182,383 168,390 154,402

Total, high estimate 985,877 735,186 685,898 636,182 587,191 538,938

Value of lost working days, M € 17,629 10,651 9,925 9,230 8,514 7,820

Healthcare cost (quantified) 4,631 3,403 3,183 2,966 2,746 2,517

Crop value losses, M € 4,867 2,176 2,114 2,074 1,897 1,545

Damage to built environment, M € 1,593 503 450 396 358 340

Note: to avoid any double counting, the value of lsot workind days has been subtracted from the total external cost of RADs; likewise, healthcare costs have been subtracted from the exteranl costs related to illnesses (morbidity)

Table A7.13: Monetised Air Quality impacts in 2005 and in options for the year 2030, in M€/year

metric 2005 Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

Chronic mortality, low estimate PM 268,792 149,724 139,727 129,817 119,996 107,110

Chronic mortality, high estimate PM 916,190 678,255 633,258 587,778 543,620 485,982

Acute mortality O3 1,654 1,322 1,302 1,288 1,232 1,109

Chronic Bronchitis PM 16,121 11,375 10,615 9,852 9,121 8,153

Restricted Activity Days (RAD) PM 42,571 29,508 27,540 25,562 23,674 21,157

Other morbidity PM 9,341 6,456 6,206 5,971 5,638 5,062

Total, low estimate 338,479 198,387 185,390 172,490 159,661 142,592

Total, high estimate 985,877 726,917 678,920 630,451 583,285 521,464

Value of lost working days, M € 17,629 9,902 9,237 8,594 7,942 7,097

Healthcare cost (quantified) 4,631 3,303 3,094 2,888 2,679 2,396

Crop value losses, M € 4,867 1,985 1,926 1,887 1,716 1,354

Damage to built environment, M € 1,593 452 408 356 317 293

In 2025, external costs due to air pollution are projected to reduce about 37% compared to 2005, and 40% in 2030. However, in option 1 they would remain in the range between 225 and 760 billion €/year in 2025 and 215-740 in 2030. Additional action beyond option

200

1 could reduce up to 60-200 billion €/year. Of these, more than 4 billion € could be direct

economic savings due to less work absenteeism, healthcare costs, crop damage and

deterioration of buildings and infrastructure.

3. P OLICY INSTRUMENTS TO ACHIEVE THE INTERIM TARGETS

The policy measures to deliver options 6A to 6E are set out in Table A7.1. While measures related to product standards (heating appliances in the domestic sector, emission limits for non-road machinery, inorganic fertilizers) are harmonised at EU level to meet the needs of the single market, other measures could in principle either be enacted either at national level or as EU-wide source controls. In practice, we will always look at a combination of both. A range of different sensitivity analysis has been undertaken for the central case Option 6C*, to investigate if and how different choices as regards the main policy instruments adopted may impact the costs of achieving the same overall environmental and health objectives. The analysis compared applying a maximum level of subsidiarity (i.e. NECD ceilings only) to applying various combinations of source controls and NECD ceilings, as well as including emission reductions from international marine shipping in the scope of the NECD.

As a general principle, constraining the range of policy instruments and technical measures that can be used will restrict access to cost-effective measures and so increase the costs of meeting a given set of environmental and health targets. Leaving full flexibility to Member States to decide on which emission sources to control and which technical measures to apply to achieve a national emission ceiling will normally always be the most cost effective option. However, EU source controls may be necessary and useful for levelling the playing field and improving administrative efficiency. In the public consultation, 94% of government respondents advocated more stringent source

controls at EU level to support the achievement of emission ceilings. 314 Harmonised

measures at EU level would to some extent result in lower cost-effectiveness, but this may be well justified in consideration of these benefits. Several different measures at EU

level were analysed, and the additional implementation cost estimated. 315 The results are

summarised as follows; details about the specific measures are provided in Annex 8:

Table A7.14: Additional pollution control costs entailed by taking EU-wide harmonised measures in specific sectors

Sector Control costs (vs base Option 6C*) Policy instrument BASE case 6C* 4680 M€ NEC Directive only Agriculture 51-67 M€ (+ 1,1-1,4%) Possible specific EU initiative for e.g. integrated manure management, BREF revision, BAT conclusions Medium combustion 162 M€ (+3,4%) Specific legislative initiative (1-50 MWth) described in detail in Annex 12 Chemicals; Solvents 2 M€ (+0,05%) BREF revision, BAT conclusions

314 Either alone (34%) or in combination with more stringent NEC ceilings (57%)

315 Note that measures related to product standards are always assumed to be taken at EU-wide scale due to

single market provisions. These include: emission standards for road vehicles and non-road machinery; solvent content of consumer products; minimum standards under the Ecodesign directive.

201

Cement&Lime; Glass 63 M€ (+1,3%) BREF revision, BAT conclusions Petroleum Refining 24 M€ (+0,5%) BREF revision, BAT conclusions International marine Only NECA: 37 M€ (+0,7%) Establishment of additional

shipping SECA+NECA: 433-1921 M€ (+9-40%) emission control areas for SO2 and

NOx under IMO Marpol Annex VI rules

The conclusion is that taking further emission control measures at harmonised EU level in several industrial sectors as well as in agriculture and for medium-scale combustion plants would help the Member States to achieve the emission reductions required to meet their air quality targets in the post-2020 horizon by providing certainty on the emission controls covered by EU legislation and at the same time ensuring a level playfield for businesses across Europe; this would be achieved with relatively minor cost-effectiveness compromises. The EU could deliver the needed source controls with a combination of existing and new policy initiatives: emission limit values for many

industrial activities are updated through the periodic revision of sectorial BREFs 316 under

the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) resulting in the adoption of BAT conclusions (as Commission implementing decisions). The Member States, through their vote on the draft Decisions in the IED Article 75 Committee, will eventually have a decisive voice in defining the stringency level of future BAT conclusions. This way Member States will determine the share of emission reductions to be delivered at EU-wide scale and the share to be left for them to deliver with national measures.

Combustion installations below the 50 MWth threshold set in the Large Combustion Plants directive (now merged in the IED) will be addressed by a specific proposal, for which Annex 12 provides details and supporting analysis. The bottom-up analysis shows that, depending on the emission level option chosen, this will reduce emissions of SO2, NOx and total PM (dust) by 127-139, 76-338 and 42-45 kilotons per year. Total annualised compliance costs for implementing the corresponding measures are in the range of 355 M€ - 3296 M€, with the upper end of the range being determined by expensive end-of-pipe measures for NOx abatement on all existing plants. When considering those particular techniques only for specific groups of plants, costs drop to the lower end of the range above, and the cost-effectiveness is in line with the ranges found under options 6A to 6C. In the central case Option 6C* (Error! Reference source not found.), pollution abatement expenditure attributed to MCP totals 220 M€ (see Annex 8 for detailed information). Additional costs for the MCP segment beyond those included in Option 6C* are thus 162 M€ in the preferred options (i.e. excluding end-ofpipe NOx controls) described in Annex 12. Administrative costs for regulating these plants may be limited by avoiding an integrated permitting regime.

Ammonia emissions from agriculture are challenging to regulate at EU level, partly because of the structure of the sector, covering a wide range of different farming activities and consisting of many small and medium-sized farms. In addition, ammonia emissions are influenced by several country-specific and local factors, such as soil and climate conditions, properties of different animal manure (linked to type of animal feed, species, age and weight), timing and rate of application of manure to agricultural land, type of housing facilities and manure storage systems, the proportion of time spent

316 Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference documents

202

indoors or grazing by farm animals, as well as different local farm traditions and

practices.

Some abatement measures for ammonia could be addressed in the NECD itself, through appropriate provisions and more detailed guidance for Member States on how to control agricultural activities in order to achieve the national ammonia ceilings. Such an approach would be complemented by strengthened IED BAT provisions at EU level for large pig and poultry installations, which are due for revision in 2014. Moreover, a recent review in accordance with Article 73 (2)(b) of the IED concluded that reducing emissions from the spreading of manure offer the highest benefit-to-cost ratio, and this option will be further explored as a matter of priority. There is also an opportunity to consider

appropriate measures in the Fertilizers Regulation 317 , which is to be reviewed in 2013.

The regulation is a product regulation designed to harmonize the inorganic fertilizer market in the EU, provide adequate information to farmers about the nutrient content through labelling requirements, and ensure that fertilizers do not harm the environment or human health. Finally, a comprehensive non-legislative Action Plan for Ammonia Abatement will accompany the revised Thematic Strategy.

