4.

Time series consistency

Category Title
GG General guidance
Time series consistency
Version Guidebook 2009

Lead author
Justin Goodwin

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 1

 4. Time series consistency

Contents
1 Time series consistency ............................................................................................................3
1.1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................3
1.2 Ensuring a consistent time series.........................................................................................3
1.3 Resolving data gaps.............................................................................................................6
2 Splicing techniques ...................................................................................................................7
2.1 Overlap ................................................................................................................................7
2.2 Surrogate data......................................................................................................................9
2.3 Interpolation ......................................................................................................................10
2.4 Trend extrapolation ...........................................................................................................11
2.5 Other techniques................................................................................................................13
2.6 Selecting the most appropriate technique..........................................................................13
3 Reporting and documentation of trend information ................................................................14
4 Time series consistency QA/QC .............................................................................................15
5 References...............................................................................................................................16
6 Point of enquiry.......................................................................................................................16

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 2

 4. Time series consistency

1 Time series consistency

1.1 Introduction
This guidance has been adapted from the 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2006). The basic methods
and principals are the same unless otherwise indicated. The time series is a central component of
an air pollutant inventory because it provides information on historical emissions trends and tracks
the effects of strategies to reduce emissions at the national level. As is the case with estimates for
individual years, emission trends should be neither over nor underestimated as far as can be
judged. All emissions estimates in a time series should be estimated consistently, which means
that, as far as possible, the time series should be calculated using the same method and data
sources in all years. Using different methods and data in a time series could introduce bias because
the estimated emission trend will reflect not only real changes in emissions but also the pattern of
methodological refinements.

This chapter describes good practice in ensuring time series consistency. Subsection 1.2 provides
guidance on common situations in which time series consistency could be difficult to achieve:
when carrying out recalculations, while adding new categories, and when accounting for
technological change. Section 2 describes techniques for combining or ‘splicing’ different
methods or data sets to compensate for incomplete or missing data. Additional guidance on
reporting and documentation and QA/QC of time series consistency is given in Sections 3 and 4.

1.2 Ensuring a consistent time series

1.2.1 Recalculations due to methodological changes and refinements
A methodological change in a category is a switch to a different Tier from the one previously
used. Methodological changes are often driven by the development of new and different data sets.
An example of a methodological change is the new use of a higher Tier method instead of a Tier 1
default method for an industrial category because a country has obtained site-specific emission
measurement data that can be used directly or for development of national emission factors.

A methodological refinement occurs when an inventory compiler uses the same Tier to estimate
emissions but applies it using a different data source or a different level of aggregation. An
example of a refinement would be if new data permit further disaggregation of a livestock enteric
fermentation model. Resulting animal categories could then be more homogenous or have a more
accurate emission factor applied to them. In this case, the estimate is still being developed using a
Tier 2 method, but it is applied at a more detailed level of disaggregation. Another possibility is
that data of a similar level of aggregation but higher quality data could be introduced, due to
improved data collection methods.

Both methodological changes and refinements over time are an essential part of improving
inventory quality. It is good practice to change or refine methods when:

• available data have changed. The availability of data is a critical determinant of the
appropriate method, and thus changes in available data may lead to changes or refinements in

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 3

 4. Time series consistency

methods. As countries gain experience and devote additional resources to preparing air
pollutant inventories, it is expected that data availability will improve ( 1);

• the previously used method is not consistent with good practice for that category. Inventory
compilers should review the guidance for each category in the detailed sector chapters;

• a category has become key. A category might not be considered key in a previous inventory
year, depending on the criteria used, but could become key in a future year. For example,
many countries are only beginning to calculate emission inventories for PM2.5 and becoming
aware of the impact of the use of biofuels on PM emissions. Although current emissions from
this category are low, they could become key in the future based on trend or level. Countries
anticipating significant growth in a category may want to consider this possibility before it
becomes key;

