Do something for our planet, print this page only if needed. Even a small action can make an enormous difference when millions of people do it!
Solid lines represent historic emissions up to 2011 and WEM projections from 2011 onwards. Dashed lines represent WAM projections. The gaps observed between the end of historic trends and the start of projected trends are due to the fact that absolute projection data were not calibrated on the latest 2011 GHG proxy inventory data.
A positive value indicates that average 2008-to-2011 emissions in the non‑ETS sectors were lower than the average annual target, taking into account the effect of allowances attributed to the EU ETS and without use of carbon sinks and Kyoto mechanisms.
Positive values indicate net acquisition of Kyoto units, while negative values indicate net sales. The actual use of Kyoto mechanisms is based on the delivery of units according to the SEF table. Countries might have acquired more units than are recorded in the SEF tables, e.g. due to delivery dates later in the commitment period. For the United Kingdom, SEF tables include the overseas territories and the crown dependencies of the United Kingdom. For the purposes of the implementation of Article 4 of the KP and as they are not part of the EC, the overseas territories and the crown dependencies of the United Kingdom were excluded from the initial assigned amount of the United Kingdom under the EC. In consequence, the trade of AAUs is slightly overestimated for the United Kingdom, as SEF tables for the geographical coverage of the United Kingdom under the EC only are not available. For Denmark, Greenland is included in the SEF tables. For the purposes of the implementation of Article 4 of the KP and as Greenland is not part of the EC, Greenland was excluded from the initial assigned amount of Denmark under the EC. In consequence, the trade of AAUs is slightly overestimated for Denmark, as SEF tables for the geographical coverage of Denmark under the EC only are not available. For Germany and France, corrections for allocated allowances have been included. Germany distributed an additional 8.1 Mt in 2008 to finance its auctioning mechanism, and in 2009 and 2010, Germany received 4 Mt from operators due to back requirements that are not included in the CITL. Allocations by France to new entrants in 2008 and 2009 were not recorded as allocation in the CITL; these 9.4 Mt are included in the calculations of the report with exception of the Chapter 4 on the EU ETS.
-
'EU‑15 (no overachievement)' corresponds to the situation of the EU‑15 where all surplus AAUs from target overachievement in the EU‑15 are not taken into account, to reflect the possibility that Member States with a surplus could use any remaining allowances for their own purposes and not necessarily make them available to compensate for Member States with a shortfall. Subsequent to the effect of allocation of allowances to the EU ETS, the target and annual emissions are those of the sectors not covered by the EU ETS. For each country, the top bar represents the gap between domestic emissions and the Kyoto target, while the bar below includes the planned effect of Kyoto mechanisms and carbon sinks. A positive value indicates a country for which average 2008–2011 non‑ETS emissions were lower than the annual target. The assessment is based on average 2008–2011 emissions and the planned use of flexible mechanisms, as well as the expected effect of LULUCF activities. EU‑15 values are the sum of the gaps/surplus for the 15 EU Member States party to Burden-Sharing Agreement. For Croatia, Iceland and Switzerland, total emissions are used as they have currently no installations under the EU ETS.
The assessment is based on emissions and the targets of the sectors not covered under the EU ETS, the planned use of flexible mechanisms as well as the expected effect of LULUCF activities. A positive sign signifies a favourable contribution towards target achievement. EU‑15* includes all overachievements but those of the United Kingdom, which will be cancelled following the Carbon Accounting Regulations (Statutory instruments, 2009. No 1257). 'EU‑15 (no overachievement)' corresponds to the situation of the EU‑15 where all surplus AAUs from target overachievement in the EU‑15 are not taken into account, to reflect the possibility that Member States with a surplus could use any remaining allowances for their own purposes, and not necessarily make them available to compensate for Member States with a shortfall. For Switzerland: carbon sequestration from LULUCF is expected to be in the range of – 0.4 Mt CO2-equivalent to – 1.8 Mt CO2‑equivalent.
Each bar represents the percentage change of domestic emissions compared to base‑year emissions; the yellow line represents the Kyoto or burden-sharing target in relation to base‑year emissions. The numbers represent the gap between emissions and targets, expressed in percentage of base‑year emissions. A positive value (and black arrow pointing up) indicates that total emissions were lower than the Kyoto or burden-sharing target. A negative value (and orange arrow pointing down) indicates that total emissions were higher than the Kyoto or burden-sharing target. For Liechtenstein, Croatia and Iceland, the comparison is based on average total 2008–2010 emissions, due to the unavailability of approximated 2011 GHG emission estimates.
The 'change in scope/coverage' concerns the correction from 2005 through 2007, to 2008 through 2012. The large corrections for 2005 and 2006 are related to Bulgaria and Romania, which only entered the scheme in 2007
PRIMES/GAINS projections recalibrated by EEA, based on 2010 GHG emissions. Member State projections do not include international aviation, while the PRIMES/GAINS scenarios do. 2025 and 2030 projections are based on information provided by 12 Member States. For other Member States, 2030 projections were gap filled using the 2020–2025 and 2020–2030 relative trends available from the Commission's scenarios based on the PRIMES and GAINS models. The gaps observed between the end of historic trends and the start of projected trends are due to the fact that the absolute projection data was not calibrated on the latest 2011 GHG proxy inventory data.
-
The map reflects the spatial combination of sites designated under national instruments and Natura 2000 sites. In Hungary there is an important overlap between Natura 2000 sites and nationally designated sites, however Natura 2000 also extend beyond these (little light green on the map). There are also a large proportion of nationally designated sites under IUCN V and VI which are not designated as Natura 2000 as reflected by extend of blue colour on the map
* SCIs — Sites of Community Importance; SACs — Special Areas of Conservation
Distribution of nationally protected sites (CDDA) in Europe according to their IUCN category classification
* EEA-39 includes the 32 EEA member countries and seven collaborating countries (http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-andmaps/ figures/political-map-of-eea-member-and-collaborating-countries).
For references, please go to https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/find/global or scan the QR code.
PDF generated on 28 Aug 2025, 05:17 AM
Engineered by: EEA Web Team
Software updated on 26 September 2023 08:13 from version 23.8.18
Software version: EEA Plone KGS 23.9.14