Further measures in international maritime shipping combining (further) emission control areas both for SO2 and for NOx would not be cost-effective to achieve the targets of the policy options 6A-6C or 6C*, as they would be more expensive than equivalent landbased emission reductions. This conclusion may however be reviewed in future as it depends on a variety of factors including: low-sulphur fuel price premiums; the availability of cost-effective alternative technical solutions (scrubbers, LNG); the fact that only impacts on EU land are considered; and the exact definition of control areas. The current analysis suggests that the designation of NECAs not combined with further SECAs would offer good cost-effectiveness even in the absence of further technical advancements.

Although an EU-level pollution levy has already been rejected as a possible instrument to deliver the EU-wide pollution reduction objectives, taxation at MS level may well remain an effective policy instrument to reduce pollution and at the same time stimulate growth and employment, as part of green tax reforms. As an example, Denmark has introduced several air pollution-related taxation levies; a 1997 2,7€/kg levy on sulphur content of fuels above 500 ppm led to a sharp decline of SO2 emissions, and in 2007 a levy of 3,2€/ per Kg NOx emitted from large and medium-sized point sources was introduced. The potential of fiscal instruments in this context is analysed with macroeconomic modelling.

4. T RAJECTORY TO ACHIEVING THE LONG - TERM OBJECTIVE BY 2050

With a view to understanding whether or not the achievement of the long-term objective of no significant impact from air pollution could be within reach by 2050, a Maximum Control Effort (MCE) scenario was developed for the years 2030 and 2050, combining the effect of further phasing out of the most polluting sources (coal), increased electrification, energy efficiency gains as well as the application of available technical pollution control measures. Table A7.16 shows that the MCE scenario in 2050 would

317 Regulation 2003/2003/EC i

203

achieve virtually everywhere in the EU (99,5% of locations and 99% of population

exposed) background PM2,5 concentrations below the 10 µg/m 3 limit recommended by

the WHO. Fig. A7.1 shows the concentration map.

204

Table A7.16: Percentage of EU territory and of EU population exposed to PM2,5 concetration ranges in 2050 in the MCE

PM2.5 range, µg No. 28km

m -3 grids Population % territory % population

< 2 322 511328 5.5% 0.1%

2 - 3 1421 26628607 24.1% 5.5%

3 - 4 1657 112866725 28.1% 23.4%

4 - 5 1452 174130410 24.6% 36.1%

5 - 6 645 97956199 10.9% 20.3%

6 - 7 253 35728954 4.3% 7.4%

7 - 8 93 22420033 1.6% 4.7%

8 - 9 17 5712484 0.3% 1.2%

9 - 10 15 1189239 0.3% 0.2%

10 - 11 12 4556864 0.2% 0.9%

11 - 12 14 307425 0.2% 0.1%

12 - 13 3 6795 0.1% 0.0%

13 - 14 0 0 0.0% 0.0%

14 - 15 1 1422 0.0% 0.0%

15 - 16 1 264 0.0% 0.0%

Fig A7.1: Anthropogenic PM2,5 conentrations across Europe in the 2050 MCE scenario

Achieving this level starting in 2025 from the point delivered by the 6C* policy option would require reducing emissions of SO2 16,7% every 5 years; NOx 15%; PM2,5 12,4%; ammonia 6%; and VOC 10%. Table A7.17 reports the pathway to reaching this

205

goal in 2050. Compared to 1990 levels, the 2050 emissions would be 97% lower for

SOx, 89% lower for NOx, 84% for VOC, 74% for PM2,5 and 60% for ammonia, with

average reduction percentage for the five pollutants of 80%. Whilst these reductions

would all be feasible under the MCE assumptions, they could not be cost-effectively

achieved by technical measures alone; the trajectory should be considered therefore

indicative. Details by Member State are reported in Appendix 7.7.

Table A7.17: Emission reduction trajectory towards achieving the WHO guideline values in 2050; emissions in kilotons, reductions compared with 2005 emissions

EU28 2005 2025 2030 2040 2050

SO2 8172 -79% -82% -87% -91% NOx 11538 -65% -70% -78% -83%

PM2,5 1647 -48% -54% -64% -72%

NH3 3928 -30% -34% -42% -48% VOC 9259 -50% -55% -64% -71%

Figure A7.2 shows compliance projections for the 2050 MCE scenario. Even at the level of individual monitors, 90% of stations would meet the 10 g/m3 limit. Th 10% would be addressed by taking proportionate specific local measures to address particular hotspot situations.

Fig A7.2: Porjected distribution of concentrations at existing monitoring stations for PM2,5

206

A PPENDIX 7.1 E MISSION REDUCTIONS PER M EMBER S TATE AND PER OPTION IN 2025

AND 2030 (% VS 2005)

SO2 emissions in 2025, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 25 14 -43% 13 -46% 13 -46% 12 -52% 12 -53% Belgium 140 59 -58% 54 -62% 51 -63% 46 -67% 46 -67% Bulgaria 890 137 -85% 135 -85% 101 -89% 81 -91% 80 -91% Croatia 68 21 -70% 20 -71% 11 -84% 9 -86% 7 -89% Cyprus 38 2 -95% 2 -95% 2 -95% 1 -97% 1 -98% Czech Rep. 208 81 -61% 74 -64% 68 -67% 65 -68% 62 -70% Denmark 21 10 -53% 10 -53% 10 -54% 9 -56% 8 -60% Estonia 66 23 -66% 23 -66% 23 -66% 20 -70% 18 -73% Finland 90 64 -29% 63 -29% 63 -29% 63 -30% 59 -34% France 444 124 -72% 117 -74% 108 -76% 103 -77% 100 -78% Germany 549 333 -39% 317 -42% 308 -44% 295 -46% 291 -47% Greece 505 66 -87% 65 -87% 65 -87% 52 -90% 39 -92% Hungary 129 28 -78% 28 -79% 20 -85% 17 -86% 17 -87% Ireland 71 18 -75% 17 -76% 16 -77% 13 -81% 13 -82% Italy 382 142 -63% 119 -69% 106 -72% 93 -76% 75 -80% Latvia 5 3 -39% 3 -41% 3 -41% 3 -47% 2 -53% Lithuania 42 24 -42% 24 -43% 23 -45% 11 -74% 9 -77% Luxembourg 2 2 -20% 2 -20% 1 -25% 1 -44% 1 -56% Malta 11 0 -96% 0 -96% 0 -96% 0 -98% 0 -99% Netherlands 70 34 -52% 33 -52% 31 -56% 30 -57% 28 -60% Poland 1256 528 -58% 414 -67% 370 -70% 332 -74% 319 -75% Portugal 111 49 -56% 45 -60% 33 -71% 23 -79% 19 -83% Romania 706 101 -86% 97 -86% 63 -91% 55 -92% 50 -93% Slovakia 92 45 -51% 44 -51% 29 -68% 20 -78% 19 -79% Slovenia 40 6 -85% 6 -85% 5 -86% 5 -88% 5 -88% Spain 1328 228 -83% 222 -83% 178 -87% 149 -89% 133 -90% Sweden 38 32 -15% 32 -15% 32 -15% 32 -16% 31 -19% Un. Kingdom 850 274 -68% 210 -75% 169 -80% 153 -82% 150 -82% EU-28 8172 2446 -70% 2188 -73% 1903 -77% 1694 -79% 1593 -81%