• the previously used method is insufficient to reflect mitigation activities in a transparent

manner. As techniques and technologies for reducing emissions are introduced, inventory
compilers should use methods that can account for the resulting change in emissions in a
transparent manner. Where the previously used methods are insufficiently transparent, it is
good practice to change or refine them. See subsection 1.2.3 of the present chapter for further
guidance;

• the capacity for inventory preparation has increased. Over time, the human or financial
capacity (or both) necessary to prepare inventories may increase. If inventory compilers
increase inventory capacity, it is good practice to change or refine methods so as to produce
more accurate, complete and transparent estimates, particularly for key categories;

• new inventory methods become available. In the future, new inventory methods may be
developed that take advantage of new technologies or improved scientific understanding. For
example, remote-sensing technology improvements in emission monitoring technology may
make it possible to directly monitor more types of emission sources;

• correction of errors. It is possible that the implementation of the QA/QC procedures

described in Chapter 6, Inventory management, improvement and QA/QC, will lead to the
identification of errors or mistakes in the inventory. As noted in that chapter, it is good
practice to correct errors in previously submitted estimates. In a strict sense, the correction of
errors should not be considered a methodological change or refinement. This situation is noted
here, however, because the general guidance on time series consistency should be taken into
consideration when making necessary corrections.

1.2.2 Adding new categories

The addition to the inventory of a new category or subcategory requires the calculation of an
entire time series, and estimates should be included in the inventory from the year emissions start
to occur in the country. A country should make every effort to use the same method and data sets
for each year. It may be difficult to collect data for previous years, however, in which case
countries should use the guidance on splicing in Section 2 of this chapter to construct a consistent
time series.

A country may add new categories or new gases to the inventory for a variety of reasons:

(1) Sometimes collection of data may be reduced which can result in a less rigorous
methodological outcome.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 4

 4. Time series consistency

• a new emission activity is occurring. Some emission processes, particularly in the Industrial
Processes Sector, only occur as a result of specific technological processes;

• rapid growth in a very small category. A category that previously was too small to justify
resources for inclusion in the national inventory could experience sudden growth and should
be included in future inventories;

• new NFR categories. The EMEP Emission Reporting Guidelines contain some categories and
subcategories which were not covered in the previous reporting guidelines. As a result,
countries may include new estimates in future national inventories. Countries should include
estimates for new categories and subcategories for the entire time series;

• additional inventory capacity. A country may be able to use more resources or employ
additional experts over time, and thus include new categories and subcategories in the
inventory.

If a new emission-causing activity began after the ‘base year’ ( 2), or if a category previously
regarded as insignificant (see subsection 1.2.1 of the present chapter regarding methodological
choice for reasons for not estimating emissions from an existing source) has grown to the point
where it should be included in the inventory, it is good practice to document the reason for not
estimating the entire time series.

1.2.3 Tracking increases and decreases due to technological change and other
factors
Emission inventories can track changes in emissions through changing activity levels or changing
emission rates, or both. The way in which such changes are included in methodologies can have a
significant impact on time series consistency.

Changes in activity levels

National statistics will typically account for significant changes in activity levels. For example,
fuel switching from coal to natural gas in electricity generation will be reflected in the national
fuel consumption statistics. Further disaggregation of activity data can provide more transparency
to indicate specifically where the change in activity is occurring. This approach is relevant when
changes are taking place in one or more subcategories, but not throughout the entire category. To
maintain time series consistency, the same level of disaggregation into subcategories should, as far
as possible, be used for the entire time series, even if the change began recently.

Changes in emission rates

Research may indicate that the average rate of emissions per unit of activity has changed over the
time series. In some cases, the factors leading to a technological change may also make it possible
to use a higher Tier method. For example, a coke oven plant manager who introduces measures to
reduce the frequency and intensity of fugitive coke oven leakage may also collect plant-specific
parameters that can be used to estimate a new emission factor. This new factor might not be
appropriate for estimating emissions for earlier years in the time series before the technological or
practice change occurred. In these cases it is good practice to use the updated emission factor or
other estimation parameters or data to reflect these changes for the relevant years only. Since a

(2) Within the UNFCCC/IPCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change/Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change) approach the ‘Base Year’ is a year upon which targets are based and often represents
the start year of the inventory.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 5

 4. Time series consistency

general assumption is that emission factors or other estimation parameters do not change over time
unless otherwise indicated, countries should clearly document the reason for using different
factors or parameters in the time series. This is particularly important if sampling or surveying
occurs periodically and emission factors or estimation parameters for years in between are
interpolated rather than measured.

