Dataset Information

River pollution by priority chemical substances under the Water Framework Directive: A provisional pan-European assessment.

ABSTRACT: In this paper, we build a preliminary inventory of dissolved phase water emissions of 36 of the 45 chemical priority substances under the European Union's Water Framework Directive. For point sources, we consider the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR) containing reported emissions from major industrial facilities. We consider all other sources as diffuse, and we estimate European average chemical emission factors from available measurements of dissolved phase concentrations, assuming simple emission patterns such as population and agricultural land. The emission inventory enables modelling concentrations, which have been compared with independent measurements. Due to the way they are estimated, they cannot withstand a point-by-point comparison. However, predicted concentrations exhibit a frequency distribution and order of magnitude compatible with observations, and match a fair proportion of independently reported exceedances of environmental quality standards for many of the substances studied. While apparently a preliminary picture based on crude simplifications, our representation suggests that simple drivers such as population and agriculture are useful to describe chemical pollution at European scale. From our preliminary inventory, E-PRTR industrial point emissions seem to account for a relatively small share of total emissions. Consequently, apart from specific measures such as upgrades to urban wastewater treatment plants in certain high impact areas, the management of priority substances may require a more strategic approach to emission control, addressing chemical use across sectors and the management of out-phased, legacy chemicals. At the same time, we advocate that improving emission inventories requires monitoring data reflecting the variability of emission patterns across Europe, as presently available monitoring data do not enable a catchment-specific estimation of emissions.

SUBMITTER: Pistocchi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6391594 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

River pollution by priority chemical substances under the Water Framework Directive: A provisional pan-European assessment.

Pistocchi Alberto A Dorati Chiara C Aloe Alberto A Ginebreda Antoni A Marcé Rafael R

The Science of the total environment 20190109

In this paper, we build a preliminary inventory of dissolved phase water emissions of 36 of the 45 chemical priority substances under the European Union's Water Framework Directive. For point sources, we consider the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR) containing reported emissions from major industrial facilities. We consider all other sources as diffuse, and we estimate European average chemical emission factors from available measurements of dissolved phase concentration ...[more]

PMID: 30690377

Similar Datasets

Project description:A critical review of the last 25 years of dioxin policy in the Elbe river catchment is presented along seven main theses of the River Basin Community (RBC)-Elbe background document "Pollutants" for the Management Plan 2016-2021. In this period, polychlorinated dibenzodioxins/-furans (PCDD/Fs) and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (dl-PCBs) will play a major role: (i) as new priority substances for which environmental quality standards (EQSs) need to be derived (Directive 2013/39/EC); (ii) in the search for innovative solutions in sediment remediation (i.e., respecting the influence of mechanical processes; Flood Risk Directive 2007/60/EC); and (iii) as indicators at the land-sea interface (Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC). In the Elbe river catchment, aspects of policy and science are closely connected, which became particularly obvious in a classic example of dioxin hot spot contamination, the case of the Spittelwasser creek. Here, the "source-first principle" of the first cycle of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) had to be confirmed in a controversy on the dioxin hot spots with Saxony-Anhalt's Agency for Contaminated Sites (LAF). At the Spittelwasser site, the move from "inside the creek" to "along the river banks" goes parallel to a general paradigm shift in retrospective risk assessment frameworks and remediation techniques for organic chemicals (Ortega-Calvo et al. 2015). With respect to dioxin, large-scale stabilization applying activated carbon additions is particularly promising. Another important aspect is the assessment of the ecotoxicology of dioxins and dl- PCBs in context of sediment mobility and flood risk assessment, which has been studied in the project framework FloodSearch. Currently, the quality goals of the WFD to reach a "good chemical status" are not met in many catchment areas because substances such as mercury do and others probably will (PCDD/Fs and dl-PCB) exceed biota-EQS values catchment area-wide. So far, relating biota-EQS values to sediment-EQSs is not possible. To overcome these limitations, the DioRAMA project was initiated, which has led to improved approaches for the assessment of dioxin-contaminated sediment using in vitro bioassays and to a robust dataset on the interrelation between dioxins and dioxin-like compounds in sediments and biota.

Project description:European Union Directive 2013/39/EU, which amended and updated the Water Framework Directive (WFD; 2000/60/EC) and its daughter directive (2008/105/EC), sets Environmental Quality Standards for biota (EQSbiota ) for a number of bioaccumulative chemicals. These chemicals pose a threat to both aquatic wildlife and human health via the consumption of contaminated prey or the intake of contaminated food originating from the aquatic environment. EU member states will need to establish programs to monitor the concentration of 11 priority substances in biota and assess compliance against these new standards for the classification of surface water bodies. An EU-wide guidance effectively addresses the implementation of EQSbiota . Flexibility is allowed in the choice of target species used for monitoring to account for both diversity of habitats and aquatic community composition across Europe. According to that guidance, the consistency and comparability of monitoring data across member states should be enhanced by adjusting the data on biota contaminant concentrations to a standard trophic level by use of the appropriate trophic magnification factor (TMF), a metric of contaminant biomagnification through the food web. In this context, the selection of a TMF value for a given substance is a critical issue, because this field-derived measure of trophic magnification can show variability related to the characteristics of ecosystems, the biology and ecology of organisms, the experimental design, and the statistical methods used for TMF calculation. This paper provides general practical advice and guidance for the selection or determination of TMFs for reliable application within the context of the WFD (i.e., adjustment of monitoring data and EQS derivation). Based on a series of quality attributes for TMFs, a decision tree is presented to help end users select a reasonable and relevant TMF. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:266-277. © 2018 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Project description:The aim of European water policy is to achieve good ecological status in all rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters by 2027. Currently, more than half of water bodies are in a degraded condition and nutrient enrichment is one of the main culprits. Therefore, there is a pressing need to establish reliable and comparable nutrient criteria that are consistent with good ecological status. This paper highlights the wide range of nutrient criteria currently in use by Member States of the European Union to support good ecological status and goes on to suggest that inappropriate criteria may be hindering the achievement of good status. Along with a comprehensive overview of nutrient criteria, we provide a critical analysis of the threshold concentrations and approaches by which these are set. We identify four essential issues: (1) Different nutrients (nitrogen and/or phosphorus) are used for different water categories in different countries. (2) The use of different nutrient fractions (total, dissolved inorganic) and statistical summary metrics (e.g., mean, percentiles, seasonal, annual) currently hampers comparability between countries, particularly for rivers, transitional and coastal waters. (3) Wide ranges in nutrient threshold values within shared water body types, in some cases showing more than a 10-fold difference in concentrations. (4) Different approaches used to set threshold nutrient concentrations to define the boundary between "good" and "moderate" ecological status. Expert judgement-based methods resulted in significantly higher (less stringent) good-moderate threshold values compared with data-driven approaches, highlighting the importance of consistent and rigorous approaches to criteria setting. We suggest that further development of nutrient criteria should be based on relationships between ecological status and nutrient concentrations, taking into account the need for comparability between different water categories, water body types within these categories, and countries.

Dataset Information

River pollution by priority chemical substances under the Water Framework Directive: A provisional pan-European assessment.

Publications

River pollution by priority chemical substances under the Water Framework Directive: A provisional pan-European assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets