European Perspective on Integrated Management of Reactive...
Transcript of European Perspective on Integrated Management of Reactive...
-
www.ecn.nl
European Perspective on Integrated Management of Reactive Nitrogen
Jan Willem Erisman, ECN, The Netherlands
-
2 20-10-2008
Summary
• Negative environmental impacts have been observed• Effects translated into effect parameters (indicators) and set long-
term targets for sustainability• Indicators used for risk assessment through Integrated
Assessment Modelling, Best Available Techniques and cost-benefit analysis
• Aim: limit exceedance of limits against lowest cost through targeted policies and measures
• Losses to air and water decreased• Up till now: focus on water and air separate• Future: TFRN will aim for integrative approach
-
3 20-10-2008
Outline of presentation
• N in Europe: the issues• N policies and their success• A proposal for integrated nitrogen approach• Comparison between the US and Europe• Conclusions
-
4 20-10-2008
100 years (and 1 week) Haber Process
Erisman et al., 2008
-
5 20-10-2008
Trends in human population and nitrogen use
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
1900 1950 2000
Wor
ld p
opul
atio
n (m
illion
s)
0
10
20
30
40
50
% w
orld
pop
ulat
ion,
ferti
lizer
inpu
t, m
eat p
rodu
ctio
n
world population
world population(no Haber BoschN)% world populationfed by HaberBosch Naverage fertilizerinput (kg N / ha/year)meat production(kg / person / year)
-
6 20-10-2008
Past and future global N fertilizer consumption 1900-2100
0
50
100
150
200
250
1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
Tg N
A1 – technol / globalA2 – technol / regionalB1 – environm /globalB2 – environm / regionalTilman et al, 2001FAO, 2000 (baseline)FAO, 2000 (improved)
A1
0
50
100
150
200
250
1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
Tg N
A1 – technol / globalA2 – technol / regionalB1 – environm /globalB2 – environm / regionalTilman et al, 2001FAO, 2000 (baseline)FAO, 2000 (improved)
0
50
100
150
200
250
1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
Tg N
A1 – technol / globalA2 – technol / regionalB1 – environm /globalB2 – environm / regionalTilman et al, 2001FAO, 2000 (baseline)FAO, 2000 (improved)
A2 B1 B2
efficiency increasediet optimizationbiofuelsfood equitypopulation growth
A1 A2 B1 B2
efficiency increasediet optimizationbiofuelsfood equitypopulation growth
A1 A2 B1 B2
efficiency increasediet optimizationbiofuelsfood equitypopulation growth
Erisman et al. 2008
We need a new invention that will change the world the coming 100 years
-
7 20-10-2008
Fossil fuels/energy and nitrogen
• NOx emissions from combustion
• Fertilizer production• Globalisation through
transport• Increased production
through increased manpower
• Biofuels/bioenergy will require more fertilizer use
Energy, transport and industry
-
8 20-10-2008
The reactive nitrogen formation and cascade
Sources EffectsCascade through the environment
-
www.ecn.nl
Nitrogen policies in Europe
-
10 20-10-2008
Changing insights on role of N in water and air
• 1920s: N in water contribute to algal growth• 1940s: NO3 in drinking water has toxic effects on babies• 1960s: N from sewage contribute to algal growth• 1970s: N from agriculture contribute to algal growth• 1980s: Managed pastures contribute to NO3 leaching
• 1972: United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm
• 1980s: ‘das Waldsterben’
-
11 20-10-2008
Policies on nitrogen in air Europe
1979: UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP)1988: NOX Protocol UNECE-CLRTAP1999: Gothenburg Protocol
- 1984: EU Air Framework Directive (84/360/EEC), - 1989: EU Large Combustion Plant Directive 88/609- 1996: EU Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (96/61/EC- 1999: EU Air Quality Directive (1999/30/EC) - 2000: EU National Emission Ceilings Directive (2001/81/EC) - 2005: EU Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution
- 1997: UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol
Artic Ocean
Atlantic Pacific Ocean
SloveniaHungarySlovakia
PolandLithuaniaLatvia
EstoniaFinland
Armenia
Sweden
Georgia
Norway
BelarusCzech Rep.Ukraine
Denmark
MoldovaGermany
YugoslaviaAustria
BulgariaLiechtenstein
TurkeyItalyMonaco
Cyprus
Switzerland
Malta
Netherlands
Greece
Belgium
F.Y.R.ofMacedonia
Luxembourg
Albania
FranceBosnia andHerzegovina
SpainCroatia
Portugal
IrelandUnited Kingdom
Romania
Russian Federation
Iceland
Kara SeaBarents Sea
North Sea
Atlantic Ocean
Mediterranean Sea
Black Sea Caspian SeaAral Sea
Canada
of America
Kyrgyzstan
Artic Ocean
Atlantic Pacific Ocean
SloveniaHungarySlovakia
PolandLithuaniaLatviaEstonia
Finland
Armenia
Sweden
Georgia
Norway
BelarusCzech Rep.Ukraine
Denmark
MoldovaGermany
Serbia and Montenegro
AustriaBulgaria
Liechtenstein
TurkeyItalyMonaco
Cyprus
Switzerland
Malta
Netherlands
Greece
Belgium
F.Y.R.ofMacedonia
Luxembourg