Abatement of emissions

Larger point sources such as chemical manufacturing facilities or power plants might generate
emissions but prevent them from being released to the atmosphere through abatement and control.
In these cases it is good practice to account for these measures and to apply different emission
factors for different years and to document the reasons why these factors are different.

1.3 Resolving data gaps

1.3.1 Issues with data availability
For a complete and consistent time series, it is necessary to determine the availability of data for
each year. Recalculating previous estimates using a higher Tier method or developing estimates
for new categories will be difficult if data are missing for one or more years. Examples of data
gaps are presented below.

Periodic data: natural resource or environmental statistics, such as national forest inventories,
waste statistics and agricultural statistics, may not cover the entire country on an annual basis.
Instead, they may be carried out at intervals such as every fifth or tenth year, or region-by-region,
implying that national level estimates can only be directly obtained once the inventory in every
region has been completed. When data are available less frequently than annual, several issues
arise. First, the estimates need to be updated each time new data become available, and the years
between the available data need to be recalculated. The second issue is producing inventories for
years after the last available data point and before new data are available. In this case, new
estimates should be extrapolated based on available data, and then recalculated when new data
become available.

Changes and gaps in data availability: a change in data availability or a gap in data is different
from periodically available data because there is unlikely to be an opportunity to recalculate the
estimate at a later date using better data. In some cases, countries will improve their ability to
collect data over time, so that higher Tier methods can be applied for recent years, but not for
earlier years. This is particularly relevant to categories in which it is possible to implement direct
sampling and measurement programs because these new data may not be indicative of conditions
in past years. Some countries may find that the availability of certain data sets decreases over time
as a result of changing priorities within governments, economic restructuring, or limited resources.
Some countries with economies in transition may no longer collect certain data sets that were
available in the base year, or if available, these data sets may contain different definitions,
classifications and levels of aggregation.

1.3.2 Non-calendar year data

When using non-calendar year data, it is good practice to use the same collection period
consistently over the time series as described in Chapter 3, Data collection. Countries should not
use different collection periods within the same time series because this could lead to a bias in the
trend.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 6

 4. Time series consistency

2 Splicing techniques
Splicing in this context refers to the combining or joining of more than one method to form a
complete time series. Several splicing techniques are available if it is not possible to use the same
method or data source in all years. This section describes techniques that can be used to combine
methods to minimise the potential inconsistencies in the time series. Each technique can be
appropriate in certain situations, as determined by considerations such as data availability and the
nature of the methodological modification. Selecting a technique requires an evaluation of the
specific circumstances, and a determination of the best option for the particular case. It is good
practice to perform the splicing using more than one technique before making a final decision and
to document why a particular method was chosen. The principal approaches for inventory
recalculations are summarised in Table 2-1.

2.1 Overlap
The overlap technique is often used when a new method is introduced but data are not available to
apply the new method to the early years in the time series, for example when implementing a
higher Tier methodology. If the new method cannot be used for all years, it may be possible to
develop a time series based on the relationship (or overlap) observed between the two methods
during the years when both can be used. Essentially, the time series is constructed by assuming
that there is a consistent relationship between the results of the previously used and new method.
The emission estimates for those years when the new method cannot be used directly are
developed by proportionally adjusting the previously developed estimates, based on the
relationship observed during the period of overlap. In this case, the emissions associated with the
new method are estimated according to Equation 1 ( 3).

