FRENCH PM WORK IN PROGRESS

With the contribution of:

Sonia Babu, Jean-Pierre Chang, Carole Levy, Bénédicte Oudart, Emanuel Rivière

Jean-Pierre Fontelle

PM INVENTORY

Previous inventory : (before mid 90s)

TSP only

New inventory : (supported by the French Ministry of Environment )

Geographical area : France

Limited number of sources

TSP, PM10, PM2.5, PM1.0 (primary sources)

Annual time series from 1990 to 1998

200 types of sources : all defined in SNAP 97+ additional sources

SECTORS CONSIDERED

road transport :

exhaust, brake, tyre and clutch wear.other mobile sources :

air traffic, railways, inland waterways, sea transport, machinery, household and gardening.

Stationary sources :

Agriculture

Nature

Waste incineration

Mobile sources :

Combustion – industrial and non industrial

COMPARISON WITH OTHER COUNTRIES

Goal : to complete and to validate the French PM inventory

total emissions

Observations : high discrepancies in

emissions by sectors

emission factors

source coverage

methodologies

Industrial processes :

SECTORS CONSIDERED

iron and steel industries,

cement, lime, plaster, glass production,

road paving,

bricks and tiles, fine ceramic materials,

non-ferrous metal industries, aluminium, lead and zinc, adipic acid, chipboard,

sugar and flour production,

storage and transport of cereals, etc...

RESULTS IN BRIEFDistribution of TSP emissions sources for the 11 CORINAIR's

groups during the 1990-1998 period

0%

4% 4%6%3%

8%

44%

3%

8%

18%2%

Combustion - energy and transformation industries

Non industrial combustion plants

Combustion in manufacturing industry

Production process

Extraction and distribution of fossil fuels

Solvent and other product use

Road transport

Other mobile sources and machinery

Waste treatment and disposal

Agriculture

Other sources (including nature)

TEACHINGS

Problem in defining the inventory fields (eg : resuspension ?)

Not complete (missing sources)

Lack of knowledge (missing and obsolete data)

Data from foreign studies possibly misused

Large discrepancies between various sources of information

Extremely high uncertainty

COMPARISON OF INVENTORIESComparison between TNO (edit.1997), IIASA (edit.2000) results and

other national inventories

Differences Emission per(in %) capita

TNO I I ASA (kg/inh)360 * 1 990 11 à 98 6.3407 * 1 997 2 à 76 7.0

SWI TZERLAND 27 33 33 1 997 18 4.5GERMANY 1 320 851 291 1 996 192 à 350 3.5UNI TED KI NGDOM 270 224 184 1 997 22 à 47 3.0I TALY 300 227 383 1 994 22 à 41 6.7

Country ref. year

FRANCE

PM10

400 715

Estimated by (in kt)reference year 1990

* related to a limited number of sources (35% of sources considered for TSP)

SOME EXAMPLES Combust. in manufac. industry : combustion plants > 50MW

Combustion in households :

EF TSP (g/GJ) Heavy fuel oil Wood

CITEPA 35 15

OFEFP / BUWAL 23 80

EF wood (g/GJ) TSP PM10

CITEPA 500 175

OFEFP / BUWAL 150

ITALY 1560

IIASA 150

EPA 870

SOME EXAMPLES

District heating plants : combustion plants < 50MW

Aluminium production (electrolysis) :

EF TSP (g/GJ) Coal

CITEPA 100

OFEFP / BUWAL 50

EF (kg/t) TSP PM10

CITEPA 9 5

OFEFP / BUWAL 2

ITALY 1

IIASA (uncontrolled) 25

TNO (Eastern Europe) 7

TNO (Western Europe) 3

SOME EXAMPLES Road transport :

gasoline diesel oil

EF mg/km PC LD Moto. HD

CITEPA highway 11 13 7 525

TSP rural 12 14 6 634

urban 21 20 7 1141

Total 6 650

IIASA 4-stroke 55 970

PM10 2-stroke 610

EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENCES IN SOURCE COVERAGECITEPA

Glass (5.6 t)………………………….0.5%Sugar (2.6 kt)……………………….0.25%Flour (800 t) …………………………0.07%Fireworks (2 kt) ……………………0.2%Wood work (40 kt) ………………3.7%Cereals handling (2 kt) …………0.2%Storage of solid fuel (39 kt)……………………………3.6%Clutch (7.8 kt) ……………………….0.7%Railways (1.6 kt) .………………….0.15%Air trafic (2kt)……….…….………….0.2%Mobile sources :- Agriculture (13 kt) …..………….1.2%- Industry (2.4 kt)…………………. 0.24%Open burning of agricultural wastes (47.5 kt)……………………4.4%Forest fires (97 kt)………………….9%Tilling of arable land crops (12.6 kt) ……….……………1.2%Source not in national total :- Construction (447 kt)……………25%

I I ASAOpen hearth furnacesSinter and pelletizing plant(production)sulfuric acidCementOther off-roadCow farmsOther farm sources

NB : 1990 TSP mass emissions are indicated in ( )

% refer to TSP

NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SOURCES

Sugar production Charcoal manufacture

Conclusion : SNAP and other nomenclatures to be revised ?

Flour production

Fireworks

Explosives production

Wood work

Cereals handling

Smoking meat

Shoe’s sole wear

Smoking

Tilling of arable land crops

Construction

Road abrasion

Quarrying

Harvesting

Use of BBQ

OBSERVATIONS

From discussion between experts :

limited knowledge in most countries

very limited number of available inventories

need for more monitoring campaigns

fugitive emissions much more complex to estimate and probably represent a significant amount of total emissions

stress politicians on the high level of uncertainties and risk to use irrelevant information when elaborating regulation involving high economic impact

CONCLUSION French inventory to complete and to improve

Further French work :

Need for exchange of knowledge between experts, initiatives for cooperation is welcome, especially regarding transparency of data As primary sources represent a minor part of total PM, would it not more efficient to focus essentially on secondary sources ? Need to consolidate PM inventories before use by policy makers

Revision of the French Inventory in 2001 by CITEPA Comparison study on methodology used by different countries to carry out PM inventories (final report expected for September 2001) by CITEPA

Projection study, 2015-2020 (expected for October 2001) by CITEPA and INERIS

CITEPA’s web site

www.citepa.org