1 / 30

Outline

Soil contamination in the Netherlands EIONET workshop, Barcelona, May 2003 Aaldrik Tiktak – Environmental Assessment Agency. Outline. Point source contamination Cleary defined sources Mining, industrial facilities, landfills Diffuse pollution Mainly from agricultural sources.

aaron-velazquez
Download Presentation

Outline

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Soil contamination in the NetherlandsEIONET workshop, Barcelona, May 2003Aaldrik Tiktak – Environmental Assessment Agency

  2. Outline • Point source contamination • Cleary defined sources • Mining, industrial facilities, landfills • Diffuse pollution • Mainly from agricultural sources

  3. Contamination by Point-Sources • 200,000 sites known to exist, which is more than in any other EU country • High population density • Intensive soil use • Different perspective due to public awereness after ‘Lekkerkerk’ 1980 • Estimated costs for clean-up higher than in any other EU country • NL: 35 billion EUR • UK: 25 billion EUR • B: 6 billionEUR

  4. Clean-up costs of contaminated sites

  5. Original ambition in the Netherlands • Clean-up all contaminated sites to minimal residual values • Multifunctional land-use • All should be done within one generation • Expensive!

  6. BEVER reconsideration • Clean-up to realistic values related to the current use of the soil, instead of multifunctional use • Decentralization of the controlling action to the provincial and municipal level • Joint funding of soil clean-up from all parties of interest (75% funded by private parties) • Historical seriously contaminated sites to be under control before 2023 • New contamination (after 1987) to be restored immediately

  7. Monitoring of point scale contamination • In 2004 an inventory of contaminated sites must be ready • Helps to define the total workload • Allows for better planning of the coming actions • Progress of the remediation is monitored independently • Annual progress reports • Size, grade of pollution and priority for remediation • Position in an area (dynamic or static developments) • Size and remidiation goals • Destination of soil and costs

  8. Overview of data to be monitored Monitoring Soil Remediation Survey of workload of suspected sites Progress of investigations Progress of remediation Results of remediation Use of management instruments Nr of sites Surface and volume Completely remediated Partly remediated Nr of sites Grade of contamination Priority for remediation Static or dynamic site Annual spendings Average spendings per site Co-funding Nr of sites Remediation goal realized Destination of soil released Nr of sites Grade of contamination Expected costs

  9. Policy adopted: only 52% multifunctional

  10. But government is still largest investor

  11. Conclusions point-scale pollution • 560 new cases detected • But only 15% remediated • Total number of 8500 sites remediated • 50% multifunctional • 35% functional • Speed of remediation has not increased • Government spent 50% of the total 5 billionEUR • Below target of 75% • With current speed, targets will not be met by 2023

  12. Diffuse Pollution • Large areas of land involved • Remediation not possible • Prevent at the source • Agriculture is the most important actor! • Diffuse pollution is usually also NPS pollution • Major pollutants • Nutrients (N and P) • Heavy metals (primarily Cd, Zn, Cu and Pb) • Pesticides • Persistent Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

  13. Diffuse pollution in NL Heavy metal contents are usually below the target value. However, accumulation is still going on. Values of persistent pesticides like DDT, HCB and Drins above target value. Not admitted anymore. Acidification and eutrophication of nature in. Slight improvement. 70% of land area P-saturated. No improvement. Pesticides in groundwater??? PAHs above target value in SW NL Heavy metals in groundwater above target values in SE NL; above intervention value under forest. High heavy metal contents in SE NL and peat areas due to historic sources N in groundwater under sandy soils >> 50 mg/L. Decreasing slightly.

  14. NationalSoil QualityMonitoringNetwork (LMB) • 200 locations • Agriculture and nature • Once per 5 years • Soil and upper groundwater

  15. Sampling soil quality

  16. Sampling groundwater quality

  17. Example 1: Heavy metals in agricultural soils Percentage of samples above target value

  18. Example 2: Nitrate in the groundwater Nitrate in the groundwater (2000) (5-15 m) % of samples with a concentration > 50 mg/L

  19. Example: The eutrophication problem • The Netherlands has a serious eutrophication problem Number of livestock per hectare Livestock per hectare

  20. Dutch and European legislation • EU Nitrate directive: • Prescribes both the target and the measure • Concentration in the groundwater should be 50 mg/L • Surface water quality should be good • Maximum application of N in manure is 170 kg/ha • Dutch Nutrient Law (MW) implemented in 1996: • MINAS: Maximum loss rates instead of maximum application rates • Soil and crop dependent • Implemented at the farm level • Inforced by penalties (levies)

  21. N surplus decreases... N surplus in dairy farms Clay Peat Other sand Dry sand 170 kg/ha

  22. But nitrate in groundwater under sandy soils is still too high... Nitrate in the shallow groundwater Measured Sand Clay Peat Corrected value Sand Corrected for fluctuations in precipitation and groundwater level

  23. Phosphate saturation • 75% of Dutch sandy soils are phosphate saturated • Current loss rate enforced (20 kg/ha) still leads to accumulation • Further reduction to 1 kg/ha foreseen in 2030 • Manure surplus increases • Alternative processing • Export • Reduction of lifestock

  24. Waterframe directive • To be implemented in national policy in 2003 • Good chemical and ecological quality • Nutrients • Toxic substances • Targets must be met in 2015 • Social consequences....

  25. Consequences of agri-environmental plans Volume change 1990 - 2002 Dairy farms Pig farms Cows per farm Pigs per farm Production Added value

  26. Additional measures required: • Reform of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) gives opportunities • More money for Rural Development Plans • Possibilities to use EU budget for national ambitions • Funding of overall farm management systems (such as organic farming) • Set-aside of agricultural sector; avoid agriculture in sensitive areas.

  27. Common Agricultural Policy Rural development plans Income support related to hectares Support to agricultural prices

  28. Organic agriculture is still a small market Organic agriculture in European countries Area in 2002 Consumption in 2002

  29. Conclusions diffuse pollution • Diffuse contamination widespread due to agricultural sources • Avoid agriculture in specific areas • Transition of agriculture necessary to reach targets • Extensification of existing agriculture • Good Farming Practice • New production methods such as organic farming • Multi-functional use of agricultural soils (recreation, ‘green services’)

  30. Recommendation for working group • Consider both diffuse and point source contamination • Tackling the diffuse pollution problem is not possible without transition towards sustainable agriculture • Investigate socio-economic consequences • Investigate alternatives (organic farming, green services, …) • Investigate where agriculture is possible at low environmental costs

More Related