Parlament České republiky, Poslanecká sněmovna 1996 – 1998

1. An Implementation Committee is hereby established to review the implementation of the present Protocol and compliance by the Parties with their obligations. It shall report to the Parties at sessions of the Executive Body and may make such recommendations to them as it considers appropriate.

2. Upon consideration of a report, and any recommendations, of the Implementation Committee, the Parties, taking into account the circumstances of a matter and in accordance with Convention practice, may decide upon and call for action to bring about full compliance with the present Protocol, including measures to assist a Party´s compliance with the Protocol, and to further the objectives of the Protocol.

3. The Parties shall, at the first session of the Executive Body after the entry into force of the present Protocol, adopt a decision that sets out the structure and functions of the Implementation Committee as well as procedures for its review of compliance.

4. The application of the compliance procedure shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 9 of the present Protocol.

1. The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, pursuant to article 10, paragraph 2 (a), of the Convention, review the information supplied by the Parties and EMEP, the data on the effects of depositions of sulphur and other acidifying compounds and the reports of the Implementation Committee referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the present Protocol.

2. (a) The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, keep under review the obligations set out in the present Protocol, including:

(i) Their obligations in relation to their calculated and internationally optimized allocations of emission reductions referred to in article 5, paragraph 5; and

(ii) The adequacy of the obligations and the progress made towards the achievement of the objectives of the present Protocol;

(b) Reviews shall take into account the best available scientific information on acidification, including assessments of critical loads, technological developments, changing economic conditions and the fulfilment of the obligations on emission levels;

(c) In the context of such reviews, any Party whose obligations on sulphur emission ceilings under annex II hereto do not conform to the calculated and internationally optimized allocations of emission reductions for that Party, required to reduce the difference between depositions of sulphur in 1990 and critical sulphur depositions within the geographical scope of EMEP by at least 60%, shall make every effort to undertake revised obligations;

(d) The procedures, methods and timing for such reviews shall be specified by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body. The first such review shall be completed in 1997.

1. In the event of a dispute between any two or more Parties concerning the interpretation or application of the present Protocol, the Parties concerned shall seek a settlement of the dispute through negotiation or any other peaceful means of their own choice. The Parties to the dispute shall inform the Executive Body of their dispute.

2. When ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to the present Protocol, or at any time thereafter, a Party which is not a regional economic integration organization may declare in a written instrument submitted to the Depositary that, in respect of any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Protocol, it recognizes one or both of the following means of dispute settlement as compulsory ipso facto and without agreement. in relation to any Party accepting the same obligation:

(a) Submission of the dispute to the International Court of Justice;

(b) Arbitration in accordance with procedures to be adopted by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body as soon as practicable, in an annex on arbitration.

A Party, which is a regional economic integration organization may make a declaration with like effect in relation to arbitration in accordance with the procedures referred to in subparagraph (b) above.

3. A declaration made under paragraph 2 above shall remain in force until it expires in accordance with its terms or until three months after written notice of its revocation has been deposited with the Depositary.

4. A new declaration, a notice of revocation or the expiry of a declaration shall not in any way affect proceedings pending before the International Court of Justice or the arbitral tribunal, unless the Parties to the dispute agree otherwise.

5. Except in a case, where the Parties to a dispute have accepted the same means of dispute settlement under paragraph 2, if after twelve months following notification by one Party to another, that a dispute exists between them, the Parties concerned have not been able to settle their dispute through the means mentioned in paragraph 1 above, the dispute shall be submitted, at the request of any of the Parties to the dispute, to conciliation.

6. For the purpose of paragraph 5, a conciliation commission shall be created. The commission shall be composed of an equal number of members appointed by each Party concerned or, where Parties in conciliation share the same interest, by the group sharing that interest, and a chairman chosen jointly by the members so appointed. The commission shall render a recommendatory award, which the Parties shall consider in good faith.

The annexes to the present Protocol shall form an integral part of the Protocol. Annexes I and IV are recommendatory in character.

1. Any Party may propose amendments to the present Protocol. Any Party to the Convention may propose an adjustment to annex II to the present Protocol to add to it its name, together with emission levels, sulphur emission ceilings and percentage emission reductions.

