Corjan Brink

Ammonia abatement and its impact on emissions of nitrous oxide and methane in Europe-Part 1: method

Agriculture is an important source of NH3, which contributes to acidification and eutrophication, as well as emissions of the greenhouse gases CH4 and N2O. Because of their common sources, emission reduction measures for one of these gases may affect emissions of others. These interrelations are often ignored in policy making. This study presents an analysis of the effects of measures to reduce NH3 emissions on emissions of N2O and CH4 from agriculture in Europe. The analysis combines information from the NH3 module of the Regional Air pollution INformation and Simulation (RAINS) model for Europe with the IPCC method for national greenhouse gas inventories. The IPCC method for estimating agricultural emissions of N2O and CH4 is adjusted in order to use it in combination with the RAINS database for the European agricultural sector. As an example, we applied the adjusted method to the agricultural sector in the Netherlands and found that application of several NH3 abatement options may result in a substantial increase in N2O emissions while the effect on CH4 emissions is relatively small. In Part 2 of this paper we focus on the resulting emissions for all European countries for 1990 and 2010.

The European Nitrogen Assessment: Costs and benefits of nitrogen in the environment

Single issue policies have been an effective means of reducing reactive nitrogen (N_r) emissions in the EU, but to make further reductions more-integrated approaches are required.

Ammonia abatement and its impact on emissions of nitrous oxide and methane—Part 2: application for Europe

Agricultural emissions of NH3, N2O, and CH4 come, to a large extent, from common sources. It has been demonstrated that controlling NH3 emissions through application of technical measures might have an impact on emissions of N2O and CH4. This paper presents estimates of NH3, N2O and CH4 emissions from European agriculture for 1990 and four scenarios for the year 2010. The first scenario assumes no specific NH3 abatement, but emissions of all three gases decline between 1990 and 2010 as a result of projected reductions in animal numbers and fertiliser consumption in Europe. The other three scenarios assume different levels of NH3 abatement in Europe, including the maximum feasible reduction case. They are compared with respect to their effect on emissions of N2O and CH4. The results indicate that in Europe, abating agricultural emissions of NH3 may cause releases of N2O from this sector up to 15% higher than in the case of no NH3 control. There may be substantial differences in the observed effects between various countries depending on the degree and type of NH3 control options applied. The effect of NH3 abatement on CH4 emissions was found to be negligible.

Cost-Effective Emission Abatement in Europe Considering Interrelations in Agriculture

Agriculture is an important source of ammonia (NH3), which contributes to acidification and eutrophication, as well as emissions of the greenhouse gases nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4). Controlling emissions of one of these pollutants through application of technical measures might have an impact (either beneficial or adverse) on emissions of the others. These side effects are usually ignored in policy making. This study analyses cost-effectiveness of measures to reduce acidification and eutrophication as well as agricultural emissions of N2O and CH4 in Europe, taking into account interrelations between abatement of NH3, N2O, and CH4 in agriculture. The model used is based on the RAINS (Regional Air pollution INformation and Simulation) model for air pollution in Europe, which includes emissions, abatement options, and atmospheric source-receptor relationships for pollutants contributing to acidification and eutrophication. We used an optimisation model that is largely based on the RAINS model but that also includes emissions of N2O and CH4 from agriculture and technical measures to reduce these emissions. For abatement options for agricultural emissions we estimated side effects on other emissions. The model determines abatement strategies to meet restrictions on emission and/or deposition levels at the least cost. Cost-effective strategies to reduce acidification and eutrophication in Europe were analysed. We found that NH3 abatement may cause an increase in N2O emissions. If total agricultural N2O and CH4 emissions in Europe were not allowed to increase, cost-effective allocation of emission reductions over countries in Europe changed considerably.

Environmental Economics for Environmental Protection

Environmental economics deals with the optimal allocation of production factors and correcting market failure in protecting the environment. Market failure occurs because of externalities, common property resources, and public goods. Environmental policy instruments include direct regulation, taxes/subsidies, tradable permits, deposit systems, voluntary agreements, and persuasion. Environmental policies usually focus on one pollutant or environmental issue but may have substantial impacts on other emissions and environmental problems. Neglecting these impacts will result in suboptimal policies. We present an integrated optimisation model for determining cost-effective strategies to simultaneously reduce emissions of several pollutants from several sources, allowing for interrelations between sources and abatement options. Our integrated approach in regard to acidifying compounds and greenhouse gases will be able to provide cost-effective policy options that will result in lower overall abatement costs. This paper shows that efficient emission reduction can be calculated, but we argue that, for transboundary air pollution and climate change, it is difficult to implement the socially optimal solution because strong incentives exist for “free-riding”. In order to implement efficient policies, international environmental agree-ments like the Gothenburg or the Kyoto Protocol are necessary to establish stable coalitions. The stability of these agreements depends on the distribution of costs and benefits over countries and on the redistribution of the gains of cooperation.