Equation 1:

⎛ 1 n yi ⎞
y0 = x0 • ⎜⎜ • ∑ ⎟⎟ (1)
⎝ (n − m + 1) i=m xi ⎠

Where:
y0 = the recalculated emission estimate computed using the overlap method
x0 = the estimate developed using the previously used method
yi and xi = the estimates prepared using the new and previously used methods
during the period of overlap, as denoted by years m through n

A relationship between the previously used and new methods can be evaluated by comparing the
overlap between only one set of annual estimates, but it is preferable to compare multiple years.
This is because comparing just one year may lead to bias and it is not possible to evaluate trends.

(3) Overlap Equation 1 is preferred to the equation described in Good Practice Guidance for National Greenhouse
Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2000):
⎛ n n
⎞
y 0 = x 0 • ⎜ ∑ y i ∑ xi ⎟
⎝ i=m i=m ⎠
This is because the latter gives more weight to overlapping years with the highest emissions. However, in
practical cases the results will often be very similar and continued use of the previous equation is consistent with
good practice where its use gives satisfactory results.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 7

 4. Time series consistency

Figure 2-1 shows a hypothetical example of a consistent overlap between two methods for the
years in which both can be applied. In Figure 2-2 there is no consistent overlap between methods
and it is not good practice to use the overlap technique in such a case.

Other relationships between the old and new estimates may also be observed through an
assessment of overlap. For example, a constant difference may be observed. In this case, the
emissions associated with the new method are estimated by adjusting the previous estimate by the
constant amount equal to the average difference in the years of overlap.

Overlap - Consistent
Relationship
20
18
16

14
Emissions

12 Tier 1
10 Splice
8 Tier 2

6
4
2

0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year

Figure 2-1 Consistent overlap

20

18

16

14
Emissions

12
Tier 1
10
Tier 2
8
6

4
2

0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year

Figure 2-2 Inconsistent overlap

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 8

 4. Time series consistency

2.2 Surrogate data

The surrogate method relates emissions to underlying activity or other indicative data. Changes in
these data are used to simulate the trend in emissions. The estimate should be related to the
statistical data source that best explains the time variations of the category. For example, mobile
source emissions may be related to trends in vehicle distances travelled, emissions from domestic
wastewater may be related to population, and industrial emissions may be related to production
levels in the relevant industry. See Chapter 3, Data Collection.

In its simplest form, the estimate will be related to a single type of data as shown in Equation 2:
y 0 = yt • ( s 0 / st ) (2)

where:
y = the emission estimate in years 0 and t
s = the surrogate statistical parameter in years 0 and t

Although the relationship between emissions and surrogate can be developed on the basis of data
for a single year, the use of multiple years might provide a better estimate.

Box 1 provides an example of the use of surrogate data for estimating methane emissions from
underground coal mining in the United States. In some cases, relating emissions to more than one
statistical parameter may develop more accurate relationships. Regression analysis may be useful
in selecting the appropriate surrogate data parameters. Using surrogate methods to estimate
otherwise unavailable data can improve the accuracy of estimates developed by the interpolation
and trend extrapolation approaches discussed below.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 9

 4. Time series consistency

Box 1 — Case study of surrogate data

Methane emissions from underground coal mining in the United States
On a quarterly basis, the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) measures methane
emissions levels at underground mines with detectable levels of methane in their ventilation air.
USEPA uses these measurements as a basis for calculating national emissions from underground coal
mining. These data were not available for the years 1991–1992, however, because of restructuring
within the Department of Labor. To estimate emissions for these years, USEPA used total underground
coal production as a surrogate data set. The graph below shows the relationship between underground
coal production and measured emissions, which are closely but not perfectly correlated. Differences
reflect the fact that individual mines vary greatly in their emission rates, and as production levels at
mines change over time, the weighted average emission rate also changes. USEPA applied Equation 2
to estimate emissions for 1991 and 1992 using Tier 3 emissions data and coal production for 1990.
These data points are crossed by the dashed line in the graph. Note that this procedure is very similar
to an overlap with the Tier 1 method because coal production is the recommended activity data for
Tier 1. Comparison of implied emission factors from estimates using surrogate data with Tier 1 default
factors would be a useful QA/QC check.