2. Such proposed amendments and adjustments shall be submitted in writing to the Executive Secretary of the Commission, who shall communicate them to all Parties. The Parties shall discuss the proposed amendments and adjustments at the next session of the Executive Body, provided that those proposals have been circulated by the Executive Secretary to the Parties at least ninety days in advance.

3. Amendments to the present Protocol and to its annexes II, III and V, shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at a session of the Executive Body, and shall enter into force for the Parties, which have accepted them on the ninetieth day after the date, on which two thirds of the Parties have deposited with the Depositary their instruments of acceptance thereof. Amendments shall enter into force for any other Party on the ninetieth day after the date on which that Party has deposited its instrument of acceptance thereof.

4. Amendments to the annexes to the present Protocol, other than to the annexes referred to in paragraph 3 above, shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at s session of the Executive Body. On the expiry of ninety days from the date of its communication by the Executive Secretary of the Commission, an amendment to any such annex, shall become effective for those Parties which have not submitted to the Depositary a notification in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 5 below, provided that at least sixteen Parties have not submitted such a notification.

5. Any Party that is unable to approve an amendment to an annex, other than to an annex referred to in paragraph 3 above, shall so notify the Depositary in writing within ninety days from the date of the communication of its adoption. The Depositary shall without delay notify all Parties of any such notification received. A Party may at any time substitute an acceptance for its previous notification and, upon deposit of an instrument of acceptance with the Depositary, the amendment to such an annex shall become effective for that Party.

6. Adjustments to annex II shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at a session of the Executive Body and shall become effective for all Parties to the present Protocol on the ninetieth day following the date on which the Executive Secretary of the Commission notifies those Parties in writing of the adoption of the adjustment.

1. The present Protocol shall be open for signature at Oslo on 14 June 1994, then at United Nations Headquarters in New York until 12 December 1994 by States members of the Commission as well as States having consultative status with the Commission, pursuant to paragraph 8 of Economic and Social Council resolution 36 (IV) of 28 March 1947, and by regional economic integration organizations, constituted by sovereign States members of the Commission, which have competence in respect of the negotiation, conclusion and application of international agreements in matters covered by the Protocol, provided that the States and organizations concerned are Parties to the Convention and are listed in annex II.

2. In matters within their competence, such regional economic integration organizations shall, on their own behalf, exercise the rights and fulfil the responsibilities which the present Protocol attributes to their member States. In such cases, the member States of these organizations shall not be entitled to exercise such rights individually.

1. The present Protocol shall be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by Signatories.

2. The present Protocol shall be open for accession as from 12 December 1994 by the States and organizations that meet the requirements of article 12, paragraph 1.

The instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who will perform the functions of Depositary.

1. The present Protocol shall enter into force on the ninetieth day following the date on which the sixteenth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession has been deposited with the Depositary.

2. For each State and organization referred to in article 12, paragraph 1, which ratifies, accepts or approves the present Protocol or accedes thereto after the deposit of the sixteenth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Protocol shall enter into force on the ninetieth day following the date of deposit by such Party of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.

At any time after five years from the date on which the present Protocol has come into force with respect to a Party, that Party may withdraw from it by giving written notification to the Depositary. Any such withdrawal shall take effect on the ninetieth day following the date of its receipt by the Depositary, or on such later date as may be specified in the notification of the withdrawal.

The original of the present Protocol, of which the English, French and Russian texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have signed the present Protocol.

DONE at Oslo, this fourteenth day of June one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four.

(5 - percentile in centigrams of sulphur per square metre per year)

a/ If, in a given year before 2005, a Party finds that, due to a particularly cold winter, a particularly dry summer and an unforeseen short-term loss of capacity in the power supply system, domestically or in a neighbouring country, it cannot comply with its obligations under this annex, it may fulfil those obligations by averaging its national annual sulphur emissions for the year in question, the year preceding that year and the year following it, provided that the emission level in any single year is not more than 20% above the sulphur emission ceiling.

The reason for exceedance in any given year and the method by which the three-year average figure will be achieved, shall be reported to the Implementation Committee.

b/ For Greece and Portugal percentage emission reductions given are based on the sulphur emission ceilings indicated for the year 2000.

c/ European part within the EMEP area.

