The Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates Directive - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – The Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates Directive PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 7742ef-ZjQ0N



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

The Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates Directive

Description:

Session 4. Future requirements The Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates Directive types of data that are needed possible implications for the agricultural ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:48
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 40
Provided by: AnL73
Learn more at: http://jova.bioforsk.no
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: The Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates Directive


1
Session 4. Future requirements
  • The Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates
    Directive
  • types of data that are needed
  • possible implications for the agricultural
    monitoring
  • possible approaches and adaptations.
  • HELCOM and OSPAR reporting
  • what type of data are needed
  • and how can this reporting be supported by
    monitoring activities

2
WFD objectives
  • protection of ALL water resources (ground water,
    reservoirs, rivers, lakes, transitional and
    coastal waters)
  • prevention of further deterioration of surface
    waters
  • rational use of water based on precautionary
    polluter pays principle
  • water management based on river basins
  • getting the citizen involved more closely
  • streamlining legislation (Urban Waste Water
    Treatment Directive, the Nitrates Directive, and
    the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control
    Directive)
  • "combined approach" of emission limit values and
    quality standards
  • achieving good surface water status all over EU
    (15 yr)

3
Achieving good surface water status all over EU
before 2015
  • Determined by chemical and ecological status
  • Chemical status
  • concentrations of specific pollutants not
    exceeding specified levels
  • Ecological status
  • expression of the quality of the structure and
    functioning of aquatic ecosystems

4
Quality elements for ecological status
Biological Quality Elements (e.g. macrobenthos,
zooplankton, fish)
5
Time table for WFD 2003-2006
Identifying river basin districts
Transposition in national legislation
2003
Characterization of surface water types
2004
Reference condition
Ecological quality classification
Identifying pressures and impacts
Monitoring strategies, (Intercalibration, EQR)
and public consultation
2005-6
6
Setting the Ecological Quality Ratio (EQR) for
Classification of surface waters
Reference value
EQR

Parameter value
Biological quality elements
7
Assessment of goal achievement
Per Stålnacke Jordforsk - Norwegian Centre for
Soil and Environmental Research per.stalnacke_at_jor
dforsk.no
8
Helcom Recommendations and EU Directives
  • All the Baltic Sea countries except Russia have
    obligations to implement the EU Directives and
    Regulations as well as HELCOM recommendations
    concerning agricultural, municipal and industrial
    nutrient load reductions
  • Revision of the HELCOM targets/goals after PLC-4
    in 2003

9
Agricultural nutrient emissions and losses to
waters will be crucial parameters for the
determination of the chemical/ecological status
in river basins and in the RBMP
River basin district
10
Emissions of nitrogen to surface waters in the
Baltic Sea basin in the 1980sSource Stålnacke,
1996
11
Have the nutrient emissions from agriculture
decreased in the Baltic Sea basin?
12
Anthropogenic flow-normalised nitrogen load
from agriculture (SYKEI, 2002)
13
Anthropogenic flow-normalised nitrogen load
from agriculture (SYKE, 2002)
Monitored decrease in agricultural catchments
14
Anthropogenic flow-normalised nitrogen load
from agriculture (SYKE, 2002)
Modelled decrease
15
Anthropogenic flow-normalised nitrogen load
from agriculture (SYKE, 2002)
River catchment monitoring
Monitoring agricultural catchments
16
Anthropogenic flow-normalised nitrogen load
from agriculture (SYKE, 2002)
Extrapolation from other countries Agricultural
statistics
17
Anthropogenic flow-normalised phosphorus load
from agriculture (SYKE, 2002)
18
Have the rivers responded to the decreased
nutrient emissions from agriculture ?
19
The large-scale experiment in EasternEurope
20
Large drop in commercial fertiliser use (60-90)
Latvia
21
Dramatic decline in livestock (50-75)
22
Emajogi (Estonia) ?
Daugava and Lielupe River (Latvia) ?
Tisza (Hungary) ?
In addition literature review
23
Strong evidence of riverine response of nitrogen
in Hungary (Stålnacke et al)
24
Some evidence of riverine response of nitrogen in
Estonia Loigu et al (in prep)
25
Weak evidence of riverine response of nitrogen in
Latvia Stålnacke et al (manuscript)
26
Weak evidence of riverine response of nitrogen in
Latvia Stålnacke et al (manuscript)
27
No/weak evidence of riverine response of
phosphorus in Estonia Stålnacke et al (in prep)
28
Evidence of riverine response of phosphorus in
Latvia Stålnacke et al (manuscript)
29
Reported trends in nutrient concentrations in
Eastern Europe Stålnacke et al (submitted)
30
The most important hydrological
processes/pathways as regards nitrogen and
phosphorus losses from diffuse sources to surface
waters (e.g. first-order streams).Source
Borgvang and Selvik (2000).
31
Pathways of nitrogen in Denmark (Grant et al.,
1997)
32
Hydrological response to various tile drainage
spacings (Deelstra et al., 1998)
33
Huge retention in first-order streamsVagtad et
al., 1999)
34
The Rothamsted experiment (UK)(Addiscott, 1988)
35
Factors that contribute to the delay in riverine
responses
  • Wet soil conditions (e.g. poorly drained soils,
    groundwater table)
  • Long residence times for water in soil and
    or/catchment (e.g hydrological pathways, tile
    drain spacing)
  • High carbon content in soils (organic matter)
  • High soil pH (ammonia volatilisation)
  • Natural variability (e.g., hydrometeorological
    variation)

36
Natural variation in nutrient losses may impede
the detection of existing trends
Observed and flow-normalised nitrate-Nnitrite-N
loads in the Rönneå River (S Sweden) Source
Anders Grimvall
37
Natural variation in nutrient losses may impede
the detection of existing trends
Observed and flow-normalised nitrate-N load on
the Elbe River at Schnackenburg. After Hussain
et al (in prep.)
38
Assessment of goal achievementsCONCLUSIONS
  • Nutrient levels have in some cases responded and
    in others not responded to the decrease in
    agricultural emissions
  • Extensive cuts in nutrient inputs do not
    necessarily cause an immediate response,
    particularly in medium-sized and large catchment
    areas
  • Hydrological conditions and hydrological pathways
    are important for the understanding of the
    retention of nutrient and thus for riverine
    response to changes in agricultural emissions
  • Separation of natural and human impact
    nutrient-loss variability is important

39
CONCLUDING REMARK
  • There is a need to further develop methodologies
    by which to measure diffuse agricultural loading,
    as well as generally accepted methodologies for
    determining discharges/losses from diffuse
    sources into surface waters
  • Laane et al., 2002
About PowerShow.com