Surrogate Data for Coal Mining in the United States

450,000 120

400,000
100
350,000
Thousand Metric Tons

300,000 80
Billion Cubic Feet
250,000 Coal
60 Production
200,000 Measured
Emissions
150,000 40

100,000
20
50,000

- 0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year

Source: USEPA (2004)

2.3 Interpolation
In some cases it may be possible to apply a method intermittently throughout the time series. For
example, necessary detailed statistics may only be collected every few years, or it may be
impractical to conduct detailed surveys on an annual basis. In this case, estimates for the
intermediate years in the time series can be developed by interpolating between the detailed
estimates. If information on the general trends or underlying parameters is available, then the
surrogate method is preferable.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 10

 4. Time series consistency

Figure 2-3 shows an example of linear interpolation. In this example, data for 1994 and 1995 are
not available. Emissions were estimated by assuming a constant annual growth in emissions from
1993–1996. This technique is appropriate in this example because the overall trend appears stable,
and it is unlikely that actual emissions for 1994 and 1995 are substantially different from the
values predicted through interpolation. For categories that have volatile emission trends (i.e. they
fluctuate significantly from year to year), interpolation will not be according to good practice and
surrogate data will be a better option. It is good practice to compare interpolated estimates with
surrogate data as a QA/QC check.

Linear
Interpolation
20
18
16
14
Emissions

12
Method
10
Interpolation
8
6
4
2
0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year

Figure 2-3 Linear interpolation

2.4 Trend extrapolation

When detailed estimates have not been prepared for the base year or the most recent year in the
inventory, it may be necessary to extrapolate from the closest detailed estimates. Trend
extrapolation is conceptually similar to interpolation, but less is known about the actual trend.
Extrapolation can be conducted either forward (to estimate more recent emissions) or backward
(to estimate a base year). Trend extrapolation simply assumes that the observed trend in emissions
during the period when detailed estimates are available remains constant over the period of
extrapolation. Given this assumption, it is clear that trend extrapolation should not be used if the
change in trend is not constant over time. In this situation it will be more appropriate to consider
using extrapolations based on surrogate data. Extrapolation should also not be used over long
periods of time without detailed checks at intervals to confirm the continued validity of the trend.
In the case of periodic data, however, extrapolations will be preliminary and the data point will be
recalculated at a later stage.

Box 2 in this section shows an example in which activity data for forests are available only at
periodic intervals, and data for the most recent years are not yet available. Data for recent years
can be extrapolated on the basis of a consistent trend, or on the basis of appropriate data. It should
be noted, however, that the uncertainty of the extrapolated estimates increases in proportion to the
length of time over which the extrapolation is made. Once the latest set of periodic data becomes

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 11

 4. Time series consistency

available, it will be necessary to recalculate the part of the time series that had been estimated
using trend extrapolation.

The example in Box 2 assumes a linear extrapolation, which is likely to be appropriate for the
forestland category. Non-linear extrapolations are possible, and may be more appropriate given an
observed trend, (e.g. exponential growth in the use of ODS (ozonosphere damaging substances)
substitutes). Countries using non-linear extrapolation should provide clear documentation for the
choice and explain why it is more appropriate than linear extrapolation.

Box 2 — Case study on periodic data, using extrapolation

Consider a case where a national forest inventory is conducted every five years. Estimates of several
types of required data (e.g. tree growth) will therefore only be obtained at certain intervals. On the
assumption that growth is on average reasonably stable between years, inventory estimates for the
years after the last available data should be made using extrapolations of past estimates (i.e. tree-
growth trends). As shown in the figure below, a biomass estimate for 2005 for a plot is obtained in this
way, although the latest measurement was made in 2000. The trend between 1995 and 2000 is simply
extrapolated linearly. In practice, a log scale might be used to accommodate exponential behaviour, but
this is not considered for this simple example. Also, extrapolation can be improved using surrogate
data or more sophisticated modelling taking into account parameters influencing the parameter we
want to extrapolate.