The following SOMA is listed for the purposes of the present Protocol:

South-east Canada SOMA

This is an area of 1 million km² which includes all the territory of the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, all the territory of the province of Quebec south of a straight line between Havre-St. Pierre on the north coast of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence and the point where the Quebec-Ontario boundary intersects the James Bay coastline, and all the territory of the province of Ontario south of a straight line between the point where the Ontario-Quebec boundary intersects the James Bay coastline and Nipigon River near the north shore of Lake Superior.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The aim of this annex is to provide guidance for identifying sulphur control options and technologies for giving effect to the obligations of the present Protocol.

2. The annex is based on information on general options for the reduction of sulphur emissions and in particular on emission control technology performance and costs contained in official documentation of the Executive Body and its subsidiary bodies.

3. Unless otherwise indicated, the reduction measures listed are considered, on the basis of operational experience of several years in most cases, to be the most well - established and economically feasible best available technologies. However, the continuously expanding experience of low-emission measures and technologies at new plants as well as of the retrofitting of existing plants will necessitate regular review of this annex.

4. Although the annex lists a number of measures and technologies spanning a wide range of costs and efficiencies, it cannot be considered as an exhaustive statement of control options. Moreover, the choice of control measures and technologies for any particular case will depend on a number of factors, including current legislation and regulatory provisions and, in particular, control technology requirements, primary energy patterns, industrial infrastructure, economic circumstances and specific in-plant conditions.

5. The annex mainly addresses the control of oxidized sulphur emissions considered as the sum of sulphur dioxide (SO₂) and sulphur trioxide (SO₃), expressed as SO₂. The share of sulphur emitted as either sulphur oxides or other sulphur compounds from non-combustion processes and other sources is small compared to sulphur emissions from combustion.

6. When measures or technologies are planned for sulphur sources emitting other components, in particular nitrogen oxides (NO_X), particulates, heavy metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), it is worthwhile to consider them in conjunction with pollutant-specific control options in order to maximize the overall abatement effect and minimize the impact on the environment and, especially, to avoid the transfer of air pollution problems to other media (such as waste water and solid waste).

II. MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCES FOR SULPHUR EMISSIONS

7. Fossil fuel combustion processes are the main source of anthropogenic sulphur emissions from stationary sources. In addition, some non-combustion processes may contribute considerably to the emissions. The major stationary source categories, based on EMEP/CORINAIR 90, include:

(i) Public power, cogeneration and district heating plants:

(a) Boilers;

(b) Stationary combustion turbines and internal combustion engines;

(ii) Commercial, institutional and residential combustion plants:

(a) Commercial boilers;

(b) Domestic heaters;

(iii) Industrial combustion plants and processes with combustion:

(a) Boilers and process heaters;

(b) Processes, e.g. metallurgical operations such as roasting and sintering, coke oven plants, processing of titanium dioxide (Ti0₂), etc.;

(c) Pulp production;

(iv) Non-combustion processes, e.g. sulphuric acid production, specific organic synthesis processes, treatment of metallic surfaces;

(v) Extraction, processing and distribution of fossil fuels;

(vi) Waste treatment and disposal, e.g. thermal treatment of municipal and industrial waste.

8. Overall data (1990) for the ECE region indicate that about 88% of total sulphur emissions originate from all combustion processes (20% from industrial combustion), 5% from production processes and 7% from oil refineries. The power plant sector in many countries is the major single contributor to sulphur emissions. In some countries, the industrial sector (including refineries) is also an important SO₂ emitter. Although emissions from refineries in the ECE region are relatively small, their impact on sulphur emissions from other sources is large due to the sulphur in the oil products. Typically 60% of the sulphur intake present in the crudes remains in the products, 30% is recovered as elemental sulphur and 10% is emitted from refinery stacks.

III. GENERAL OPTIONS FOR REDUCTION OF SULPHUR EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION

9. General options for reduction of sulphur emissions are:

(i) Energy management measures: [Options (i) and (a) and (b) are integrated in the energy structure and policy of a Party. Implementation status, efficiency and costs per sector are not considered here.]

(a) Energy saving

The rational use of energy (improved energy efficiency/process operation, cogeneration and/or demand-side management) usually results in a reduction in sulphur emissions.