207

SO2 emissions in 2030, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red

Austria 25 13 -47% 13 -49% 12 -49% 11 -54% 11 -55% Belgium 140 58 -59% 52 -63% 49 -65% 44 -68% 44 -68% Bulgaria 890 112 -87% 109 -88% 76 -92% 53 -94% 52 -94% Croatia 68 20 -70% 19 -71% 11 -84% 9 -87% 6 -91% Cyprus 38 2 -95% 2 -95% 2 -95% 1 -97% 1 -98% Czech Rep. 208 74 -64% 67 -68% 61 -70% 59 -72% 56 -73% Denmark 21 9 -56% 9 -56% 9 -56% 9 -58% 8 -63% Estonia 66 22 -67% 22 -67% 22 -67% 19 -71% 15 -78% Finland 90 64 -29% 63 -29% 63 -29% 63 -30% 59 -35% France 444 117 -74% 111 -75% 103 -77% 98 -78% 92 -79% Germany 549 295 -46% 278 -49% 269 -51% 258 -53% 246 -55% Greece 505 50 -90% 51 -90% 50 -90% 38 -92% 26 -95% Hungary 129 27 -79% 26 -80% 18 -86% 16 -88% 15 -88% Ireland 71 14 -80% 14 -80% 13 -81% 11 -84% 11 -85% Italy 382 142 -63% 119 -69% 105 -72% 92 -76% 73 -81% Latvia 5 3 -40% 3 -42% 3 -42% 3 -47% 2 -54% Lithuania 42 25 -41% 24 -41% 24 -43% 12 -72% 10 -77% Luxembourg 2 2 -21% 2 -21% 1 -25% 1 -44% 1 -56% Malta 11 0 -97% 0 -97% 0 -97% 0 -98% 0 -99% Netherlands 70 32 -54% 32 -54% 30 -58% 28 -59% 26 -63% Poland 1256 453 -64% 362 -71% 317 -75% 278 -78% 261 -79% Portugal 111 49 -56% 44 -60% 33 -71% 23 -79% 17 -84% Romania 706 99 -86% 95 -87% 60 -92% 51 -93% 45 -94% Slovakia 92 46 -50% 45 -50% 29 -68% 20 -79% 19 -80% Slovenia 40 6 -85% 5 -86% 5 -87% 5 -89% 4 -89% Spain 1328 232 -83% 226 -83% 179 -87% 148 -89% 130 -90% Sweden 38 32 -16% 32 -16% 32 -16% 32 -16% 31 -19% Un. Kingdom 850 214 -75% 173 -80% 144 -83% 128 -85% 124 -85% EU-28 8172 2211 -73% 1999 -76% 1720 -79% 1510 -82% 1383 -83%

208

NOx emissions in 2025, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 230 77 -67% 77 -67% 77 -67% 71 -69% 65 -72% Belgium 295 146 -50% 142 -52% 141 -52% 123 -58% 111 -62% Bulgaria 167 68 -59% 68 -59% 68 -59% 65 -61% 52 -69% Croatia 76 36 -52% 36 -53% 35 -53% 27 -64% 17 -78% Cyprus 21 7 -67% 7 -67% 7 -67% 7 -67% 5 -78% Czech Rep. 296 130 -56% 129 -56% 127 -57% 114 -61% 98 -67% Denmark 182 70 -62% 69 -62% 69 -62% 63 -65% 55 -70% Estonia 40 18 -55% 18 -55% 18 -55% 18 -55% 13 -69% Finland 201 110 -45% 110 -45% 110 -45% 110 -45% 92 -54% France 1351 502 -63% 501 -63% 486 -64% 453 -66% 393 -71% Germany 1397 608 -56% 575 -59% 572 -59% 522 -63% 460 -67% Greece 407 150 -63% 134 -67% 133 -67% 133 -67% 108 -74% Hungary 155 59 -62% 59 -62% 58 -62% 53 -66% 42 -73% Ireland 150 63 -58% 63 -58% 63 -58% 55 -64% 49 -68% Italy 1306 514 -61% 506 -61% 489 -63% 447 -66% 418 -68% Latvia 36 24 -34% 23 -35% 23 -35% 23 -36% 19 -49% Lithuania 62 31 -50% 30 -51% 30 -51% 30 -52% 25 -60% Luxembourg 47 13 -73% 13 -73% 13 -73% 13 -73% 12 -75% Malta 10 1 -86% 1 -86% 1 -86% 1 -86% 1 -89% Netherlands 380 158 -58% 158 -58% 155 -59% 134 -65% 119 -69% Poland 797 438 -45% 437 -45% 435 -45% 404 -49% 343 -57% Portugal 268 103 -62% 101 -62% 100 -63% 85 -68% 68 -75% Romania 311 140 -55% 139 -55% 137 -56% 112 -64% 95 -69% Slovakia 95 50 -47% 50 -48% 48 -49% 42 -55% 35 -63% Slovenia 50 18 -63% 18 -63% 18 -63% 17 -66% 15 -69% Spain 1513 496 -67% 485 -68% 485 -68% 441 -71% 365 -76% Sweden 216 82 -62% 82 -62% 82 -62% 82 -62% 72 -67% Un. Kingdom 1480 504 -66% 503 -66% 502 -66% 450 -70% 380 -74% EU-28 11538 4616 -60% 4535 -61% 4484 -61% 4096 -64% 3525 -69%

209

NOx emissions in 2030, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red

Austria 230 65 -72% 65 -72% 65 -72% 60 -74% 54 -76% Belgium 295 134 -55% 131 -56% 130 -56% 112 -62% 95 -68% Bulgaria 167 60 -64% 60 -64% 60 -64% 57 -66% 41 -75% Croatia 76 33 -56% 33 -56% 33 -57% 25 -68% 14 -81% Cyprus 21 6 -70% 6 -70% 6 -70% 6 -70% 4 -81% Czech Rep. 296 112 -62% 111 -62% 110 -63% 99 -67% 83 -72% Denmark 182 61 -66% 60 -67% 60 -67% 56 -70% 46 -75% Estonia 40 16 -61% 16 -61% 16 -61% 16 -61% 10 -74% Finland 201 99 -51% 99 -51% 99 -51% 99 -51% 82 -59% France 1351 441 -67% 440 -67% 424 -69% 395 -71% 332 -75% Germany 1397 530 -62% 495 -65% 491 -65% 442 -68% 380 -73% Greece 407 126 -69% 113 -72% 112 -72% 112 -72% 91 -78% Hungary 155 52 -66% 52 -67% 52 -67% 46 -70% 35 -77% Ireland 150 43 -71% 43 -71% 43 -71% 35 -76% 28 -82% Italy 1306 456 -65% 449 -66% 432 -67% 391 -70% 360 -72% Latvia 36 20 -44% 20 -44% 20 -44% 20 -44% 15 -58% Lithuania 62 28 -54% 28 -55% 28 -55% 27 -56% 22 -65% Luxembourg 47 10 -79% 10 -79% 10 -79% 10 -79% 9 -80% Malta 10 1 -89% 1 -89% 1 -89% 1 -89% 1 -92% Netherlands 380 143 -62% 143 -62% 141 -63% 121 -68% 105 -72% Poland 797 379 -52% 378 -53% 376 -53% 343 -57% 280 -65% Portugal 268 92 -65% 91 -66% 90 -67% 75 -72% 57 -79% Romania 311 127 -59% 127 -59% 124 -60% 100 -68% 81 -74% Slovakia 95 47 -51% 46 -51% 45 -52% 39 -59% 31 -67% Slovenia 50 16 -69% 16 -69% 15 -69% 14 -72% 12 -75% Spain 1513 434 -71% 422 -72% 422 -72% 378 -75% 300 -80% Sweden 216 76 -65% 76 -65% 76 -65% 75 -65% 64 -70% Un. Kingdom 1480 441 -70% 440 -70% 439 -70% 391 -74% 316 -79% EU-28 11538 4051 -65% 3970 -66% 3921 -66% 3544 -69% 2947 -74%

