European critical loads work by ICP Forests and ICP Modeling and Mapping

Outline of presentation

• Background of Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) and ICP Forests

• Data management of ICP Forests

• Example of new results of ICP Forests: Spatial and temporal variation of pollutant concentrations in bulk deposition

• Introduction to ICP Modelling and Mapping (Spranger)

• Critical loads work: Hans-Dieter Nagel

Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution

(CLRTAP)

History:

• Acidification of Scandinavian lakes by sulphur depositions (1960)

Evidence of damage by air pollutants transported thousands of kilometers (mid 1970s)

Necessity of international cooperation

High level meeting under UNECE (Geneva 1979)

Signature of CLRTAP by 35 Parties

Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution

(CLRTAP)

Today 49 Parties:

• Principles of international cooperation for air pollution abatement

• Institutional framework bringing together science and policy

• Scientific cooperation and political negotiation

CLRTAP was extended by protocols identifying obligationsand measures to be taken by Parties

Protocols in force

• The 1985 Protocol on the Reduction of Sulphur Emissions or their Transboundary Fluxes by at least 30% (22 Parties)

• The 1988 Protocol concerning the Control of Nitrogen Oxides or their Transboundary Fluxes (28 Parties)

• The 1991 Protocol comcermimg the Control of Emission of Volatile Organic Compounds or their Transboundary Fluxes (21 Parties)

• The 1994 Protocol on Further Reduction of Sulphur Emissions (25 Parties)

Structure of CLRTAP

Mandate of ICP Forests

1. to monitor effects of natural and anthropogenic stress factors (in particular air pollution) on the condition and development of forests at the European-wide scale

2. to contribute to a better understanding of cause-effect relationships in forest ecosystem functioning in various parts of Europe.

ICP Forests

Large-scale monitoring(Level I ●)

• Many plots• European-wide systematic

grid (16 x 16 km)• 6 000 monitoring plots

• Low monitoring intensity• Crown condition assessment

(all plots)• Soil survey (5 300 plots)• Foliar survey (1 500 plots)

Intensive monitoring(Level II ● )

• Fewer plots• High monitoring intensity• 866 intensive monitoring plots

in important forest ecosystems

• High monitoring intensity• 11 different surveys

Level II core surveys

Survey Frequency Number of plots

Crown condition Annually 866

Soil condition Every ten years 865

Foliar condition Every two years 855

Tree growth Every five years 859

ICP Forests

Further Level II surveys

Survey Frequency Number of plots

Ambient air quality Continuously 133

Atmospheric deposition Continuously 499

Soil solution chemistry Continuously 243

Ground vegetation Every five years 730

Meteorological condition Continuously 202

Phenology According to phenophases

59

ICP Forests

Data management

Data flow within ICP Forests

Level I and Level II plots

National Focal Centre

Programme Coordinating Centre

Data checks

Level I data bank (ORACLE)

Level II data bank (end 2005)

ICP Forests

Data management

Data ownership

• Participating countries

Free data access

• Parties to CLRTAP

Authorization procedure for third parties

• Submission of project description and request for data to PCC

• Request by PCC to each country for release of data

• Submission of released data to third party, exclusively for the use for the described project

ICP Forests

Example of Level I result: Crown condition

• Kriged trends in defoliation

Scots pine (1994-1999)

Improvement

Deterioration

N-NO3 (409 Level II plots)

Volume weighted mean concentration [mg/l]1996-2001

Highest concentrations in• Poland• East Germany

Clear spatial pattern

Example of Level II result:Bulk deposition

Comparison of N-NO3 with S-SO4 and N-NH4

• N-NO3: Slight decrease• N-NH4: Higher concentration,

unclear trend• S-SO4: High concentration,

clear decrease

Example of Level II result:Bulk deposition trends

ICP Forests

Critical loads

• long-term ecosystem capacity (steady state)

• defined for specific combinations of pollutants, effects, and receptors

• Acidification (N, S), eutrophication (N), HMs

• terrestrial and (non-marine) aquatic ecosystems

• based on chemical criteria linked to biological effects

• spatially variable, thus leading to regionally differentiated emission reduction needs

• used as sustainability indicators for policy guidance

ICP M&M

National CL data/maps

European CL

data/maps

compare

European CL exceedance data/maps

Optimized emission reduction scenarios

National emission

abatement costs

EMEP deposition data/maps

European emission

data/maps

EMEP Unified Model

Nat´l Emission Ceilings

Integrated Assessment

Models

ICP M&M

CLnut(N): Europeaggregated to 50*50 km²2004 dataset – to be revised!

ICP M&M

CLacid (Clmax(S)): Europeaggregated to 50*50 km²2004 dataset – to be revised!

ICP M&M

Exceedance of CLnut(N)in 2000

33% area exceeded(77% in EU25)

ICP M&M

Exceedance of CLacid

in 2000

11% area exceeded(23% in EU25)

ICP M&M

Main results of CLRTAP negotiations

• Emission reductions 1990 - 2010: SO2 - 60%; NOx - 40%; NH3 - 17%

• Eutrophication of terrestrial ecosystems will remain a risk to biodiversity and other environmental targets in Europe

• Acidification has been slowed but not stopped through emission abatement; Nr (especially NH3) emissions more relevant than sulphur emissions

• Highest remaining exceedances dominated by NH3 emissions from intensive animal husbandry

ICP M&M

Participation of the USA in ICP Forests and ICP M & M

The United States of America is

• Party to the CLRTAP

• Participating country of ICP Forests

• Not yet a participating country of ICP M & M

ICP M&MICP Forests

Participation of the USA in ICP Forests and ICP M & M

The United States of America is invited to participate in

21st ICP M&M Task Force meeting and 15th CCE Workshop25 – 29 April, Berlin, GermanyPlease contact till.spranger@uba.de for more information

21st ICP Forests Task Force meetingand 20 years ICP Forests anniversary celebration23 – 26 May, Rome, ItalyInvitations were sent to USDA and the NFC

Participation of the USA in ICP Forests and ICP M & M

The United States of America is invited to have its Level II data managed as part of the ICP Forests data bank. This includes

• Plausibility checks of US data

• Storage of US data in the Level II data bank (ORACLE)

• Access to US data and all other ICP Forests data

US data are being made available to the bodies under CLRTAP upon request, but will be submitted to third parties only by permission of the USA.

ICP M&MICP Forests

Websites

UNECE www.unece.org

CLRTAP www.unece.org/env/lrtap

EMEP www.emep.int

WGE www.unece.org/wge

ICP Forests www.icp-forests.org

ICP M & M www.icpmapping.org

ICP M&MICP Forests