Albania
FranceBosnia andHerzegovina
SpainCroatia
Portugal
IrelandUnited Kingdom
Romania
Russian Federation
Iceland
Kara SeaBarents Sea
North Sea
Atlantic Ocean
Mediterranean Sea
Black Sea Caspian SeaAral Sea
Canada
United Statesof America
Kyrgyzstan
Kazakhstan
Azerbaijan
UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE
-
12 20-10-2008
Effect based approach based on ecosystem critical loads
eq ha-1a-1
< 200200 - 400400 - 700700 - 10001000 - 1500> 1500
CLnut(N) percentile 5
MNP/CCE
Critical load: “the highest deposition of (…) below which harmful effects in ecosystem structure and function do not occur according to present knowledge”
= long-term ecosystem capacity against eutrophication, acidification, heavy metal effects
used as sustainability indicators for policy guidance
-
13 20-10-2008
Excess of critical loads for eutrophication
Percentage of ecosystems area with nitrogen deposition above critical loads using grid-average deposition. Calculation for 1997 meteorology
2000 2020 2020 Current legislation Max. feas. reductions
-
14 20-10-2008
Policies on nitrogen in air in Europe: Industry and traffic: decreasing NOX emissions
• Instruments:- Regulatory limits and standards - Regulatory ceilings (from flat-rates to
critical loads) - Economic instruments (charges,
subsidies)• Measures:
- Best available techniques (BATs)- (Structural measures: changes in energy
sources, transport)• Effects:
- In EU-25 in 2006 a decrease in NOXemissions of ~34% relative 1980
- A further decrease needed of ~27% to reach 2010 ceilings
- Side effects: increases in energy use, NH3, N2O, CO2 emissions
Source: EEA
-
15 20-10-2008
0500
1000150020002500300035004000
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
kton
nes
of N
H3
Other
Waste
Agriculture
Other Transport
Road Transport
Industry
Fugitive Emissions
Energy Industries
2010: CLRTAP Gothenburg Protocol, 1Dec. 19992010 NECD Target
Policies on nitrogen in air in Europe: Agriculture: decreasing NH3 emissions
• Instruments:- Permits for large pig and poultry
operations- Regulatory ceilings (based on
critical loads) • Measures:
- Best available techniques (BATs)- (milk quota system, less fertilizer)
• Effects: - In EU-15 in 2006 a decrease in NH3
emissions of ~19% relative 1980- A further decrease needed of ~2 -
30% to reach 2010/2020 ceilings- Side effects: increase in N2O
emissions and NO3 leaching
-
16 20-10-2008
Changes in NH3 emissions
-60% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30%
Spain
Ireland
Norway
Austria
France
Sweden
Italy
Portugal
Luxembourg
Greece
EU15
Belgium
Liechtenstein
United Kingdom
Germany
Finland
Denmark
Netherlands
% change from 1990 to target (1999 & National Ceilings 2010)
1990 - 2001 1990 - 2010 NECD Target
☺
Source: EEA
-
17 20-10-2008
Policies on nitrogen in water Europe
• 1972: Helsinki Convention / OSCOM / PARCOM• 1976: Mediterranean Action Plan• 1992: HELCOM /OSPAR Conventions :50% decrease in N and P loads
• 1991: EU Urban waste water Directive• 1991: EU Nitrates Directive• 2000: EU Water Framework Directive• 2006: Groundwater Directive• 2007: Marine Strategy
-
18 20-10-2008
Policies on nitrogen in water in Europe:Urban waste: Decreasing N loading to surface waters
• Instruments:- Regulations for collecting &
treatment- Regulatory limits for discharges
• Measures: - Collection of sewage- Treatment
• Effects: - Decrease in N loading of
surface waters by ~40%- Regional diverse
-
19 20-10-2008
Policies on nitrogen in water in Europe:Agriculture: Decreasing NO3 leaching losses
• Instruments:- Regulatory limits on the use of fertilizers
and animal manure- Communicative instruments - Economic (through Cross compliance
regulations)• Measures:
- Codes of Good Agricultural Practices- Zoning, Nitrate Vulnerable Zones- Action Programs
• Effects: - Decrease in fertilizer N use of ~5%- Changes in agricultural practices- Not much change in NO3 concentrations
yet
-
20 20-10-2008
Nitrate concentrations in some rivers
Source: EEA
-
21 20-10-2008
Spatialised Gross Nitrogen Balance indicator
Spatialised gross nitrogen balance (average on 10 km grid), JRC
National N surplus kgN/ha
Source: EEA
-
22 20-10-2008
Successful national examples: the Netherlands• Mineral accounting system• Emission poor housing• Slurry injection• Coverage of manure storage• Maximum manure application
per land use• Decrease of N in concentrates:
lowering urea concentration in milk
• Manure processing • Housing cattle at night• No slurry application in winter• Good agricultural practice• SCR industry and transport• Fuel switch
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1975 1985 1995 2005
Year
N in
put (
Kto
n N
)
0,0
5,0
10,0
15,0
20,0
25,0
30,0
N2O
em
issi
ons
(kto
n) N input to surface waterN in manureNH3 emissionsNort Sea inputNOx emissionsN to agric. SoilsN2O emissions
-
23 20-10-2008
Why are some policies effective?