210

NH3 emissions in 2025, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 63 67 7% 59 -6% 56 -11% 51 -19% 46 -26% Belgium 74 74 0% 69 -8% 66 -10% 62 -16% 60 -19% Bulgaria 65 64 -2% 62 -5% 61 -6% 58 -11% 57 -13% Croatia 29 29 0% 28 -5% 26 -12% 21 -27% 18 -38% Cyprus 6 6 -6% 6 -7% 5 -12% 5 -21% 4 -33% Czech Rep. 80 63 -21% 60 -25% 55 -31% 52 -35% 52 -35% Denmark 73 51 -31% 49 -33% 49 -34% 46 -37% 39 -46% Estonia 12 13 7% 12 6% 12 -1% 11 -10% 8 -30% Finland 34 31 -8% 30 -11% 30 -11% 28 -17% 24 -29% France 675 638 -5% 580 -14% 534 -21% 463 -31% 425 -37% Germany 593 570 -4% 485 -18% 392 -34% 318 -46% 299 -50% Greece 57 47 -16% 46 -19% 43 -25% 41 -28% 38 -32% Hungary 78 67 -13% 62 -20% 54 -31% 48 -38% 48 -38% Ireland 104 101 -4% 101 -4% 98 -6% 92 -11% 85 -18% Italy 422 386 -9% 364 -14% 330 -22% 299 -29% 296 -30% Latvia 13 15 16% 15 14% 15 13% 13 3% 12 -5% Lithuania 44 49 12% 49 11% 48 8% 46 4% 32 -28% Luxembourg 6 6 -10% 5 -18% 5 -22% 5 -25% 5 -27% Malta 2 2 -7% 2 -7% 1 -21% 1 -25% 1 -34% Netherlands 146 112 -23% 112 -24% 111 -24% 111 -24% 110 -25% Poland 344 331 -4% 300 -13% 294 -14% 245 -29% 227 -34% Portugal 71 71 0% 65 -8% 62 -13% 55 -22% 49 -30% Romania 161 142 -12% 136 -16% 134 -17% 122 -24% 112 -31% Slovakia 28 24 -16% 21 -25% 18 -35% 17 -41% 17 -42% Slovenia 19 17 -12% 15 -18% 15 -20% 14 -25% 14 -28% Spain 366 352 -4% 334 -9% 303 -17% 258 -29% 211 -42% Sweden 54 48 -10% 48 -10% 47 -13% 44 -19% 39 -27% Un. Kingdom 308 282 -8% 275 -11% 257 -17% 240 -22% 236 -23% EU-28 3928 3658 -7% 3390 -14% 3122 -21% 2767 -30% 2566 -35%

211

NH3 emissions in 2030, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red

Austria 63 68 8% 60 -5% 56 -11% 51 -19% 47 -26% Belgium 74 73 -1% 68 -9% 66 -11% 62 -16% 60 -19% Bulgaria 65 64 -1% 62 -4% 61 -6% 59 -10% 57 -12% Croatia 29 30 2% 28 -4% 26 -12% 22 -26% 19 -36% Cyprus 6 6 -4% 6 -5% 6 -10% 5 -20% 4 -31% Czech Rep. 80 62 -22% 59 -26% 55 -32% 51 -36% 51 -36% Denmark 73 51 -31% 49 -33% 48 -34% 46 -38% 39 -47% Estonia 12 13 9% 13 7% 12 1% 11 -9% 8 -29% Finland 34 31 -8% 30 -11% 30 -11% 28 -17% 24 -29% France 675 639 -5% 574 -15% 527 -22% 458 -32% 424 -37% Germany 593 565 -5% 472 -20% 379 -36% 312 -47% 294 -50% Greece 57 48 -16% 46 -18% 43 -25% 41 -28% 39 -32% Hungary 78 67 -13% 62 -20% 54 -31% 49 -37% 48 -38% Ireland 104 101 -3% 101 -3% 98 -5% 93 -11% 86 -18% Italy 422 389 -8% 367 -13% 329 -22% 302 -28% 299 -29% Latvia 13 15 19% 15 17% 15 15% 14 6% 13 -3% Lithuania 44 51 15% 50 13% 49 11% 47 6% 33 -26% Luxembourg 6 6 -11% 5 -19% 5 -24% 5 -25% 5 -27% Malta 2 2 -8% 2 -8% 1 -22% 1 -26% 1 -35% Netherlands 146 111 -24% 110 -24% 110 -25% 109 -25% 109 -25% Poland 344 332 -3% 300 -13% 294 -14% 245 -29% 228 -33% Portugal 71 73 3% 66 -7% 63 -11% 57 -20% 50 -29% Romania 161 141 -12% 136 -16% 133 -18% 121 -25% 112 -31% Slovakia 28 24 -16% 21 -25% 18 -35% 17 -41% 17 -42% Slovenia 19 17 -12% 15 -18% 15 -20% 14 -25% 14 -28% Spain 366 349 -5% 330 -10% 300 -18% 258 -30% 209 -43% Sweden 54 49 -9% 49 -9% 47 -12% 44 -18% 39 -27% Un. Kingdom 308 287 -7% 279 -10% 260 -16% 244 -21% 239 -22% EU-28 3928 3663 -7% 3375 -14% 3099 -21% 2762 -30% 2568 -35%

212

VOC emissions in 2025, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 171 107 -38% 105 -39% 104 -39% 90 -47% 54 -68% Belgium 158 99 -37% 97 -39% 97 -39% 89 -44% 68 -57% Bulgaria 139 73 -47% 66 -52% 66 -53% 56 -60% 36 -74% Croatia 79 51 -36% 47 -41% 47 -41% 38 -52% 27 -66% Cyprus 9 4 -52% 4 -53% 4 -53% 4 -53% 3 -68% Czech Rep. 251 143 -43% 137 -46% 136 -46% 113 -55% 73 -71% Denmark 130 65 -50% 61 -53% 61 -53% 55 -58% 37 -72% Estonia 38 29 -24% 28 -27% 28 -27% 26 -31% 10 -73% Finland 173 102 -41% 101 -41% 101 -41% 96 -44% 53 -69% France 1117 616 -45% 610 -45% 606 -46% 573 -49% 413 -63% Germany 1235 850 -31% 800 -35% 795 -36% 720 -42% 514 -58% Greece 283 121 -57% 112 -60% 100 -65% 93 -67% 66 -77% Hungary 144 83 -42% 82 -43% 82 -43% 63 -56% 47 -67% Ireland 63 44 -31% 44 -31% 44 -31% 43 -32% 24 -62% Italy 1237 667 -46% 622 -50% 596 -52% 568 -54% 409 -67% Latvia 69 40 -42% 39 -44% 39 -44% 30 -57% 16 -76% Lithuania 84 43 -49% 39 -54% 39 -54% 34 -59% 19 -78% Luxembourg 13 6 -54% 6 -54% 6 -54% 5 -58% 4 -66% Malta 4 3 -31% 3 -32% 3 -32% 3 -32% 1 -64% Netherlands 205 142 -31% 142 -31% 139 -32% 135 -34% 106 -48% Poland 615 412 -33% 405 -34% 340 -45% 287 -53% 210 -66% Portugal 227 137 -40% 130 -43% 126 -45% 122 -46% 92 -60% Romania 460 256 -44% 231 -50% 230 -50% 171 -63% 104 -77% Slovakia 77 54 -30% 53 -31% 53 -31% 47 -39% 29 -63% Slovenia 41 30 -27% 30 -27% 30 -28% 15 -62% 11 -74% Spain 934 597 -36% 518 -45% 513 -45% 485 -48% 363 -61% Sweden 210 138 -34% 137 -34% 137 -34% 137 -35% 103 -51% Un. Kingdom 1093 694 -37% 675 -38% 638 -42% 552 -50% 419 -62% EU-28 9259 5604 -39% 5322 -43% 5157 -44% 4648 -50% 3308 -64%

213

VOC emissions in 2030, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red

Austria 171 102 -40% 100 -41% 100 -41% 89 -48% 52 -70% Belgium 158 99 -37% 98 -38% 98 -38% 90 -43% 67 -57% Bulgaria 139 67 -51% 60 -57% 60 -57% 52 -62% 32 -77% Croatia 79 48 -39% 44 -44% 44 -44% 36 -54% 25 -68% Cyprus 9 4 -53% 4 -54% 4 -54% 4 -54% 3 -69% Czech Rep. 251 140 -44% 133 -47% 133 -47% 111 -56% 69 -72% Denmark 130 63 -51% 59 -55% 59 -55% 54 -58% 35 -73% Estonia 38 27 -31% 25 -34% 25 -34% 24 -37% 9 -75% Finland 173 96 -44% 98 -43% 98 -43% 92 -47% 48 -72% France 1117 591 -47% 590 -47% 586 -48% 560 -50% 396 -65% Germany 1235 840 -32% 788 -36% 783 -37% 710 -43% 502 -59% Greece 283 116 -59% 108 -62% 96 -66% 89 -68% 60 -79% Hungary 144 81 -44% 80 -45% 79 -45% 61 -58% 45 -69% Ireland 63 43 -32% 43 -32% 43 -32% 43 -33% 22 -65% Italy 1237 646 -48% 610 -51% 587 -53% 555 -55% 400 -68% Latvia 69 37 -46% 35 -49% 35 -49% 30 -56% 16 -77% Lithuania 84 40 -53% 36 -57% 36 -57% 33 -60% 18 -78% Luxembourg 13 6 -55% 6 -55% 6 -55% 5 -58% 4 -67% Malta 4 3 -30% 3 -31% 3 -31% 3 -31% 1 -64% Netherlands 205 141 -31% 140 -32% 138 -33% 133 -35% 103 -50% Poland 615 403 -34% 399 -35% 335 -45% 281 -54% 192 -69% Portugal 227 137 -40% 130 -43% 127 -44% 123 -46% 92 -60% Romania 460 238 -48% 213 -54% 213 -54% 165 -64% 96 -79% Slovakia 77 53 -31% 53 -32% 53 -32% 47 -39% 27 -65% Slovenia 41 28 -33% 28 -33% 27 -33% 15 -63% 10 -75% Spain 934 596 -36% 518 -45% 513 -45% 485 -48% 358 -62% Sweden 210 132 -37% 132 -37% 132 -37% 131 -37% 98 -53% Un. Kingdom 1093 684 -37% 666 -39% 631 -42% 546 -50% 410 -62% EU-28 9259 5460 -41% 5199 -44% 5043 -46% 4569 -51% 3191 -66%