(b) Energy mix

In general, sulphur emissions can be reduced by increasing the proportion of non - combustion energy sources (i.e. hydro, nuclear, wind, etc.) to the energy mix. However, further environmental impacts have to be considered.

(ii) Technological options:

(a) Fuel switching

The SO₂ emissions during combustion are directly related to the sulphur content of the fuel used.

Fuel switching (e.g. from high- to low-sulphur coals and/or liquid fuels, or from coal to gas) leads to lower sulphur emissions, but there may be certain restrictions, such as the availability of low-sulphur fuels and the adaptability of existing combustion systems to different fuels. In many ECE countries, some coal or oil combustion plants are being replaced by gas - fired combustion plants. Dual-fuel plants may facilitate fuel switching.

(b) Fuel cleaning

Cleaning of natural gas is state-of-the-art technology and widely applied for operational reasons.

Cleaning of process gas (acid refinery gas, coke oven gas, biogas, etc.) is also state-of-the-art technology.

Desulphurization of liquid fuels (light and middle fractions) is state-of-the-art technology.

Desulphurization of heavy fractions is technically feasible; nevertheless, the crude properties should be kept in mind. Desulphurization of atmospheric residue (bottom products from atmospheric crude distillation units) for the production of low-sulphur fuel oil is not, however, commonly practised; processing low-sulphur crude is usually preferable, Hydro-cracking and full conversion technology have matured and combine high sulphur retention with improved yield of light products. The number of full conversion refineries is as yet limited. Such refineries typically recover 80% to 90% of the sulphur intake and convert all residues into light products or other marketable products. For this type of refinery, energy consumption and investment costs are increased. Typical sulphur content for refinery products is given in table 1 below.

Current technologies to clean hard coal can remove approximately 50% of the inorganic sulphur (depending on coal properties) but none of the organic sulphur. More effective technologies are being developed which, however, involve higher specific investment and costs. Thus the efficiency of sulphur removal by coal cleaning is limited compared to flue gas desulphurization. There may be a country-specific optimization potential for the best combination of fuel cleaning and flue gas cleaning.

(c) Advanced combustion technologies

These combustion technologies with improved thermal efficiency and reduced sulphur emissions include: fluidized-bed combustion (FBC): bubbling (BFBC), circulating (CFBC) and pressurized (PFBC); integrated gasification combined-cycle (IGCC); and combined-cycle gas turbines (CCGT).

Stationary combustion turbines can be integrated into combustion systems in existing conventional power plants which can increase overall efficiency by 5% to 7%, leading, for example, to a significant reduction in SO₂ emissions. However, major alterations to the existing furnace system become necessary.

Fluidized-bed combustion is a combustion technology for burning hard coal and brown coal, but it can also burn other solid fuels such as petroleum coke and low-grade fuels such as waste, peat and wood. Emissions can additionally be reduced by integrated combustion control in the system due to the addition of lime/limestone to the bed material. The total installed capacity of FBC has reached approximately 30,000 MW_th (250 to 350 plants), including 8,000 MW_th in the capacity range of greater than 50 MW_th. By-products from this process may cause problems with respect to use and/or disposal, and further development is required.

The IGCC process includes coal gasification and combined-cycle power generation in a gas and steam turbine. The gasified coal is burnt in the combustion chamber of the gas turbine. Sulphur emission control is achieved by the use of state-of-the-art technology for raw gas cleaning facilities upstream of the gas turbine. The technology also exists for heavy oil residues and bitumen emulsions. The installed capacity is presently about 1,000 MW_el (5 plants).

Combined-cycle gas-turbine power stations using natural gas as fuel with an energy efficiency of approximately 48% to 52% are currently being planned.

(d) Process and combustion modifications

Combustion modifications comparable to the measures used for NO_X emission control do not exist, as during combustion the organically and/or inorganically bound sulphur is almost completely oxidized (a certain percentage depending on the fuel properties and combustion technology is retained in the ash).

In this annex dry additive processes for conventional boilers are considered as process modifications due to the injection of an agent into the combustion unit. However, experience has shown that, when applying these processes, thermal capacity is lowered, the Ca/S ratio is high and sulphur removal low. Problems with the further utilization of the by-product have to be considered, so that this solution should usually be applied as an intermediate measure and for smaller units (table 2 ).