Combustion UrbanNOx NH3 NO3 Ntot
Few stakeholders x xTechnology driven x x xLow costs (x)Cost to consumers x xKnowledge extensive (x) (x)No yield loss x x x
Agriculture
-
24 20-10-2008
Reasons for being effective
• Regulatory pressure (catalytic converter, MINAS)• No choice and builds good image (catalytic converter)• Cost effectiveness caused by optimization (MINAS)
and emission trading (SCR) and monetizing external costs (fines or taxing)
• Actor is given clear insight in his own actions in relations to the environmental consequences (MINAS)
• Ecological targets for an environmental compartment: effect based approach
-
25 20-10-2008
Reasons for being less effective
• Ambiguous and complex policies, uniform for all systems and conditions
• Complexity: many small diffuse sources with different owners; complex interactions (scale, components)
• Juridical emphasis of the problem; no education, training and persuasion
• Actors do not support/understand the reasoning behind measures (slurry injector less effective than it could be)
• Measures not profitable (low prices, cheap energy/transport); economic optimum is at 50% efficiency or loss
• Lack of integration and no links with economic and structural developmentsMore integrated approach
-
www.ecn.nl
Towards an integrated Nitrogen approach
-
27 20-10-2008
Multiple EU policies affect nitrogen in different sectors
IndustryTransport
Energy
Forests/grass/ecosystems
AgricultureFertilizer
Bird & HabitatDirectiveNature conservation
CAP ReformAnimal welfareRural DevelopmentBiofuels
Kyoto
NEC, CLTRAP
TSIPPC
Nitrate DirectiveWater Framework Directive
Renewable EnergyDirectiveInnovation (Lisboa)IPPC
Euro-5
NH3 N2ONOx
NO3Surface water
NO3 groundwater
N depositionHuman/animal
health
Global changeClimate/biodiversity
-
28 20-10-2008
Strategy towards a successful integrated approachWhat is needed?• Evidence of effects• Develop a concept• Assessment of benefits of an
integral approach• Tools: models; toolboxes• Organization• Communication/education• Policy forum/outlet
-
29 20-10-2008
Water quality monitoring
River stations – EIONET Water EUROWATERNET
Nitrate in groundwater
Source: CEC 2002 Implementation of NitrateDirective
More than 3000 river stations from more than 30 countries –timeseries for many stations from 1992-2002
Evidence
-
30 20-10-2008
Build on the effect based approach for N
• Reduce emissions by increasing nitrogen efficiency• Solve the ‘local problems’ through e.g. the IPPC directive• Established a effect based framework to deal with N in an
integrated manner (Nitrogen ceilings):
Effects
Indicators
Nitrogen Budgets
Emissions/losses
Targets
Concept
-
31 20-10-2008
Integrated modeling system Miterra-Europe
• Ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane emissions from housing, storage and soils
• Nitrate leaching• Interactions between N flows
housing and soils (consistent N budget)
• Measures to mitigate ammonia and nitrate emissions
Oenema et al., 2007
Tools: models
-
32 20-10-2008
Result of integrated model Miterra: pollutant swapping
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
Biofiltration Low NH3applicationtechnique
Coveredstorage
Stableadaptation
Low nitrogenfeed
Incineration Ureasubstitution
NH3 package
NH3 emissionNO3 leachingN2O emission
change in emission, % to situation without measures
Ammonia measures
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
Balancedfertilization
Decreasedapplication onsloping soils
Efficient applicationtechnique
No winterapplication
Winter crops NO3 package
NH3 emissionNO3 leachingN2O emission
change in emission, % to situation without measures
