Environmental Evaluation – a SEPA Perspective

1. Environmental Evaluation – a SEPA Perspective Dr Chris J Spray MBE Director of Environmental Science Glasgow University 13th September 2007

2. Outline of Presentation • Who are SEPA and what do we do? • How do we use data and statistics? • Current challenges?

3. a. Who are SEPA and what do we do? • Non-departmental public body set up by Environment Act 1995 • Budget of £57m (05/06) • 54% from Scottish Executive Grant in Aid • 46% from charging schemes • 22 offices • 1150 staff

4. “To be an excellent environmental regulator and a recognised and influential authority on the environment”. SEPA’s Corporate Vision

5. To be an excellent environmental regulator What does it mean? • Effective and efficient – fit for purpose • Apply regulations in a proportionate, balanced, fair and legally correct way • Effective enforcement • Responding to complaints/ incidents • Base advice and decisions on sound science and monitoring of the environment • Promote best practice and influence operator performance • Engagement and openness • Provide guidance that is both flexible and consistent

6. To be a recognised and influential authority on the environment What does it mean? • Sample, monitor and assess Scotland’s environment • Provide clear, easy to understand, consistent and accessible information • Be credible, visible, effective and efficient • Provide expert advice based on sound science and understanding of the environment • Build our internal knowledge • Influence policy makers • Leading to an improved Scottish environment

7. State of Scotland’s Environment Report Many good news stories Scotland has a fantastic environment! Major challenges – human health, biodiversity, local air quality, waste and resource use, climate change …present major opportunities Authority on the environment

8. How we work: process and drivers State of the environment External Internal Driversfor monitoring Reporting EU/ legislation Interpretation What? Why? Where? When? How? Analysis & verification Sampling/ monitoring Programme

9. Aqueous discharge Increasedstreptococci: Strep throat, steptococcal toxic shock syndrome, flesh eating bacteria Run off Increasedfaecal coliforms: Gastro-intestinal illnesses How we work: complexity of science needed in decision making BATHING WATERS RECEPTOR IMPACT SOURCE Economic – closing down of beaches, tourism affected, businesses affected. Social – human casualties, loss of recreation. Environmental – ecosystem affected. PATHWAY Issues: % source apportionment, the cost of regulation, carrying capacity, precautionary principle

10. State of the Environment – Monitoring Networks Compliance with regulatory standards – industrial performance Investigations and projects – specific issues KPI’s – monitoring and performance Setting Boundaries – WFD targets Reporting on Trends – to EU, to general public, to academia. b. How do we use (and abuse!) data and statistics

11. 1. Monitoring Networks National Environmental Monitoring System (NEMS) Deals with 350,000 determinands per year Programme of planning, monitoring and reporting Deals with compliance, regulation and environmental samples

14. 2. Compliance with Regulatory Standards • Bathing Beaches • Industrial discharge consents • Water abstraction • Fish Farms

15. Marine Science in SEPA DEPOMOD OUTPUT for FISH CAGE CONSENTS

16. Marine Science in SEPA Continuous data Measurements • Advantages • Good Horizontal Resolution. • System Can be Undulated to Give Reasonable Horizontal and Vertical Resolution. • Can Cover a Large and Representative Area Easily and Efficiently • Disadvantages • Water Sampling and Electronic Measurements Difficult to Obtain Simultaneously. • Accuracy of Measurements Cannot be Confirmed Easily. • Cannot Obtain Good Vertical Resolution • Generates Large Data Sets

17. 3. Investigations and Projects Chirnside Papermill - location of the Papermill

18. ADMS 3.2 is a practical air dispersion model which allows a wide range of buoyant and passive releases to the atmosphere to be modelled either individually or in combination. ADMS 3.2 uses an up to date description of the atmospheric boundary layer and can model short time scale fluctuations. This allows ADMS 3.1 to model odours. The effect of buildings, terrain, and coastlines on dispersion can be taken into account. ADMS 3.2 links to other software packages, such as SURFER, for easy and effective display. ADMS 3.2 has been extensively validated against field data sets. ADMS 3.2 (Air Dispersion Modelling System)

19. ADMS 3.2 REQUIREMENTS Setup – General site details Source – Stack dimensions and release conditions Meteorology – Weather conditions Grids – Type and size of grid for output data Output – Source averaging times

20. SETUP

21. SOURCE

22. ADMS formatted hourly sequential meteorological data was provided by the Met Office for the Boulmer weather station located in northern England (1999-2003). Meteorology

23. The Model Grid

24. Results Long Term (annual average) (OUE m-3) odour concentrations from all stacks. 100% tile odour (daily average) (OUE m-3) from all stacks.

