Närsaltkoncentrationer och trender i vattendrag kring trender i vattendrag kring Östersjönj

Marianne Bechmann ogPer Stålnacke Per Stålnacke

Bioforskmarianne.bechmann@bioforsk.no

Långa mätserier och beräkningar av växtnäringsläckaget från svensk åkermark

Stockholm, 13. September 2011

O tliOutline

1 V i ti i 1. Variation in space 2. Variation in time3 R i f i 3. Retention from source to river

mouth4 Effi i f itig ti 4. Efficiency of mitigation

measures5 Concluding remarks5. Concluding remarks

Part 1. Variation in space

Between catchment variability in N-losses (5-year mean) from 35 small agricultural catchments (12 to 2000 ha); Vagstad et al, (2004)

80

Nit t N Oth N

60

70g/

ha)

Nitrate-N Other-N

40

50

loss

es (k

g

20

30

Nitr

ogen

0

10

rdre

erud stad on

a

Tim

e

stad tra

n

s R.

dder

drup bæ

k

und

lbro

hög

slöv

nna

nge

gbo

ken

ken

stad elö

å

ärde

Hovi

noja joki

jyrä

apu

nga

erze

mite pite

zena

upis

rdas

Mør

Sku

te

Kol

s

Vas

shag

lo

T

Nau

rs

Hot

Høj

vads

Od

Hor

nd

Lille

b

Bar

slu

Bol

Vem

men

h

För

s

Gul

lbra

Dra

fti

Bar

ling

Jär

nsbä

c

Uve

reds

bäc

Mar

s

Giss

e

Frö

gä H

Löyt

änee

n

Savi

Haap

aj R To B e

Vien

ziem

Mellu Ly

z

Grais

u

Var

Norway Denmark Sweden Finland Est. Lat. Lith.

Vagstad et al., (2004)

Between catchment variability in P-losses (5-year mean) from 35 small agricultural catchments (12 to 2000 ha); Vagstad et al, (2004)

5.0

3 5

4.0

4.5

g/ha

)Other-PPhosphate-P

2.5

3.0

3.5

s lo

sses

(kg

only

Tot-P

1 0

1.5

2.0

Phos

phor

us

0.0

0.5

1.0

re d ad a me d an R. er p æk d ro g öv na ge bo n n ad öå de vi a ki rä u a ze te te na s as

P

Mør

dr

Sku

teru

Kol

sta

Vas

shag

lon

Ti m

Nau

rsta

Hot

r a

Høj

vads

R

Odd

e

Hor

ndru

Lille

bæ

Bar

slun

Bol

br

Vem

men

hö

För

slö

Gul

lbra

nn

Dra

fting

Bar

lingb

Jär

nsbä

cke

Uve

reds

bäck

e

Mar

sta

Giss

elö

Frö

gärd Ho

v

Löyt

änee

noj

Savij

ok

Haap

ajyr

Rap

Tong

Berz

Vien

ziem

it

Mellu

pit

Lyze

n

Grais

upi

Vard

a

Norway Denmark Sweden Finland Est. Lat. Lith.

Vagstad et al., (2004)

Modelled within catchment N-loss variability(Sweden; Hoffmann&Johnsson)(Sweden; Hoffmann&Johnsson)

Part 2. Variation in time

A large interannual variation –gNitrogen loads to Baltic Sea 1970-1993 (Stålnacke et al., 1999)

1000

1200

800

s yr

-1 N

)

400

600

(103 *

tonn

es

200

Total range: 580 – 1050 k tonnes0

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

Total range: 580 1050 k tonnes

Natural variation often the causeAnnual riverine loads of total-N

to the Baltic Sea 1970-1993

Natural variation often the cause

to the Baltic Sea, 1970 1993.

1200

after flow-normalization before flow-normalization

800

1000

yr-1

N)

400

600

800

* ton

nes

y

200

400

(103

0

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

(Stålnacke et al., 1999)

Nitrogen in the 2 large Polish rivers å

80zers

(Pastuszak, Stålnacke, submitted)

506070

ral f

ertil

izL]

NP2O5

20304050

of m

iner

ha-1

AU

L

01020

8 2 6 0 4 8 2 6 0 4 8 2 6 0 4 8 2 6sum

ptio

n [k

g

1938

1942

1946

1950

1954

1958

1962

1966

1970

1974

1978

1982

1986

1990

1994

1998

2002

2006

Con

s

Ph h i th 2 l P li h i Phosphorus in the 2 large Polish rivers (Pastuszak, Stålnacke, submitted)

Large drop in commercial fertiliser use in Latvia (60-90%)

140

(60 90%)

100

120

n (k

g/ha

)

