EMEP Monitoring programme. Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU)

Transcription

1 EMEP Monitoring programme Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU)

2 Outline EMEP monitoring programme Why, where, what Monitoring strategy Quality assurance EMEP Manual for sampling and analysis Nationally Centrally by EMEP/CCC How to organize the work nationally

3 UN-ECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (50 Parties) - 8 Specific protocols, where the first is European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) (41 Parties) Barents Sea Kara Sea EMEP Topics Artic Ocean Acidification and Eutrophication Iceland Pacific Ocean Canada Photochemical oxidants North Sea Norway Sweden Finland Estonia Latvia Russian Federation of America Atlantic Ocean Heavy metals Denmark Lithuania Ireland Belarus United Kingdom Poland Netherlands Germany Belgium Czech Rep. Ukraine Luxembourg Slovakia Austria France Liechtenstein Hungary Moldova Switzerland Atlantic Ocean Slovenia Romania Croatia Bosnia and Monaco Herzegovina Yugoslavia Black Sea Bulgaria Italy F.Y.R.of Albania Macedonia Spain Greece Portugal Turkey Caspian Georgia Sea Armenia Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Aral Sea Uzbekistan Kyrgyzstan Turkmenistan Tajikistan Persistent Organic Pollutants Particulate matter Malta Mediterranean Sea Cyprus The EMEP vision; To be the main science based and policy-driven instrument for international cooperation in atmospheric monitoring and modelling activities, emission inventories and projections, and integrated assessment to help solve transboundary air pollution problems in Europe

4 Objectives of the EMEP measurement programme Establish pollutant concentrations, deposition, emissions and transboundary fluxes on the regional scale, including intercontinental transport and boundary conditions for urban air quality Identify the trends with time as well as their sensitivity to European emission reductions Assess the success of international abatement strategies for atmospheric pollutants Improve the understanding of atmospheric chemical and physical processes Provide data for the validation of models Provide data which, in conjunction with models, are the basis for the assessment of environmental problems related to air pollution including comparison with effect thresholds and exposure levels Provide measurements required to assess the effects of atmospheric pollutants Serve to explore the environmental concentrations of new substances and support the development of cost-effective abatement strategies.

5 Environmental problems in 2020 Light blue = no risk Health - PM Health+vegetation - ozone Vegetation N dep. Forests acid dep. Semi-natural acid dep. Freshwater acid dep.

6 Intercontinental transport of Hg Mercury deposition to Europe: contribution of continents of NH Total Hg deposition, t/y % 15% 5% 3% Natural Anthropogenic 12% 4% Europe Asia Americas Northern Africa Oceans South Hemis. Total annual Hg deposition in the Northern Hemisphere

7 Monitoring Strategy Adopted in December 2004 Three levels approach Level 1 Basic (1.st priority for new Parties) Level 2 Supersites (added to level 1 sites) Level 3 Research driven supersites Parties responsibility to implement the Strategy

8 Monitoring programme: Level 1 Main ions in precipitation and in air heavy metals in precipitations ozone PM 10 and PM 2.5 mass meteorology at ca 125 sites Level 2, supersite (joint EMEP/GAW) POPs Heavy metals in air and aerosols VOC EC/OC, OC speciation Mineral Dust PM speciation incl. gas particle ratio + all level 1 activities sites Both levels are mandatory by all Parties

9 Monitoring programme, Level 3 Programme Parameters Minimum time resolution Level-3 sites (monitoring at these sites do not require all level-1 and level-2 parameters) Dry deposition flux of Nand S SO 2, NH 3, HNO 3 (SO -- 4, NH + 4, NO - 3 ) Hourly/Daily Dry deposition flux of O3 Hourly/Daily O 3 Hydrocarbons C 6 -C 12 Hourly/Daily NOy chemistry NO, NO 2, PAN, organic nitrates Hourly/Daily OC speciation Both water soluble and water insoluble OC Hourly/Daily Black carbon BC Hourly/Daily Size/number distribution dn/dlogdp Hourly/Daily Light Optical scattering properties Scattering Aerosol optical and absorption depth coefficients Hourly/Daily Vertical profiles O 3 soundings, PM lidar, Hourly/Daily Mercury speciation TGM, RGM and TPM Daily/Weekly Congener-specific POPs PCBs, PAHs, PCDDs and PCDFs Daily/Weekly Multi-compartment (air, soil, water) POPs and Hg Daily/Weekly Research driven and voluntary,

10 Positive consequences Many countries have initiated national revision plans, the general impression is that most Parties intend to comply with requirements. The strategy is used as an important instrument towards the funding authorities. CCC may assist when needed. Generally large interest from research groups to get involved in EMEP measurements. A better link between the traditional monitoring community and the research groups has been established Particulate matter observations are in very good progress Support to establish EMEP level 1 sites in some EECCA countries