Linear Extrapolation in AFOLU

Actual (Periodic) Data) Original Extrapolation

65

60
Tree Growth

55

50

45

40
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year

NB: AFOLU = Agriculture Forestry and Land Use

Unlike periodically available data, when data are not available for the first years in the time series
(e.g. base year and pre base year data on, for example, waste disposal and land use) there is no
possibility of filling in gaps with future surveys. Trend extrapolation back in time is possible but
should be done in combination with other splicing techniques such as surrogate data and overlap.
Some countries that have undergone significant administrative and economic transitions since
1990 do not have consistent activity data sets for the entire time series, particularly if national data
sets covered different geographic areas in previous years. To extrapolate backwards in these cases,

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 12

 4. Time series consistency

it is necessary to analyse the relationship between different activity data sets for different periods,
possibly using multiple surrogate data sets.

2.5 Other techniques

In some cases, it may be necessary to develop a customised approach to best estimate the
emissions over time. For example, the standard alternatives may not be valid when technical
conditions are changing throughout the time series (e.g. due to the introduction of mitigation
technology). In this case, it will be necessary to carefully consider the trends in all factors known
to influence emissions over the period. Where customised approaches are used, it is good practice
to document them thoroughly, and in particular to give special consideration to how the resultant
emissions estimates compare to those that would be developed using the more standard
alternatives.

2.6 Selecting the most appropriate technique

The choice of splicing technique involves expert judgement, and depends on an expert assessment
of the volatility of emissions trend, the availability of data for two overlapping methods, the
adequacy and availability of surrogate data sets, and the number of years of missing data.
Table 2-1 summarises the requirements for each technique and suggests situations in which they
may or may not be appropriate. Countries should use Table 2-1 as a guide rather than a
prescription.

Table 2-1 Summary of splicing techniques

Approach Applicability Comments
Overlap Data necessary to apply both the o Most reliable when the overlap between
previously used and the new method two or more sets of annual estimates can
must be available for at least one be assessed.
year, preferably more. o If the trends observed using the previously
used and new methods are inconsistent,
this approach is not good practice.
Surrogate data Emission factors, activity data or o Multiple indicative data sets (singly or in
other estimation parameters used in combination) should be tested in order to
the new method are strongly determine the most strongly correlated.
correlated with other well-known o Should not be done for long periods.
and more readily available indicative
data.
Interpolation Data needed for recalculation using o Estimates can be linearly interpolated for
the new method are available for the periods when the new method cannot
intermittent years during the time be applied.
series. o The method is not applicable in the case of
large annual fluctuations.
Trend Data for the new method are not o Most reliable if the trend over time is
extrapolation collected annually and are not constant.
available at the beginning or the end o Should not be used if the trend is changing
of the time series. (in this case, the surrogate method may be
more appropriate).
o Should not be done for long periods.
Other techniques The standard alternatives are not o Document customised approaches
valid when technical conditions are thoroughly.
changing throughout the time series o Compare results with standard techniques.
(e.g. due to the introduction of

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 13

 4. Time series consistency

mitigation technology).

3 Reporting and documentation of trend information

If the same method and data sources are used throughout the time series, and there have been no
recalculations, then following the reporting guidance for each category should be sufficient to
ensure transparency. Generally, countries should explain inventory trends for each category,
giving particular attention to outliers, trend changes, and extreme trends. Countries should provide
additional documentation if they have recalculated previous estimates and if they have used the
techniques in this chapter to splice methodologies.

Recalculations: in addition to following the category-specific guidance on each category

provided in the sectoral volumes, countries should clearly document any recalculations. The
documentation should explain the reason for the recalculation and the effect of the recalculation
on the time series. Countries can also include a graph that shows the relationship between the
previous data trend and the new data trend. Table 3-1 provides an example of how recalculations
can be documented either for reporting purposes or for internal tracking.