80

appl

icat

ion

40

60

n fe

rtili

ser a

20

40

Nitr

ogen

01961 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996

Long-term trends in nitrogen i 3 i l l concentrations at 3 agricultural

streams in Latvia (Jansons, unpublished)

35,00

Ntot mg/l

Small catchment

25,00

30,00

15,00

20,00

5 00

10,00

,

Berze

Mellupite

0,00

5,00

Vienziemite 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

No. of TN and TP trends in 53 Estonian rivers th t 15 20 (Iit l bli h d)over the past 15-20 years (Iital, unpublished)

3331 33NP

18

13

74

7

Vähenemine Kasv Muutust ei oleDecrease Increase No-change

Gl k å 0 lGlomma case (Mjøsa aktionen på 70-talet)

Fosfor och kväve transport i utloppet vid Sarpfossen i Glomma (SFT-RID; Skarbøvik et al., 2009)

600

700 Glomma

300

400

500

600

onne

s/yr

)

0

100

200

990

991

992

993

994

995

996

997

998

999

000

001

002

003

004

005

006

007

008

TOT-

P (t

19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

25 000 Glomma

15 000

20 000

nnes

/yr)

0

5 000

10 000

TOT-

N (t

on

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Riverine response to decreasedi t P i ipoint source P-emissions

Motala Ström in Sweden (Grimvall & Stålnacke, 2000)

160

1 P)

mouth (Norrköping)

120

140

onne

s yr-1 mouth (Norrköping)

upstream (Borensberg)further upstream (Motala)

80

100

ansp

ort (

to

40

60

phor

us tr

a

0

20

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995

Pho

sp

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995

Introduction of tertiary treatment (90% or 200 tonnes)

Wi t i d (Ø d 2000)Winter episode (Øygarden, 2000)

January 30 January 31January 30Runoff: 25 mm

January 31Runoff: 77 mm

Soil loss: 2 kg ha-1 Soil loss: 3 050 kg ha-1

Dynamic soil loss at field scaleySP=spring ploughing; AP=autumn ploughing

Short-term variability in nitrate-N concentrations on a ysmall agricultural catchment (Høyjord /S Norway) October 6-9, 1995

(Vagstad, Deelstra and Eggestad)

Daglige målinger: NVE 2001-2004 Daglige målinger: NVE 2001 2004 (Skarbøvik, Stålnacke et al. Manuskript)

Concentration Suspended Solids April-November 2004

600

700

300

350Water Discharge Cs

400

500

3/s 200

250

mg/

l

200

300m

100

150

m

0

100

7.ap

r

.mai

.mai

.mai

2.ju

n

1.ju

n

0.ju

n

9.ju

n

8.ju

l

7.ju

l

6.ju

l

.aug

.aug

.aug

.aug

.sep

.sep

.sep

6.ok

t

5.ok

t

4.ok

t

2.no

v

.nov

0

50

27 06 15 24 02 11 20 29 0 1 2 04 13 22 31 09 18 27 0 6 15 24 02 11

Høyeste verdi – 325 mg/l

Data fra det nasjonale overvåkingsprogrammet RID overvåkingsprogrammet – RID (månedsprøvetaking; Borgvang et al., 2006)

Water Discharge and Cs as measured by RID

250 12Water Discharge Cs

Vannføring og Suspendert stoff

150

200

8

10

100

150

m3/

s

4

6

mg/

l

0

50

06 04 08 13 11 08 06 03 07 08 09 07

0

2

2004

0106

2004

0204

2004

0308

2004

0413

2004

0511

2004

0608

2004

0706

2004

0803

2004

0907

2004

1008

2004

1109

2004

1207

Høyeste verdi– 10 mg/l. Hvordan kan man gjettey g300 mg/l mindre enn høyeste ved daglige

målinger

Hvordan kan man gjette hva som skjer mellom to

prøvetakinger

Part 3. Nutrient losses via the various hydrological pathways?The most important ‘hydrological’ pathways as regards nitrogen The most important hydrological pathways as regards nitrogen

and phosphorus losses from diffuse sources to surface waters

Atmospheric deposition

PLoss by

soil erosionLoss bysurface

run-off

Direct input

Rootzone leaching

Groundwater table

Losses by tile drainage flow

Losses via interflow

Rootzone leaching

N

Groundwater table

Losses viagroundwater

Surfacewater

Source: Borgvang and Selvik (2000)

Grøfte- og overflatevann

Grøfteavrenning gir N-tapOverflateavrenning gir P-tap

Nitrogen Fosfor

Part 3.Retention from source to river Part 3.Retention from source to river mouth

Retention processes (Howarth et al. 1996):

• storage in catchment biomass as for instance in aggrading forests;

• storage or denitrification in catchment soils;• storage or denitrification in groundwater;g g• denitrification or storage in wetlands or riparian

zones, i.e. at the interface between ground- and surface water;

• in-stream processes of retention, either by benthic l kt i d it ifi ti b t i or planktonic denitrification or by storage in

sediments.