11 Challenges Level 1 Some Parties have given little response. Probably due to large difficulties to find national resources, most problems in Eastern Europe Many sites lack a few parameters to get a complete measurement program of level 1

12 New EMEP sites in the EECCA region KZ: Borovoye MD: Leovo UA: Danube delta GE: Abastumani AR: In process

13 New sites that will be establish: Georgia: Abastumani Support from: CAPACT Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Moldova: Leovo Kazakhstan: Borovoye

14 Expectations, EECCA countries A very important region High emissions Strategic area for hemispheric transport issues Little monitoring today Expected that most countries will sign the EMEP protocol soon. Need to establish EMEP level 1 sites in each country. Support can be found, i.e from foreign aid money, EU, UNECE. Training and capacity building is necessary. Beeing part of an international monitoring programme, as on transboundary air pollution, will in addition, give competence and awarness on other envirionmental issues

15 Challenges Level 1 Some Parties have given little response. Probably due to large difficulties to find national resources, most problems in Eastern Europe Many sites lack a few parameters to get a complete measurement program of level 1 Level 2 POPs and Hg monitoring receives little attention Photooxidats receives little attention (but EU directive addressing PAHs offers assistance) Full chemical speciation of particles is difficult. It s costly and there are problems to harmonise methodology (i.e for EC/OC)

16

17

18 Purpose Comparable measurements needed to make regional and global assessments Need methods that are easy to use, cheap and long lasting for trend analysis (changing methodology may affect the trend A harmonisation of methodology has been developed during the last 30 years and are still developing close cooperation between CCC and international experts

19 Necessary national commitments Proper siting for representative measurements Use recommended field methods for precipitation, gas and aerosols (main comp, HM, POP, PM, VOC) Use recommended lab methods Follow QA/QC procedures in field and lab Reporting of data in proper format incl information of methods, detection limits, precisions, siting information etc (so called meta data)

20 QA activities in EMEP Site characterization Documentation of methods and material -detection limits, precision, accuracy, -instructions for maintenance and calibration Manual and standard operating procedures (SOPs) Lab intercalibration Co-located experiments (field comparison) Training courses Data checking and validation -e.g calculate ion balance and time trends Flagging data

21 Field intercomparisons, SO4 in air Estonia Spain

22 Lab intercomparisons annually Rel bias % Rel standard dev %

23 QA flags based on lab and field intercomp. SO2 NO2 SO4 SNO3 SNH4 qa flagg field lab qa flagg field lab qa flagg field qa flagg field lab qa flagg field lab AT 22--B CH 3200 B A 33-- B CZ 12-- B A A A DE 0100 A A A 00-- A A B DK 0000 A A A 00-- A A A EE 1200 B A 6210 B A ES 32-- B B A A FI 1010 A A A A A FR 2003 B C B GB 1010 B A 5300 B A 00-- A HU B A B IE 00-- A B A LT 1000 B A 3200 B A 10-- B 1010 B A --00 A LV 5010 B A 0200 B A 22-- B 1030 B B 0210 A A NL 11--B A NO 0000 A A 0020 A A 00-- A A A PL 0010 A A 4340 B B 01-- A A A PL B A 5200 B A 32-- B A A SE 0000 A A 1010 B A 00-- A A A SI 0031 A B A 20-- B A A SK A 5300 B A A TR 0010 A A A A A YU B

24 National organisation of EMEP monitoring Signing the EMEP protocol gives a national responsibility usually charged by the Ministry of Environment The daily work are usually being done my hydrometeorological institutes or similar by contract of the Ministry A close contact with universities and other research communities needed to interpret data and co-benefits the infrastructures both in lab an field

25 Data flow (a typical example) Continuously Monthly or annually Annually Measurements are evaluated in the labs after accredited procedures or similar Project leader usually at the same institute QA/QC the data Approval by the national government Often different databases and formats Annually International bodies like EMEP/CCC Annually Approval by the international bodies (EMEP: Steering Body)

26 Data reporting, the site NN story Site "NN" Main Comp. in Precip. Main Comp. in Air HM (air or prec.) POPs (air or prec.) Ozone National db. National db. National db. National db. National db. EMEP EMEP EMEP EMEP EMEP ICP Forest ICP Forest ICP IM ICP IM ICP Forest ICP IM ICP IM OSPAR OSPAR ICP IM OSPAR OSPAR Helcom Helcom EIONET Helcom Helcom AMAP AMAP WMO-GAW AMAP EIONET WMO-GAW AMAP EIONET WMO-GAW Need to have instruments to avoid duplication of data in the different programmes and define where the official data are.

27 Summary EECCA region of high importance and relevance EMEP is a long lasting programme that need long commitments from the national authorities Quality assurance is an essential part of the monitoring programme EMEP/CCC assists when support letter etc is needed or training of QA/QC procedures Reporting of data etc

28