Table 3-1 Category-specific documentation of recalculations

Category/Gas Emissions (Gg)
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Previous Data (PD)

Latest Data (LD)
Difference in percent
=100●[(LD–PD)/PD]
Documentation (reason for recalculation):

Splicing techniques: countries should provide documentation of any splicing techniques used to
complete a time series. The documentation should identify the years in which data for the method
were not available, the splicing technique used, and any surrogate or overlap data used. Graphical
plots, such as those shown in subsection 2.1 of the present chapter, can be useful tools for
documenting and explaining the application of splicing techniques.

Mitigation: the category-specific guidance in the sectoral volumes provides targeted guidance on
specific information that should be reported for each category, including mitigation and
reductions. Generally, countries should document the approach used to track mitigation activities
and provide all relevant parameters such as abatement utilisation, destruction efficiency, updated
emission factors, etc.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 14

 4. Time series consistency

4 Time series consistency QA/QC

The most effective way to ensure the quality of a time series is to apply both general and category-
specific checks to the entire time series (see Chapter 6, Inventory management, improvement and
QA/QC). For example, the outlier and implied emission factor checks in Chapter 6 will help to
identify possible inconsistencies in the time series. Category-specific checks are particularly
important because they are targeted to unique features of each category.

As described above, plotting and comparing the results of splicing techniques on a graph is a
useful QA/QC strategy. If alternative splicing methods produce different results, countries should
consider which result is most realistic. In some cases, additional surrogate data can be used to
check the spliced time series.

A side-by-side comparison of recalculated estimates with previous estimates can be a useful check
on the quality of a recalculation. This can be done through a tabular comparison as shown in
Table 3-1, or as a graphical plot. It is important to note, however, that higher Tier methods may
produce different trends than lower Tier methods because they more accurately reflect actual
conditions. Differences in trends do not necessarily suggest a problem with the recalculated
estimate.

Where it is possible to use more than one approach in tracking the effects of mitigation activities,
countries should compare the results of multiple approaches. If the results differ by more than
would be expected, it is good practice to explain the reason for the differences and evaluate
whether or not a different approach should be used. For disaggregated higher Tier estimates,
implied emission factors can be a useful tool for checking the consistency of the trend and the
plausibility of mitigation estimates.

In some cases activity data collection may have been interrupted or drastically changed. This
situation causes challenges for time series consistency. In this situation it is good practice to
examine closely documentation of the previous data collection system to get a good understanding
of how changes in data collection, including definitions and delimitations, have affected the data
used in the inventory and any implications for inconsistencies in time-series. If appropriate
documentation is not available, an alternative is to compile indicators (e.g. emissions per unit
production or emissions per car) and compare these between countries with a similar economic
structure, across time series and in the overlap of the two data collection methods.

In some cases a country may have undergone changes in geographical coverage, e.g. a country
may have divided into two or more new countries. In this situation it is good practice to compare
the inventory data with estimates from regional statistics for the years prior to the split. It can also
be recommended to collaborate with other countries that were once part of the same country to
ensure completeness and avoid-double counting. If regional statistics are not available and such
collaboration is not possible, it is good practice to compare appropriate indicators as described
above for the country prior to a split with the data used in the inventory.

If inconsistencies are identified, it is good practice to correct them and, if necessary, apply
appropriate splicing techniques as described in this chapter.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 15

 4. Time series consistency

5 References
IPCC (2006), 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, IPCC National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Hayama,
Japan, (www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.htm).
IPCC (2000), Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse
Gas Inventories, IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, the Institute for Global
Environmental Strategies (IGES), Hayama, Japan,
(www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gp/english/).
USEPA (2004), Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2003, United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), National Service Center for Environmental
Publications (NSCEP),
(www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/emission)

6 Point of enquiry
Enquiries concerning this chapter should be directed to the co-chairs of the Task Force on
Emission Inventories and Projections (TFEIP). Please refer to the TFEIP website
(www.tfeip-secretariat.org/) for the contact details of the current co-chairs.

EMEP/EEA emission inventory guidebook 2009 16