214

PM2,5 emissions in 2025, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 24 17 -31% 16 -35% 15 -39% 11 -54% 10 -60% Belgium 28 19 -33% 18 -36% 16 -43% 15 -46% 14 -52% Bulgaria 35 26 -24% 19 -45% 18 -47% 14 -60% 11 -69% Croatia 15 11 -26% 7 -56% 6 -58% 5 -66% 3 -78% Cyprus 3 1 -70% 1 -72% 1 -72% 1 -73% 1 -75% Czech Rep. 43 34 -21% 28 -34% 28 -35% 23 -47% 18 -59% Denmark 28 15 -47% 14 -49% 14 -49% 11 -62% 8 -70% Estonia 20 13 -36% 12 -42% 12 -42% 10 -48% 4 -80% Finland 29 21 -25% 21 -27% 21 -28% 18 -37% 13 -55% France 271 184 -32% 166 -39% 162 -40% 154 -43% 124 -54% Germany 123 87 -29% 82 -33% 78 -36% 73 -41% 67 -45% Greece 62 32 -49% 24 -61% 17 -72% 16 -75% 13 -79% Hungary 29 19 -35% 16 -44% 16 -46% 11 -61% 9 -69% Ireland 13 9 -29% 9 -29% 9 -31% 9 -32% 8 -43% Italy 147 128 -12% 113 -23% 86 -41% 82 -44% 75 -49% Latvia 19 14 -26% 12 -34% 12 -35% 9 -52% 5 -74% Lithuania 15 12 -23% 8 -47% 8 -47% 7 -55% 4 -71% Luxembourg 3 2 -42% 2 -42% 2 -42% 2 -47% 2 -51% Malta 1 0 -75% 0 -79% 0 -79% 0 -79% 0 -82% Netherlands 24 17 -29% 16 -32% 16 -35% 15 -38% 14 -44% Poland 225 216 -4% 197 -13% 174 -22% 154 -31% 124 -45% Portugal 63 41 -34% 27 -58% 22 -65% 19 -69% 17 -73% Romania 113 91 -19% 66 -42% 58 -48% 44 -61% 29 -74% Slovakia 32 20 -36% 19 -42% 18 -44% 12 -62% 8 -74% Slovenia 9 6 -35% 6 -39% 6 -39% 2 -73% 2 -75% Spain 156 124 -20% 69 -56% 65 -58% 60 -61% 52 -67% Sweden 31 25 -19% 25 -19% 25 -19% 21 -33% 14 -55% Un. Kingdom 87 82 -6% 67 -23% 53 -39% 46 -47% 41 -52% EU-28 1647 1266 -23% 1059 -36% 960 -42% 844 -49% 690 -58%

215

PM2,5 emissions in 2030, baseline and further control options. % reduction vs 2005

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red 2030 % red

Austria 24 16 -34% 15 -38% 14 -42% 11 -55% 9 -62% Belgium 28 19 -33% 18 -36% 16 -43% 15 -46% 13 -53% Bulgaria 35 24 -30% 17 -52% 16 -53% 12 -64% 9 -75% Croatia 15 11 -28% 6 -59% 6 -60% 5 -67% 3 -82% Cyprus 3 1 -70% 1 -72% 1 -72% 1 -73% 1 -75% Czech Rep. 43 32 -25% 27 -37% 26 -38% 22 -49% 15 -65% Denmark 28 13 -53% 13 -55% 13 -55% 10 -64% 7 -75% Estonia 20 12 -41% 10 -48% 10 -48% 10 -52% 3 -85% Finland 29 20 -30% 19 -33% 19 -33% 17 -41% 11 -62% France 271 169 -38% 152 -44% 148 -45% 141 -48% 107 -61% Germany 123 84 -32% 79 -36% 75 -39% 70 -43% 62 -49% Greece 62 30 -51% 23 -63% 18 -70% 17 -72% 14 -78% Hungary 29 18 -37% 16 -46% 15 -48% 11 -63% 8 -73% Ireland 13 9 -33% 9 -33% 9 -34% 9 -35% 7 -49% Italy 147 119 -19% 105 -28% 83 -44% 78 -47% 69 -53% Latvia 19 12 -34% 11 -42% 11 -43% 8 -54% 4 -80% Lithuania 15 11 -28% 7 -52% 7 -52% 6 -57% 4 -75% Luxembourg 3 2 -43% 2 -43% 2 -44% 2 -48% 2 -54% Malta 1 0 -76% 0 -80% 0 -80% 0 -80% 0 -83% Netherlands 24 17 -30% 16 -33% 16 -36% 15 -39% 13 -45% Poland 225 198 -12% 181 -19% 160 -29% 140 -38% 98 -56% Portugal 63 41 -35% 26 -59% 22 -65% 19 -69% 16 -74% Romania 113 84 -25% 59 -48% 52 -54% 41 -64% 23 -80% Slovakia 32 20 -38% 18 -43% 18 -45% 12 -62% 7 -78% Slovenia 9 6 -40% 5 -44% 5 -44% 2 -74% 2 -76% Spain 156 125 -20% 70 -55% 66 -58% 61 -61% 50 -68% Sweden 31 25 -19% 25 -19% 25 -20% 20 -34% 14 -56% Un. Kingdom 87 82 -6% 65 -26% 52 -40% 46 -48% 38 -56% EU-28 1647 1200 -27% 994 -40% 904 -45% 802 -51% 607 -63%

