1 / 25

European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EG (published 22/12/2000)

European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EG (published 22/12/2000). European policy. Target:. Good water status. Means:. River basin management plans. input. analysis monitoring programmes measurement programmes. reporting. What is ‘a good status’?. Depends on :

jersey
Télécharger la présentation

European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EG (published 22/12/2000)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EG (published 22/12/2000) European policy

  2. Target: Good water status Means: River basin management plans input analysis monitoring programmes measurement programmes • reporting

  3. What is ‘a good status’? Depends on : characterization of the water body natural water body (rivers, lakes, transitional, coastal waters) heavily modified water body (HMWB) artificial water body normative definitions

  4. Analyses 1st time 2004 2nd time 2013 further 6-yearly Characteristics of surface water (characterization/reference status) and GW Assessment of effects of human activities (= impacts) Economic analysis

  5. State and trend monitoring (every six year an intensive campaign throughout the year - all quality aspects) Operational monitoring (‘threatened’ bodies of water) (at least once every 3 years - or six months - relevant quality aspects) Monitoring on closer investigation Additional monitoring for protected areas Monitoring

  6. Quality element Rivers Lakes Transitional Coastal Biological Phytoplankton 6 months 6 months 6 months 6 months Other aquatic flora 3 years 3 years 3 years 3 years Macro-invertebrates 3 years 3 years 3 years 3 years Fish 3 years 3 years 3 years Hydromorphological Continuity 6 years Hydrology continuous 1 month Morphology 6 years 6 years 6 years 6 years Physico-chemical Thermal conditions 3 months 3 months 3 months 3 months Oxygenation 3 maanden 3 months 3 months 3 months Salinity 3 months 3 months 3 months Nutrient status 3 months 3 months 3 months 3 months Acidification status 3 months 3 months Other pollutants 3 months 3 months 3 months 3 months Priority substances 1 month 1 month 1 month 1 month

  7. Proposals ecological status ? ? ? ? 0 1 Bad Poor Moderate Good High Ecological quality classes Intercalibration

  8. WGs & Guidances on technical issues Analysis of pressures and impacts (= IMPRESS) Designation of heavily modified water bodies (HMWB) REFCOND (+ classification of inland surface w) Typology and classification of transitional/coastal waters Intercalibration protocol Economic analysis (= WATECO) Monitoring protocol (= MONITORING) Assessment and classification of groundwater River basin planning

  9. SCALE ? • Reporting: • National: River Basin • international: River Basin District • Data collection: catchment level, site level ?

  10. REFCOND • Environmental Quality Ratio’s (EQRs) • Establishment of Intercalibration Network • Intercalibration exercise

  11. IMPRESS-Analysis: Need • Central role of IMPRESS analysis in River Basin Management Planning • Identify human activities that put the Directive’s environmental objectives at risk:  Pressures according to Annex II, WFD

  12. Pressures and impacts analysis Results used to: Identification of potential reference sites (Annex II) Design of programmes of measures (Article 11) Identification of water bodies for which alternative objectives may be appropriate (Article 4) Identification of potential inter-calibration sites (Annex V) Information for use in water body identification and refinement (Annex II) Design of monitoring programmes (Article 8) Information for producing an interim overview of the significant water management issues (Article 14) Information for use in the economic analysis of water use (Article 5)

  13. Identify pressures Conditions required to achieve the objectives Annex III economic analysis (WATECO) Identify potential relevant effects of pressures (i.e. the hazard) IMPRESS: key elements of the analysis Characteristics of water bodies that determine their susceptibility Assess susceptibility to the effects of pressures Magnitude of pressures Identify likely effects of pressures Decide on the likelihood of failing to achieve the Directive’s environmental objectives Environmental conditions required to achieve objectives

  14. Identify pressures use existing monitoring data Use existing monitoring information to help identify pressures Identify potential relevant effects of pressures (i.e. the hazard) Assess susceptibility to the effects of pressures Use existing monitoring information to help validate and refine the assessments of the effects of identified pressures Identify likely effects of pressures Where existing monitoring information shows significant effects (even if pressures responsible have not been identified) use to help identify bodies at risk Identify water bodies at risk of failing to achieve the Directive‘s objectives

  15. IMPRESS “OPEN” ISSUE Uncertainty in pressures and impacts risk analysis The first round of pressures and impacts analysis (2004) will largely be based on existing information. These first risk assessments will contain more uncertainty than the subsequent rounds of analyses (Definition of ‘good status’; precedes surveillance and operational monitoring). Where there is ‘significant’ uncertainty around the risk assessment for a water body, should member states report on these water bodies as “at risk” and monitor them?

  16. Iterative process update with monitoring data more uncertainty in first risk assessment than in subsequent rounds 2 Greatest uncertainty in assessment of which side of good-moderate boundary a water body really lies 2 Uncertainties in the analyses 1stIMPRESS Report 1 2005 Intercalibration completed 2006 Area of greatest uncertainty should be a focus for the monitoring programmes Monitoring started 2007 Good status Less than or better good status Uncertainty in values for boundary between good and moderate status 1

  17. Examples of tools or current practice of some Member States Flow regulation and hydromorphological pressures in the River Maana in Norway Finnish classification system of water quality Morphological alterations reporting in Netherlands England and Wales River Ecosystem Classification scheme Groundwater abstraction in Denmark Belgium pollution pressure quantification tool France pressure screening and quantification methods Germany using the LAWA pressure screening criteria for pilot project „Middle Rhine“ Quantification of pollution pressures in Portugal Spain water abstraction and water flow regulation modelling

  18. General Water Quality PlansFlanders (Belgium)Water QualitySurface WatersFlanders region A. Van de Maelestraat 96 9320 Erembodegem Belgium

  19. DPSIR vs. GWQP2 DRIVING FORCES RESPONSE MEASURES PRESSURES Discharges (Emissions) Discharge (Emission) reduction Inflow (Immissions) Inflow (Immission) reduction Surface Water Quality Status STATE IMPACTS

  20. MEASURES Discharges (emission) HOUSEHOLDS Discharge (emission) reduction LEVIES INDUSTRY DIFFUSE COSTS SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE SCENARIO ANALYSIS Inflow (immission) Inflow (immission) reduction Water course Water column Waterbottom suspended solids Biota Biological Fysical-chemical Bacteriological Standardised load Measured load Impact assessment Load reduction Surface Water Quality Status

  21. Households Industry Farms E I E E1 I E E E1 E1 WWTP fertilizers manure I1 Land domestic / urban air I1 I1 soil E2 groundwater E2 Sludge I2 I I I I2 air SURFACE WATER X water quality status Water column Water bottom Legend : E = emission 1 = 1st order I = immisson 2 = 2d order Partitioning and self-purification

  22. LOAD REDUCTION FOR NITROGEN (RIVER BASIN IJZER - VHA-area level) (standard: 16 mg N/l)

  23. LOAD REDUCTION FOR NITROGEN (RIVER BASIN IJZER - VHA-area level) (standard: 2.2 mg N/l)

More Related