Nitrate measures
Oennema et al., 2008
NH3 NO3
Tools: models
-
33 20-10-2008
Artic Ocean
Atlantic Ocean
Pacific Ocean
SloveniaHungary
Slovakia
Poland
Lithuania
Latvia
Estonia
Finland
Armenia
Sweden
Georgia
Norway
Belarus
Czech Rep. Ukraine
Denmark
Moldova
Germany
Yugoslavia
Austria
Bulgaria
Liechtenstein
Turkey
Italy
Monaco
Cyprus
Switzerland
Malta
Netherlands
Greece
Belgium
F.Y.R.ofMacedonia
Luxembourg
Albania
France
Bosnia andHerzegovina
Spain
Croatia
Portugal
IrelandUnited Kingdom
Romania
Russian Federation
Iceland
Kara SeaBarents Sea
North Sea
Atlantic Ocean
Mediterranean Sea
Black Sea Caspian Sea
Aral Sea
Canada
of America
Kyrgyzstan
Artic Ocean
Atlantic Ocean
Pacific Ocean
SloveniaHungary
Slovakia
Poland
Lithuania
Latvia
Estonia
Finland
Armenia
Sweden
Georgia
Norway
Belarus
Czech Rep. Ukraine
Denmark
Moldova
Germany
Serbia and Montenegro
Austria
Bulgaria
Liechtenstein
Turkey
Italy
Monaco
Cyprus
Switzerland
Malta
Netherlands
Greece
Belgium
F.Y.R.ofMacedonia
Luxembourg
Albania
France
Bosnia andHerzegovina
Spain
Croatia
Portugal
IrelandUnited Kingdom
Romania
Russian Federation
Iceland
Kara SeaBarents Sea
North Sea
Atlantic Ocean
Mediterranean Sea
Black Sea Caspian Sea
Aral Sea
Canada
United Statesof America
Kyrgyzstan
Kazakhstan
Azerbaijan
UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE
Programme Coordinating
Centre
Implementation Committee
ICP Forests
Task Force
Working Groupon Effects
Task Force onEmission Inventories
and Projections
Task Force onMeasurement and
Modelling
Chemical CoordinatingCentre
Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-West
Task Force on Integrated
Assessment ModellingCentre for Integrated
Assessment Modelling
EMEP Steering Body
Expert Group on Ammonia Abatement
Task Forceon POPs
Network of Experts on Benefits and
Economic Instruments
Expert Group on Techno-economic Issues
Working Group onStrategies and
Review
Executive Body
ICPIntegrated Monitoring
Task Force
Task Force Health
ICP Modelling and Mapping
Task Force
ICP Materials
Task ForceICP
Vegetation Task Force
ICP Waters
Task ForceProgramme
Centre
ProgrammeCentre
ProgrammeCentre
CoordinationCenter for
Effects
Main ResearchCentre
Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-East
Task Force onHeavy Metals
Expert Group onParticulate Matter
Task Force onHemispheric Transport of
Air Pollution
Nitrogen and the Convention on LRTAP
Task Force onReactive Nitrogen
Organization
-
34 20-10-2008
Long-term:• To provide technical information to be able
– to develop an integrated vision and approach to abatement of Nr emissions and effects;
– to improve coordination on the development of integrated Nr policies;– to search for synergies between policies on air pollution and other policies;
Short-term activities:• Expert Panel on N balances and budgets• Expert Panel on mitigation of agricultural nitrogen• European Nitrogen Assessment (ENA)• Analyse the linkages across Convention,
plus Convention Biological Diversity and Marine Conventions• Develop Nr related options for revision of the Gothenburg Protocol
Task Force on Reactive Nitrogen: TFRNco-chairs: Mark Sutton (UK) and Oene Oenema (NL)
-
35 20-10-2008
http://www.clrtap-tfrn.org
-
www.nine-esf.org
European Nitrogen Assessment
1. Nitrogen in Europe2. Nitrogen processing in the
atmosphere, aquatic and biosphere system
3. Dispersion and fate of nitrogen on different scales
4. Managing nitrogen in relation to key social threats
5. EU nitrogen policies and future challenges
www.nine-esf.org
-
37 20-10-2008
Communication and visualisationNitroGenius Visualisation tool:
Communication
-
38 20-10-2008
Policy starts to work …..