216

A PPENDIX 7.2 A NNUAL HEALTH IMPACTS DUE TO AIR POLLUTION PER OPTION IN

2025 AND 2030, EU 28

IMPACTS 2025 EU28 Option 1 Opt 6A Opt 6B Opt 6C Opt 6D

Acute Mortality (All ages) Premature O3

deaths 17800 17500 17300 16500 15000

Respiratory hospital Cases O3

admissions (>64) 19080 18775 18572 17803 16168

Cardiovascular hospital Cases O3

admissions (>64) 84028 82710 81762 78162 70666

Minor Restricted Activity Days Days O3

(MRADs all ages) 85600047 84247689 832916 79751306 72291776

Chronic Mortality (All ages) Life years PM

LYL (1) lost 2712818 2528130 2346405 2163449 1983531

Chronic Mortality (30yr +) Premature PM

deaths (1) deaths 306981 286271 265399 24488 224769

Infant Mortality (0-1yr) Premature PM

deaths 1062 989 919 845 773

Chronic Bronchitis (27yr +) Cases PM 242262 225787 209296 193324 177412

Bronchitis in children (aged 6 Added cases PM

to 12) 4620688 4306510 3992889 3688243 3384315

Respiratory Hospital Cases PM

Admissions (All ages) 105003 97733 91027 83753 76791

Cardiac Hospital Admissions Cases PM

(>18 years) 80583 75205 69965 64399 59086

Restricted Activity Days (all Days PM

ages) 275871902 257139250 238147099 220117469 201831060

Asthma symptom days Days PM

(children 5-19yr) 8183267 7627288 7076647 6551034 6012666

Lost working days (15-64 Days PM

years) 136552072 127245001 118334181 109151738 100259715

Note (1) Alternative expressions of the same effect, not additive

217

IMPACTS 2030 EU28 Option 1 Opt 6A Opt 6B Opt 6C Opt 6D

Acute Mortality (All ages) Premature O3

deaths 17200 17000 16800 16000 14400

Respiratory hospital Cases O3

admissions (>64) 20061 19751 19541 1874 16914

Cardiovascular hospital Cases O3

admissions (>64) 87708 86383 85409 81673 73336

Minor Restricted Activity Days O3

Days (MRADs all ages) 83560018 82295930 81380787 77947523 70210465

Chronic Mortality (All ages) Life years PM

LYL (1) lost 2540459 2370845 2202668 2036090 1817522

Chronic Mortality (30yr +) Premature PM

deaths (1) deaths 304106 283932 263538 243741 217902

Infant Mortality (0-1yr) Premature PM

deaths 943 880 818 755 673

Chronic Bronchitis (27yr +) Cases PM 234058 218409 202726 187672 167765

Bronchitis in children aged 6 Added cases PM

to 12 4459198 4161137 3863144 3576416 3196594

Respiratory Hospital Cases PM

Admissions (All ages) 100929 94054 87642 8085 7213

Cardiac Hospital Admissions Cases PM

(>18 years) 77246 7216 67154 61964 55314

Restricted Activity Days (all Days PM

ages) 269964452 251973103 233769290 216594842 193573166

Asthma symptom days Days PM

(children 5-19yr) 7733781 7218182 6707800 6222191 5568248

Lost working days (15-64 Days PM

years) 126944403 118424645 110185096 101818106 90984180

Note (1) Alternative expressions of the same effect, not additive

218

A PPENDIX 7.3 I MPACT REDUCTIONS PER M EMBER S TATE AND PER OPTION IN 2025 AND 2030 (% REDUCTIONS VS IMPACTS IN 2005)

Million Years of life lost (YOLL), calculated with constant 2010 population. 2025

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 5,17 3,20 -38% 3,03 -41% 2,91 -44% 2,56 -50% 2,37 -54% Belgium 9,11 5,47 -40% 5,14 -44% 4,88 -46% 4,55 -50% 4,25 -53% Bulgaria 6,92 3,64 -47% 3,46 -50% 3,28 -53% 2,98 -57% 2,77 -60% Croatia 2,96 1,68 -43% 1,58 -47% 1,50 -50% 1,37 -54% 1,26 -57% Cyprus 0,59 0,53 -9% 0,53 -9% 0,53 -10% 0,52 -11% 0,52 -12% Czech Rep. 7,91 5,31 -33% 4,93 -38% 4,68 -41% 4,21 -47% 3,82 -52% Denmark 2,94 1,68 -43% 1,61 -45% 1,56 -47% 1,41 -52% 1,30 -56% Estonia 0,53 0,43 -19% 0,42 -21% 0,42 -22% 0,40 -26% 0,33 -38% Finland 1,68 1,28 -24% 1,26 -25% 1,26 -25% 1,19 -29% 1,09 -35% France 46,02 24,73 -46% 23,36 -49% 22,44 -51% 21,04 -54% 18,54 -60% Germany 53,90 34,50 -36% 32,29 -40% 30,47 -43% 28,19 -48% 26,53 -51% Greece 11,65 6,15 -47% 5,97 -49% 5,33 -54% 5,08 -56% 4,73 -59% Hungary 8,41 5,06 -40% 4,76 -43% 4,46 -47% 3,96 -53% 3,66 -57% Ireland 1,34 0,86 -36% 0,84 -38% 0,81 -39% 0,78 -42% 0,73 -45% Italy 51,51 32,52 -37% 30,69 -40% 26,59 -48% 25,08 -51% 22,99 -55% Latvia 1,10 0,83 -24% 0,80 -27% 0,79 -28% 0,72 -35% 0,64 -42% Lithuania 1,76 1,37 -22% 1,30 -26% 1,27 -28% 1,17 -34% 1,07 -39% Luxembourg 0,39 0,23 -40% 0,22 -44% 0,21 -46% 0,19 -51% 0,18 -54% Malta 0,25 0,13 -47% 0,13 -48% 0,12 -50% 0,12 -51% 0,12 -53% Netherlands 12,22 7,21 -41% 6,83 -44% 6,52 -47% 6,16 -50% 5,82 -52% Poland 36,91 28,52 -23% 26,21 -29% 24,26 -34% 21,91 -41% 19,61 -47% Portugal 8,21 3,67 -55% 3,29 -60% 2,98 -64% 2,73 -67% 2,49 -70% Romania 20,18 11,62 -42% 10,83 -46% 10,25 -49% 8,97 -56% 7,87 -61% Slovakia 3,80 2,75 -28% 2,58 -32% 2,41 -37% 2,10 -45% 1,89 -50% Slovenia 1,43 0,85 -41% 0,80 -44% 0,76 -47% 0,62 -57% 0,58 -59% Spain 28,57 16,21 -43% 14,46 -49% 13,63 -52% 12,69 -56% 11,54 -60% Sweden 2,66 1,84 -31% 1,80 -33% 1,76 -34% 1,69 -37% 1,58 -41% Un. Kingdom 29,96 20,14 -33% 18,35 -39% 16,45 -45% 15,19 -49% 14,35 -52% EU-28 358,09 222,38 -38% 207,45 -42% 192,51 -46% 177,58 -50% 162,64 -55%

219

Million Years of life lost (YOLL), calculated with constant 2010 population. 2030

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % % % red 2025 red 2025 red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 2,22 3,05 -41% 2,89 -44% 2,76 -47% 2,45 -53% 2,22 -57% Belgium 4,04 5,28 -42% 4,96 -46% 4,70 -48% 4,40 -52% 4,04 -56% Bulgaria 2,60 3,47 -50% 3,30 -52% 3,12 -55% 2,86 -59% 2,60 -62% Croatia 1,22 1,66 -44% 1,56 -48% 1,47 -50% 1,35 -54% 1,22 -59% Cyprus 0,54 0,56 -5% 0,56 -5% 0,55 -5% 0,55 -6% 0,54 -7% Czech Rep. 3,53 5,05 -36% 4,69 -41% 4,44 -44% 4,00 -49% 3,53 -55% Denmark 1,24 1,60 -46% 1,53 -48% 1,49 -49% 1,37 -53% 1,24 -58% Estonia 0,32 0,42 -21% 0,41 -23% 0,41 -24% 0,39 -27% 0,32 -40% Finland 1,06 1,25 -25% 1,24 -26% 1,23 -26% 1,17 -30% 1,06 -37% France 16,86 23,19 -50% 21,85 -53% 20,96 -54% 19,71 -57% 16,86 -63% Germany 24,70 32,88 -39% 30,67 -43% 28,88 -46% 26,75 -50% 24,70 -54% Greece 4,50 5,94 -49% 5,77 -50% 5,21 -55% 4,97 -57% 4,50 -61% Hungary 3,50 4,93 -41% 4,64 -45% 4,34 -48% 3,86 -54% 3,50 -58% Ireland 0,69 0,82 -39% 0,80 -41% 0,77 -42% 0,74 -45% 0,69 -49% Italy 21,67 30,84 -40% 29,18 -43% 25,53 -50% 24,08 -53% 21,67 -58% Latvia 0,61 0,81 -27% 0,78 -29% 0,77 -30% 0,71 -36% 0,61 -44% Lithuania 1,04 1,34 -24% 1,28 -27% 1,25 -29% 1,15 -34% 1,04 -41% Luxembourg 0,17 0,22 -43% 0,21 -46% 0,20 -49% 0,18 -53% 0,17 -57% Malta 0,12 0,13 -47% 0,13 -48% 0,12 -49% 0,12 -50% 0,12 -52% Netherlands 5,53 6,93 -43% 6,58 -46% 6,28 -49% 5,94 -51% 5,53 -55% Poland 17,51 26,78 -27% 24,79 -33% 22,87 -38% 20,58 -44% 17,51 -53% Portugal 2,43 3,64 -56% 3,25 -60% 2,97 -64% 2,73 -67% 2,43 -70% Romania 7,43 11,19 -45% 10,41 -48% 9,82 -51% 8,80 -56% 7,43 -63% Slovakia 1,79 2,67 -30% 2,51 -34% 2,34 -38% 2,04 -46% 1,79 -53% Slovenia 0,56 0,81 -43% 0,77 -46% 0,73 -49% 0,60 -58% 0,56 -61% Spain 11,15 16,11 -44% 14,39 -50% 13,54 -53% 12,60 -56% 11,15 -61% Sweden 1,56 1,81 -32% 1,77 -33% 1,74 -35% 1,67 -38% 1,56 -42% Un. Kingdom 13,53 19,01 -37% 17,47 -42% 15,79 -47% 14,59 -51% 13,53 -55% EU-28 152,10 212,41 -41% 198,35 -45% 184,27 -49% 170,35 -52% 152,10 -58%

