38 th session wgsr item 3, review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals jean-paul hettelingh (cce)

38th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metalsCoordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh.

38th Session WGSRItem 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals

Jean-Paul Hettelingh (CCE)

Critical loads of heavy metals and their exceedancesof Cd, Pb, Hg and tentatively of Cr, Ni, Cu, Zn, As and Se

in Europe

In collaboration with:

TNO (emissions), EMEP/MSC-E (dispersion) Alterra (CL-other metals)Coordination Centre for Effects (CL-priority metals and exceedances )


Critical loads of Cd, Pb and Hg and their exceedances

• Details in: CCE Status Report 2005, updated in 2006 by BG, CY, IT, NL, UA• Elaborated in the TFHM Sufficiency and Effectiveness Report• In press in reviewed scientific journal: Slootweg J, Hettelingh J-P, Posch M, Schütze G,

Spranger T, De Vries W, Reinds GJ, Van ’t Zelfde M, Dutchak S, Ilyin I, European critical loads of cadmium,

lead and mercury and their exceedances, Water, Air and Soil Pollution Forum .• Summary in: ECE/EB.AIR/WG.1/2006/10, adopted at 25th WGE sessionWhat do we want to protect: • Endpoints with respect to:

– 1 Human health (drinking water)– 2 Human health (food quality)– 3 Ecotox. Effects on terrestrial ecosystems– 4 Ecotox. Effects on aquatic ecosystems– 5 Human health (Hg in fish)

• Exceedance in 2000 now use depositions computed by MSC-E based on emissions adjusted by TNO.

• Exceedance in 2020 based on three scenarios; CLE, FI and FIAM


5th percentile CL(Cd) to protecthuman health (g ha-1 a-1)

5th percentile CL(Pb) to protecthuman health(g ha-1 a-1)

5th percentile CL(Hg) to protecthuman health(g ha-1 a-1)

5th percentile CL(Cd) to protectEcosystems(g ha-1 a-1)

5th percentile CL(Pb) to protectEcosystems(g ha-1 a-1)

5th percentile CL(Hg) to protectEcosystems(g ha-1 a-1)

Source: CCE SR2005pp. 23


Areas at risk of health or ecosystem effects in 2000 based on Official Emission data incl. TNO adjustments

Between brackets: Areas at risk based on official 2000 emission data as published in the CCE SR2005 and the TFHM-S&E

% area at risk ofHealth effects

% area at risk ofEcosystem effects

Cd Pb Hg Cd Pb Hg

EU25 0.03

(0.1)

24.32

(8.1)

2.4

(3.9)

0.02

(0.0)

48.64

(7.4)

85.75

(51.2)

Europe 0.83

(0.8)

16.65

(8.3)

2.4

(3.9)

0.07

(0.1)

53.44

(28.7)

85.34

(51.0)


Scenario analysis in Europe:

Exceedances to both public and environmental health by Cd, Pb and Hg depositions in2000 compared to 2020-FIAM


Exceedance by cadmium (Cd) depositionIn 2000 and 2020-FIAM

% area at risk:CLRTAP: 0.34 %EU25: 0.04 %

% area at risk:CLRTAP: 0.02 %EU25: 0.02 %


Exceedance by lead (Pb) depositionIn 2000 and 2020-FIAM

% area at risk in 2000:CLRTAP: 42 %EU25: 42 %

% area at risk in 2020-FIAM:CLRTAP: 19 %EU25: 27 %


lead (Pb) deposition in 2000 as factorof critical loads


lead (Pb) deposition in 2000 as factorof critical loads

Deposition is up tomore than 10 x higher

thancritical loads.


Exceedance by mercury (Hg) depositionIn 2000 and 2020-FIAM

% area at risk:CLRTAP: 77 %EU25: 68 %

% area at risk:CLRTAP: 74 %EU25: 61 %


Conclusions and recommendationsregarding Cd, Hg and Pb

• Conclusions also reflected in the TFHM Sufficiency en Effectiveness report.

• Lead (Pb) and mercury (Hg) deposition significantly exceed critical loads.• The health risk is stressed in the unedited TFH-draft 2006 report (Health

risks of heavy metals from LRTP air pollution)

• Cadmium deposition does not cause widespread exceedance • However, Cd exposure (not only from LRTAP) may lead to damage to

critical organs while Cd is suggested to still be accumulating in the top-soil of arable land (see TFH draft 2006).

• Current critical load data of Cd, Pb and Hg can be applied in chain-model (emission, deposition, exceedance) assessments of policy scenarios.

• Uncertainty, in particularly of emission data, requires further attention. • Note that model and data uncertainty does not markedly vary between

scenarios.


Chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), arsenic (As), selenium (Se)

reported in

“Emissions, depositions, critical loads and exceedances in Europe” (in press)

Preliminary results of a collaborative project between TNO,

EMEP/MSC-E, Alterra and CCE.

Study commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Public Housing, Spatial Planning and the

Environment (VROM)


Preliminary critical load methodologyaddressing other metals in Europe

• Steady State Mass Balance approach as described in the Mapping Manual.

• Critical limits (critical concentrations in soil drainage water):

Proposed critical limit values (Alterra, 2006)

Metal CC-Human health

(μg.l-1)

CC-ecotox(μg.l-1)

Cr 50 44

Ni 20 25-700

Cu 2000 1-50

Zn - 20-90

As 10 70

Se 10 1


Tentative results in 2000 and

in 2020 following CLE, FI and FIAM scenarios

Scenario Percentage of area in Europe at risk caused by exceedance of critical loads of the following heavy metals:

Cr Ni Cu Zn As Se

2000 0.07 0.71 0.76 1.66 0 2.41

2020-CLE 0.08 0.40 0.44 1.06 0 1.09

2020-FI 0.01 0.21 0.34 1.06 0 0.94

2020-FIAM

0.01 0.03 0.25 1.06 0 0.33


Conclusions

• No widespread exceedance in Europe of critical loads of Cr,Ni,Cu,Zn,As, Se in 2000; exceedance of Zn and Selenicum cover < 3% of the European ecosystem area.

• In 2020, this exceedance is reduced to about ≤ 1%• In line with… “Presently, available information indicates that

none of these other metals achieve high enough concentrations as a result of long-range atmospheric transport and deposition to cause adverse effects on wildlife and human health”…(Sufficiency and Effectiveness Report, A2).

• Therefore, the focus on priority heavy metals is justified from an effect-based perspective.

38 th session wgsr item 3, review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals jean-paul hettelingh (cce)

Documents