1 / 30

N-surpluses and handling of the Water Framework Directive in Sweden

N-surpluses and handling of the Water Framework Directive in Sweden. Hans Nilsson Swedish Board of Agriculture. Average N-surplus from nutrient balances in Greppa Näringen, 2000-2004. N-surplus in plant production - Correlation to area.

dolph
Download Presentation

N-surpluses and handling of the Water Framework Directive in Sweden

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. N-surpluses and handling of the Water Framework Directive in Sweden Hans Nilsson Swedish Board of Agriculture

  2. Average N-surplus from nutrient balances in Greppa Näringen, 2000-2004

  3. N-surplus in plant production- Correlation to area

  4. N-surplus in plant production- Correlation to soil texture (% sand)

  5. N-surplus on farms milk production900 farms without manure import/export

  6. N-surplus on farms milk production- slurry vs farmyard manure (FYM)

  7. N-surplus on farms with pig production

  8. Calculations at SLU have shown that • N-leaching from arable land decreased by 7000 tonnes or 12% in the period 1995-2003 • Average N-leaching decreased from 21.8 to 20.0 kg N/ha arable land • The goal is 7500 tonnes by 2010 • The goal is 93% fulfilled already Source: Beräkning av förändringar av kväveutlakning från åkermark mellan 1995 och 2003PM from SJV, Magnus Bång, 2005

  9. Reasons for decreased N-leaching a Decreased arable land area b Increased nitrogen use efficiency c Use of catch crops and decreased autumn tillage d Increased proportion of manure spread in spring e Changes in crop rotation

  10. Decreased N-leaching in different regions West East North

  11. Investigation by SCB(Statistiska Centralbyrån) • Nitrogen balance for arable land • N-surplus 2003 = 46 kg N/ha (decrease of 4% from 2001) • Input 123 kg N/ha • Output 77 kg N/ha • Nitrogen balance including animal production • Total N-surplus 2003 = 168 ktonnes or 54 kg N/ha(decrease of 8% from 2001) Source: Kväve- och fosforbalanser för jordbruksmark och jordbrukssektor 2003, Rapport MI40SM0501 , SCB 2005, Link

  12. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) • Legislation for protection of all water bodies in Europe • Lakes, Rivers, Coastal Waters, Groundwater (drinking water) • Sweden has over 85,000 lakes >1 ha and over 60,000 rivers. Lakes >50 ha and rivers >1000 ha are going to characterize water protection areas • Good water status before 2015, but exceptions can be accepted for Heavily Modified Bodies. • Based on the state of reference, intercalibrated between the countries in EU • The water shall have a price and the polluter has to pay? PPP (Polluter Pays Principle).

  13. 2003 Constuction of water administration boards in Sweden. 5 regions 2004 The first basis analysis, preliminary goals for the environment 2006 Publish and consult on timetable and work programmes for the production of river management plans 2006 Intercalibration 2007 Publish and consult on significant water management issues for each river basin district 2008 Publish and consult on drafts of the river basin management plans 2009 First water plan to be fulfilled 2012 Water plan operational 2015 Main environmental objectives to be fulfilled 2027 Last chance to meet the objectives after 2x6 year postponements Timetable

  14. THE SWEDISH WATER ADMINISTRATION UTREDNINGEN SVENSK VATTENADMINISTRATION THE SWEDISH WATERADMINISTRATION 5 river basin districts Bothnien Bay Bothnien Sea Northern Baltic Sea Kattegatt/Skagerrak”West sea” Southern Baltic Sea

  15. Questions • What is good water status? • What does Heavily Modified Bodies mean in different countries ? • How is PPP going to work?

  16. Good water status

  17. Intercalibration • All member states have identified water bodies with high and good ecological status • In 2006 the EU Commission will inter- calibrate the sites, which means the same objectives will apply for the same types of water bodies in all member states

  18. Little deviation from unaffected conditions Observed value EQR= Reference value Present and future (WFD) environmental objectives EQR=1 No or very little deviation from unaffected conditions High status Intercalibration 2006 Good status Moderate status Moderate deviation from unaffected conditions Unsatisfactory status Bad status EQR=0

  19. Biology Aquatic flora (macrophytes) Bottom fauna Fish Quality factors for classification of ecological status Phys/chem • Water temp • Oxygenation • Salinity • pH, alk, ANC • Nitrogen, Phosphorus • Toxic substances Hydromorp • Hydrological condition • Continuity • Morphological condition One out, all out principle

  20. High Biology Biology Biology Phys- chem Phys- chem Phys- chem Phys- chem Hydro- morph Hydro- morph Hydro- morph Hydro- morph Hydro- morph Use of quality factorsfor classifying ecological status Unsatis- factory Good Bad Moderate Biology Biology Phys- chem Not available in WFD

  21. Identified sensitive areas in EU:s Nitrate Directive

  22. Sensitive areas in Swedenaccording to the Nitrate Directive Problem in the Baltic sea? Phosphorus + Nitrogen Problem on the West coast? Nitrogen + Phosphorus

  23. Exceptions according toHeavy Modified Water Bodies

  24. Proportion of the flowing water that is characterized as Heavy Modified Water BodiesUnpublished material approx. • Belgian, average: 41% • Denmark, ? • Finland: 25% (km) • France: 26% • Ireland: 39% • Netherlands, average: 57% • Norway: 14% • Great Britain, average: 36% • Sweden: 8% • Germany: 37% Source: Anna Mcarthur, Federation of Swedish Farmers, unpublished

  25. Criteria in Sweden • Lakes with more than 3 m regulation depth • Lakes that were significantly lowered 1960 or later • Large dams for electricity production • Largest harbours

  26. Who has to pay and how is the price going to be established? PPP in WFD

  27. Some thoughts from LRF* in Sweden on how to divide PPP between the producer and the consumer- Example : Potatoes 1. Catch crop 2. Irrigation 3. Optimized fertilization 4. Minimized tillage Residual leakage * Federation of Swedish Farmers

  28. Some thoughts from LRF* in Sweden how to divide PPP between the producer and the consumer Example : Potatoes This leakage depends on HOW the farmer grows his potatoes This leakage is due to THAT potatoes is grown and is only affected by consumption. * Federation of Swedish Farmers

  29. Some thoughts from LRF* in Sweden how to divide PPP between the producer and the consumer Example : Potatoes Who is going to pay for the HOW-part? Who is going to pay for the THAT-part? * Federation of Swedish Farmers

  30. Thank you for your attention

More Related