220

Premature deaths from ozone (cases/yr) 2025

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 469 312 -33% 308 -34% 304 -35% 288 -39% 257 -45% Belgium 316 265 -16% 262 -17% 259 -18% 248 -22% 221 -30% Bulgaria 814 543 -33% 537 -34% 533 -35% 510 -37% 468 -43% Croatia 358 222 -38% 218 -39% 215 -40% 200 -44% 174 -51% Cyprus 51 42 -18% 42 -18% 42 -18% 41 -20% 39 -24% Czech Rep. 547 374 -32% 368 -33% 364 -33% 344 -37% 307 -44% Denmark 164 127 -23% 126 -23% 125 -24% 120 -27% 110 -33% Estonia 38 28 -26% 28 -26% 28 -26% 27 -29% 25 -34% Finland 99 71 -28% 71 -28% 70 -29% 69 -30% 63 -36% France 2497 1704 -32% 1684 -33% 1667 -33% 1601 -36% 1451 -42% Germany 3673 2715 -26% 2674 -27% 2649 -28% 2533 -31% 2279 -38% Greece 924 643 -30% 633 -31% 624 -32% 605 -35% 564 -39% Hungary 828 533 -36% 526 -36% 520 -37% 488 -41% 435 -47% Ireland 56 50 -11% 49 -13% 49 -13% 48 -14% 46 -18% Italy 5294 3674 -31% 3591 -32% 3530 -33% 3377 -36% 3007 -43% Latvia 93 65 -30% 65 -30% 64 -31% 62 -33% 57 -39% Lithuania 144 103 -28% 102 -29% 101 -30% 98 -32% 91 -37% Luxembourg 15 12 -20% 12 -20% 12 -20% 11 -27% 10 -33% Malta 26 19 -27% 19 -27% 18 -31% 18 -31% 16 -38% Netherlands 380 338 -11% 334 -12% 330 -13% 316 -17% 284 -25% Poland 1669 1172 -30% 1158 -31% 1139 -32% 1083 -35% 979 -41% Portugal 591 449 -24% 443 -25% 440 -26% 428 -28% 399 -32% Romania 1597 1074 -33% 1061 -34% 1052 -34% 986 -38% 903 -43% Slovakia 307 203 -34% 200 -35% 197 -36% 185 -40% 165 -46% Slovenia 135 85 -37% 84 -38% 83 -39% 77 -43% 67 -50% Spain 2085 1609 -23% 1573 -25% 1564 -25% 1516 -27% 1402 -33% Sweden 240 172 -28% 171 -29% 169 -30% 164 -32% 152 -37% Un. Kingdom 1207 1192 -1% 1181 -2% 1167 -3% 1123 -7% 1040 -14% EU-28 24614 17794 -28% 17517 -29% 17318 -30% 16566 -33% 15009 -39%

221

Premature deaths from ozone (cases/yr) 2030

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 469 298 -36% 294 -37% 291 -38% 275 -41% 243 -48% Belgium 316 258 -18% 255 -19% 252 -20% 241 -24% 214 -32% Bulgaria 814 526 -35% 520 -36% 516 -37% 495 -39% 448 -45% Croatia 358 212 -41% 208 -42% 206 -42% 191 -47% 165 -54% Cyprus 51 43 -16% 43 -16% 43 -16% 42 -18% 40 -22% Czech Rep. 547 359 -34% 353 -35% 349 -36% 330 -40% 292 -47% Denmark 164 124 -24% 122 -26% 121 -26% 117 -29% 106 -35% Estonia 38 27 -29% 27 -29% 27 -29% 26 -32% 24 -37% Finland 99 69 -30% 69 -30% 68 -31% 67 -32% 61 -38% France 2497 1642 -34% 1624 -35% 1607 -36% 1545 -38% 1389 -44% Germany 3673 2623 -29% 2582 -30% 2558 -30% 2447 -33% 2185 -41% Greece 924 632 -32% 624 -32% 615 -33% 597 -35% 553 -40% Hungary 828 510 -38% 504 -39% 498 -40% 466 -44% 412 -50% Ireland 56 49 -13% 49 -13% 49 -13% 47 -16% 45 -20% Italy 5294 3546 -33% 3474 -34% 3418 -35% 3267 -38% 2896 -45% Latvia 93 64 -31% 63 -32% 63 -32% 61 -34% 56 -40% Lithuania 144 100 -31% 100 -31% 99 -31% 96 -33% 88 -39% Luxembourg 15 11 -27% 11 -27% 11 -27% 11 -27% 10 -33% Malta 26 18 -31% 18 -31% 18 -31% 17 -35% 16 -38% Netherlands 380 329 -13% 325 -14% 322 -15% 308 -19% 274 -28% Poland 1669 1130 -32% 1117 -33% 1099 -34% 1044 -37% 936 -44% Portugal 591 441 -25% 435 -26% 432 -27% 420 -29% 390 -34% Romania 1597 1041 -35% 1029 -36% 1020 -36% 958 -40% 869 -46% Slovakia 307 194 -37% 192 -37% 189 -38% 177 -42% 156 -49% Slovenia 135 81 -40% 80 -41% 79 -41% 73 -46% 63 -53% Spain 2085 1574 -25% 1540 -26% 1531 -27% 1484 -29% 1366 -34% Sweden 240 167 -30% 165 -31% 164 -32% 159 -34% 146 -39% Un. Kingdom 1207 1171 -3% 1160 -4% 1147 -5% 1105 -8% 1018 -16% EU-28 24614 17239 -30% 16980 -31% 16792 -32% 16067 -35% 14461 -41%

222

Square Kilometres of forest area exceeding acidification critical loads. 2025

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 63 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% Belgium 668 29 -96% 29 -96% 28 -96% 19 -97% 4 -99% Bulgaria 0 0 0 0 0 0 Croatia 1333 297 -78% 252 -81% 142 -89% 51 -96% 21 -98% Cyprus 0 0 0 0 0 0 Czech Rep. 1902 916 -52% 704 -63% 535 -72% 381 -80% 281 -85% Denmark 1438 37 -97% 28 -98% 23 -98% 11 -99% 9 -99% Estonia 119 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% Finland 25 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% France 15403 3199 -79% 1768 -89% 958 -94% 403 -97% 150 -99% Germany 32633 4361 -87% 2762 -92% 1522 -95% 867 -97% 639 -98% Greece 1217 198 -84% 149 -88% 94 -92% 73 -94% 73 -94% Hungary 3326 1077 -68% 926 -72% 560 -83% 432 -87% 330 -90% Ireland 696 4 -99% 3 -100% 3 -100% 1 -100% 0 -100% Italy 1060 60 -94% 40 -96% 28 -97% 2 -100% 1 -100% Latvia 5275 1066 -80% 878 -83% 790 -85% 614 -88% 472 -91% Lithuania 6563 5781 -12% 5648 -14% 5556 -15% 5403 -18% 5024 -23% Luxembourg 165 118 -29% 117 -29% 96 -42% 3 -98% 3 -98% Malta 0 0 0 0 0 0 Netherlands 4785 3816 -20% 3699 -23% 3576 -25% 3380 -29% 3229 -33% Poland 52295 19166 -63% 13987 -73% 11506 -78% 7537 -86% 5887 -89% Portugal 1387 190 -86% 168 -88% 140 -90% 135 -90% 116 -92% Romania 2930 80 -97% 56 -98% 1 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% Slovakia 2103 523 -75% 402 -81% 217 -90% 47 -98% 42 -98% Slovenia 203 4 -98% 3 -99% 3 -99% 0 -100% 0 -100% Spain 2620 48 -98% 41 -98% 28 -99% 4 -100% 1 -100% Sweden 19376 5243 -73% 4867 -75% 4572 -76% 4216 -78% 3836 -80% Un. Kingdom 3315 967 -71% 760 -77% 542 -84% 395 -88% 309 -91%