-
www.ecn.nl
Comparison between Europe and the US
-
40 20-10-2008
N efficiency in EU27 and the US
In the US:• Population less than half• Surface twice as high• N creation a little higher• Less intensive• Atm. emissions 25% higher• N consumption similar• Agricultural N efficiency 8%
lowerthan in Europe
05
101520253035404550
N cre
ated:
per h
a
total
Atmo
sphe
ric in
puts
N co
nsum
ption
Ag N
eff-fe
rtiliz
erAg
Neff
-total
N in
put
Kg/
ha USEurope
Tg
Kg/ha
kg N/pers/yr
%
%
-
41 20-10-2008
A view from Europe• Good science, quantification of the major national N fluxes and the
cascade! Coastal/watershed areas well covered. Good focus on ‘control points’. There is still large uncertainty (50%): ammonia; deposition; regionalisation needed
• Starting point should be the effects and sustainable levels of protection (end points); effect based approach through indicators (metrics) and risk assessment (exceedance of long-term targets)
• Integrated models and assessments to determine optima cot-effective policies (and co-policy e.g. climate change: less meat; manure processing; renewables; CO2 sequestration, ..)
• Focus on N balances/budgets and improvement of efficiency• Visualisation, communication• “struggle with agriculture”
-
www.ecn.nl
Thank you for your [email protected]
-
43 20-10-2008
Conclusions
• Negative environmental impacts have been observed
• Effects translated into effect parameters• Indicators for risk assessment have been
identified (incl. Nitrogen balances/budgets; Neff)
• Risk reduction through Integrated Assessment Modelling, Best Available Techniques and cost-benefit analysis
• Aim: limit exceedance of limits against lowest cost through targeted policies and measures
• Up till now: too much focus on water and air separate
• TFRN will aim for integrative approach
-
44 20-10-2008
Effects of reactive nitrogen in the environment
Overall effects
-
45 20-10-2008
Policies on nitrogen in Europe• Policy responses: Sectoral & species approaches
- Industry/traffic: NOX (NH3, N2O), Norg, NO3- Agriculture: NH3, NO3, N2O, (NH4, Norg)- Urban: Norg, NO3, NH4
• Focus on command and control measures:- Ambient targets- Emission targets- Technology targets - Penalties if limits / targets / standards are not met
• Other factors and processes affecting N- Food production (Common Agricultural Policy)- Rural development and demographic effects- Industrial changes- Changes in traffic, transport, shipping- Energy consumption- Nature and agricultural policies - Climate, etc.
-
46 20-10-2008
European Nitrogen research and policy
European and National policies UNEP, EU, VROM, LNV, TFRN
Integrated Assessment, Policy support
European Nitrogen Assessment Scientific coordination
ScienceKnowledge basis
COST Action on Nitrogen
NinE ESFScience
NitroEuropeIP FP6
National and EU fundedresearch
Organization
-
47 20-10-2008
More information on nitrogen:
-
48 20-10-2008
The Netherlands is the ‘Nitrogen Hot spot’ of Europe
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Hung
aryIce
land
Austr
iaPo
land
Italy
Swed
enGr
eece
Spain
Franc
e
Czec
h Rep
ublic
Switz
erlan
dGe
rman
yFin
land
Portu
gal
Norw
ayIre
land
Unite
d King
dom
Denm
arkBe
lgium
Nethe
rland
s
Country
N s
oil b
alan
ce (K
ton)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
N e
ffici
ency
(%)
N balanceN efficiency N in rivers
N deposition
Nitrogen surplus
NO2 concentrations
-
49 20-10-2008
N-efficiency of protein consumption for different regions in the world
Nitrogen consumption (kg/cap/year) Nitrogen efficiency (%) in 1995
-
50 20-10-2008
Lessons to be learned from EU
• Effect based approach• Integrated assessment for most optimal (cost-effective) measures• One size does not fit all• Emphasis on technological innovations as well as emphasis on
management, structural, institutional innovations, and integration with economic policies
• There is need for more effective and efficient environmental policy measures in EU:
- Integration of environmental policies needed- Integration of agricultural and environmental policies needed- More emphasis on increasing resource use efficiency needed through input
control - Proper mix of policy instruments needed, targeted to the specific conditions
- Communicative instruments- Economic instruments- Regulatory instruments
-
51 20-10-2008
Tool box of policy instruments• Regulatory measures
- Limits, pollution standards- prohibition of specific methods, tools, techniques- public land use planning (zoning/spatial planning)- Fertilizer application limits
• Economic instruments- taxes & subsidies, fines - price support - import/export tarifs - tradable rights and quotas
• Communicative instruments- education, demonstration and persuasion - co-operative approaches - extension services
Instruments