Retention from outlet of subbasins to river mouth in Daugava R with the MESAW statistcialmouth in Daugava R with the MESAW statistcial

model (Stålnacke, 2003)

Mean nitrate concentrations at the outlet of the tile drains and at main channel in outletthe tile drains and at main channel in outlet of two agricultural stream in Estonia and Latvia (Stålnacke et al 1999)Latvia (Stålnacke et al., 1999)

8.00Tile drain outletsMouth of catchment

6.00

7.00

8.00

-N

Mouth of catchment

3 00

4.00

5.00

/ L n

itrat

e

1.00

2.00

3.00

mg

/

0.00

1.00

Kahametsa Berze

Pathways of nitrogen in Denmarky g(Grant et al., 1997)

300

250

300

200

Nitrogen input

100

150

kg/h

a

g pN in yieldN losses from root-zoneN losses in streams

50

100

0Sandy soils Clay soils Grant et al (1997)

Retention as a function of hydrology(Behrendt and Opitz, 2000)

R t ti f ti f t Retention as a function of stream depth (Alexander et al, 2000)

Artificial drainage reduces the general riparian nitrate retention (Garnier and Billen, 1999)

60n

MarneSaulx

30

40

50

n re

tent

ion

Petit MorinSurmelinUpper SeineOise

10

20

30

% ri

paria

n

Grand MorinEure

00 20 40 60

% watershed drained

Part 4. How to identify the most yefficient mitigation measures?

Jordtap ved forskjellige jordarbeidingsmetoder

1200

800

1000

daa)

Hsøtpløying

400

600

Jord

tap

(kg/

d Høstharving

H th t di kt åi

200

400J Høsthvete direktesåing

Vårkorn vårharving0

Lav Middels Høy Meget høy

Erosjonsrisiko

Vårkorn vårharving

Fokus i Norge på reduksjon av høstpløyingProgram for Jord- og vannovervåking 3000

Areal med høstpløying i Mødre•

i landbruket (JOVA)

1500

2000

2500

Daa

0

500

1000

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Mørdre

1990

199

1992

199

1994

199

199

199

199

1999

2000

200

2002

200

2004

200

200

200

200

250300350400450500

150

200

250

300

ng (

mm

)

g/da

a)

050100150200250

0

50

100

150

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Avre

nnin

SS (

kg

92/9

393

/94

94/9

595

/96

96/9

797

/98

98/9

999

/00

00/0

101

/02

02/0

303

/04

04/0

505

/06

06/0

707

/08

08/0

9

Vegetasjonssoner:Terrengformer og

Foto: Skarbøvik

Terrengformer og effekter

Foto: Blankenberg

Konstruerad våtmark (2001) i SkuterudKonstruerad våtmark (2001) i Skuterud

Yearly retention(%)03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/0903/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09

TP 16 18 33 15 3 10SS 45 48 62 19 21 17

Fosfor og partikler i Skuterud (JOVA, 2009)

1000

1200

300

350 SSTPAvrenning

800

200

250

mm

)

(g/0

.1 h

a)

400

600

100

150

Runo

ff (

m

1 ha

), T

P (

20050

100

SS (

kg/0

.

00

94/9

5

95/9

6

96/9

7

97/9

8

98/9

9

99/0

0

00/0

1

01/0

2

02/0

3

03/0

4

04/0

5

05/0

6

06/0

7

07/0

8

08/0

9

Effekt av tilskudd og rådgiving:Fangvekstarealet i Mørdre følger tilskuddet

1600

1800

2000

140

160

180

1200

1400

1600

daa)

100

120

140

kr d

aa-1

)Tilskudd

600

800

1000

Are

al (d

60

80

Tils

kudd

(k

Lokal informasjons-

0

200

400

0

20

40

T

kampagne

01998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

0

Part 5. Sammendrag

- Næringsstofftap viser stor variasjon over kort tid og stor romlig variasjonromlig variasjon

Faktorer som har betydning for variasjonen omfatter- Faktorer som har betydning for variasjonen omfatter hydrometeorologi, geologi, og jordbruksdrift

- Det er stor forskjell i effekt av tiltak på ulike skala, på grunn av bl a retensjongrunn av bl.a. retensjon

Målretting av tiltak- Målretting av tiltak

Takk for oppmerksomheten!pp