EU-28 160900 47178 -71% 37287 -77% 30920 -81% 23972 -85%

2042

8 -87%

223

Square Kilometres of forest area exceeding acidification critical loads. 2030

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 63 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% Belgium 668 29 -96% 28 -96% 26 -96% 11 -98% 2 -100% Bulgaria 0 0 0 0 0 0 Croatia 1333 294 -78% 250 -81% 133 -90% 47 -96% 19 -99% Cyprus 0 0 0 0 0 0 Czech Rep. 1902 787 -59% 577 -70% 439 -77% 275 -86% 213 -89% Denmark 1438 32 -98% 27 -98% 13 -99% 10 -99% 9 -99% Estonia 119 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% Finland 25 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% France 15403 2364 -85% 1452 -91% 759 -95% 216 -99% 113 -99% Germany 32633 3561 -89% 2129 -93% 1098 -97% 623 -98% 434 -99% Greece 1217 150 -88% 115 -91% 94 -92% 75 -94% 75 -94% Hungary 3326 1065 -68% 872 -74% 524 -84% 430 -87% 260 -92% Ireland 696 3 -100% 3 -100% 2 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% Italy 1060 48 -95% 40 -96% 28 -97% 2 -100% 1 -100% Latvia 5275 1045 -80% 865 -84% 754 -86% 608 -88% 451 -91% Lithuania 6563 5773 -12% 5612 -14% 5532 -16% 5399 -18% 5009 -24% Luxembourg 165 118 -29% 116 -29% 68 -59% 3 -98% 3 -98% Malta 0 0 0 0 0 0 Netherlands 4785 3731 -22% 3612 -25% 3460 -28% 3219 -33% 3035 -37% Poland 52295 16483 -68% 11756 -78% 9346 -82% 5765 -89% 4334 -92% Portugal 1387 190 -86% 168 -88% 140 -90% 135 -90% 115 -92% Romania 2930 69 -98% 56 -98% 1 -100% 0 -100% 0 -100% Slovakia 2103 447 -79% 309 -85% 119 -94% 42 -98% 40 -98% Slovenia 203 4 -98% 3 -99% 1 -99% 0 -100% 0 -100% Spain 2620 44 -98% 35 -99% 27 -99% 4 -100% 1 -100% Sweden 19376 4931 -75% 4634 -76% 4452 -77% 4044 -79% 3615 -81% Un. Kingdom 3315 827 -75% 658 -80% 481 -86% 340 -90% 218 -93% EU-28 160900 41995 -74% 33317 -79% 27496 -83% 21247 -87% 17948 -89%

224

Square Kilometres of ecosystem area exceeding eutrophication critical loads. 2025

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 29569 17369 -41% 13823 -53% 11507 -61% 8524 -71% 6235 -79% Belgium 253 28 -89% 10 -96% 5 -98% 1 -99% 1 -100% Bulgaria 31978 14250 -55% 14182 -56% 14115 -56% 12943 -60% 11576 -64% Croatia 28901 24465 -15% 23818 -18% 23389 -19% 21968 -24% 21038 -27% Cyprus 2528 2528 0% 2528 0% 2528 0% 2528 0% 2528 0% Czech Rep. 2094 1702 -19% 1583 -24% 1423 -32% 1213 -42% 1030 -51% Denmark 4275 4234 -1% 4231 -1% 4227 -1% 4156 -3% 4068 -5% Estonia 10886 4475 -59% 4356 -60% 4030 -63% 3482 -68% 2647 -76% Finland 30047 7963 -73% 7144 -76% 6711 -78% 5611 -81% 4316 -86% France 157035 121429 -23% 113945 -27% 104304 -34% 88184 -44% 74833 -52% Germany 65668 50700 -23% 45879 -30% 40361 -39% 33971 -48% 31391 -52% Greece 57928 55006 -5% 54533 -6% 54292 -6% 54121 -7% 53185 -8% Hungary 23844 19136 -20% 17393 -27% 16169 -32% 15900 -33% 15856 -34% Ireland 1621 615 -62% 595 -63% 539 -67% 443 -73% 342 -79% Italy 98149 56516 -42% 52093 -47% 46273 -53% 38668 -61% 35439 -64% Latvia 32738 26928 -18% 26034 -20% 25547 -22% 23354 -29% 20236 -38% Lithuania 19343 18932 -2% 18874 -2% 18784 -3% 18354 -5% 16916 -13% Luxembourg 1156 1117 -3% 1116 -3% 1106 -4% 1084 -6% 1065 -8% Malta 0 0 0 0 0 0 Netherlands 4142 3899 -6% 3861 -7% 3752 -9% 3530 -15% 3506 -15% Poland 74127 59685 -19% 56348 -24% 54066 -27% 45796 -38% 40264 -46% Portugal 32716 32590 0% 32430 -1% 32141 -2% 30670 -6% 28729 -12% Romania 94774 88682 -6% 88121 -7% 87800 -7% 85212 -10% 81946 -14% Slovakia 22184 19661 -11% 19353 -13% 19082 -14% 18512 -17% 17856 -20% Slovenia 9716 2158 -78% 1593 -84% 1103 -89% 515 -95% 366 -96% Spain 211578 202275 -4% 201083 -5% 198777 -6% 192785 -9% 181272 -14% Sweden 91924 44863 -51% 42207 -54% 39439 -57% 33551 -64% 26665 -71% Un. Kingdom 8924 4054 -55% 3624 -59% 2795 -69% 1755 -80% 1346 -85% EU-28 1148097 885262 -23% 850757 -26% 814266 -29% 746831 -35% 684651 -40%

225

Square Kilometres of ecosystem area exceeding eutrophication critical loads. 2030

Country Option 1 Option 6A Option 6B Option 6C Option 6D

2005 2025 % % red 2025 red 2025 % red 2025 % red 2025 % red

Austria 29569 16210 -45% 12569 -57% 10283 -65% 7278 -75% 5214 -82% Belgium 253 25 -90% 6 -98% 4 -98% 1 -100% 1 -100% Bulgaria 31978 14250 -55% 14115 -56% 14115 -56% 12943 -60% 11576 -64% Croatia 28901 24105 -17% 23566 -18% 23080 -20% 21785 -25% 20617 -29% Cyprus 2528 2528 0% 2528 0% 2528 0% 2528 0% 2528 0% Czech Rep. 2094 1659 -21% 1508 -28% 1356 -35% 1071 -49% 875 -58% Denmark 4275 4231 -1% 4230 -1% 4214 -1% 4140 -3% 4013 -6% Estonia 10886 4419 -59% 4201 -61% 3891 -64% 3363 -69% 2517 -77% Finland 30047 7322 -76% 6513 -78% 6198 -79% 5171 -83% 4022 -87% France 157035 117867 -25% 108306 -31% 98435 -37% 82080 -48% 71303 -55% Germany 65668 49440 -25% 43827 -33% 38191 -42% 32419 -51% 29743 -55% Greece 57928 54678 -6% 54366 -6% 54185 -6% 53828 -7% 52852 -9% Hungary 23844 18452 -23% 16611 -30% 15997 -33% 15884 -33% 15848 -34% Ireland 1621 586 -64% 568 -65% 520 -68% 428 -74% 318 -80% Italy 98149 54504 -44% 50186 -49% 43442 -56% 36505 -63% 33288 -66% Latvia 32738 26468 -19% 25754 -21% 25048 -23% 22982 -30% 19959 -39% Lithuania 19343 18923 -2% 18864 -2% 18762 -3% 18332 -5% 16834 -13% Luxembourg 1156 1116 -3% 1106 -4% 1106 -4% 1071 -7% 1046 -9% Malta 0 0 0 0 0 0 Netherlands 4142 3886 -6% 3829 -8% 3683 -11% 3508 -15% 3439 -17% Poland 74127 58839 -21% 54771 -26% 52450 -29% 43737 -41% 37690 -49% Portugal 32716 32580 0% 32378 -1% 32024 -2% 30527 -7% 28404 -13% Romania 94774 88362 -7% 87930 -7% 87373 -8% 84439 -11% 80852 -15% Slovakia 22184 19416 -12% 19228 -13% 18923 -15% 18283 -18% 17336 -22% Slovenia 9716 1936 -80% 1267 -87% 878 -91% 460 -95% 286 -97% Spain 211578 201558 -5% 200233 -5% 197487 -7% 190457 -10% 178497 -16% Sweden 91924 43196 -53% 40343 -56% 37594 -59% 31698 -66% 24834 -73% Un. Kingdom 8924 3927 -56% 3529 -60% 2527 -72% 1635 -82% 1225 -86% EU-28 1148097 870482 -24% 832334 -28% 794295 -31% 726551 -37% 665117 -42%

226