25. Results cont… 100.0% tile odour (15 minute average) (OUE m-3) from all stacks.

26. Discussion From the results it can be seen that with all stacks operating odour concentrations of 19 OUE can be found immediately south west of the site. Near to Rockcliffe cottage the odour concentrations are around 6-7 OUE Casella Stanger were contracted to carry out an odour survey at the site. They concluded that the six emission points released distinct odour (hedonic tone and intensity) at very low concentrations i.e. below 10 OUE. No monitoring data available to validate the model results apart from odour observations made by residents at Rockcliffe Guesthouse. By linking the odour observations made at Rockcliffe Guesthouse with the findings made by Casella Stanger it was possible to validate the model results.

27. Conclusions The buildings and terrain do have an effect on the dispersion of the emissions at the site. Building effect and downwash was observed during a site visit. With all stacks operating odour concentrations well in excess of the odour concentration of 1 OUE occurred at the site and at surrounding properties. The predominant wind direction is from the south west with low velocity winds from the north east so maximum odour concentrations occurred to the SW of the site. This modelling study has confirmed that E7 and E6 are the main contributors to the odour nuisance in the area and these stacks are currently in the process of being replaced. These changes have already reduced the odour nuisance surrounding the site. This will bring the site more in line with the EC regulations where odourous emissions must be controlled.

28. 4. KPI’s • Making sense from too much data • Required response to indication trends, infrastructure.

29. WFD - Standards - Intercallibration across Europe - Intercallibration between different data sets 5. Setting Regulatory Boundaries and targets

30. WFD requires all our water bodies to be of good ecological status by 2015 WFD - the reason for it • No water bodies should deteriorate in status • Whole process must be based on soundscience

31. For each surface water body; ecological status Groundwater status HIGH GOOD GOOD Good status Prevent deterioration MODERATE Preventdeterioration POOR Restore Restore BAD BAD WFD Objectives

32. What’s monitored where Achievements

33. 100 80 60 For the first time, we have standards which: - Are agreed at a UK level - Have been widely consulted on with stakeholders - All the standards have been designed to be relevant to ecological health and normative definitions TDI 40 20 0 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 -1 FRP (mg l ) Environmental standards Achievements

34. Ratio Sensitive/Insensitive Macroinvertebrate Taxa 6000+ sites in GB Middle of high -proportion sensitive exactly as expected. Proportion sensitive exactly as expected.

35. Zone of overlap of proportions of sensitive and insensitive taxa = GOOD

36. IS classification Achievements

38. EU, General Public, Academia, In-house. Peak at 15:45 Severe Flood Warning issued at 20:30 Flood Warning issued at 12:50 Flood Watch issued at 18:28 6. Reporting and Trends

39. c. Challenges 1 • Are our networks representative?

40. Monitoring sites used for classification 2007 2006 Achievements

41. c. Challenges 1 • Are our networks representative? • What are real discriminatory powers? • Are we measuring the right things? • Can we tell trends from noise (climate or weather?)

42. Trends and Noise

43. How to deal with changes in measurements and standards? How to link data sets between organisations? Length of the records and variation over time? How best to deal with trends? c. Challenges 2

44. 90 years Scotland Air Temp

45. How to deal with changes in measurements and standards? How to link data sets between organisations? Length of the records and variation over time? How best to deal with trends? How to deal with extremes? c. Challenges 2

46. Severe Flood Warning Flood Warning Lossie Hydrograph 1990-2003 How to deal with Extreme Values?

47. How to deal with changes in measurements and standards? How to link data sets between organisations? Length of the records and variation over time? How best to deal with trends? How to deal with extremes? How to deal with increasing variability and uncertainty? c. Challenges 2

48. River Dee (Aberdeenshire)

49. How to deal with changes in measurements and standards? How to link data sets between organisations? Length of the records and variation over time? How best to deal with trends? How to deal with extremes? How to deal with increasing variability and uncertainty? How to communicate all of this to those we regulate and the public? c. Challenges 2

50. Flow Frequency Analysis and Return Periods