Some concepts for quantifying emissions of Priority Substances WFD WG E Drafting Group on Emissions meeting 9 September 209 Some concepts for quantifying emissions of Priority Substances Bo N. Jacobsen Project manager – Water European Environment Agency

of Hazardous Substances Some elements in the assessment and control of hazardous substances in water Monitoring Detection methods Assesment and Control of Hazardous Substances in Water Fate Regulation Pollution control Risk assessment (Jacobsen, 2003)

Emissions:only a fraction Toxicity testing Emissions:only a fraction Chemical analyses Drinking water Wastewater Receiving water Sludge Environment Monitoring Detection methods Contaminated soils and sediments Emissions Assesment and Control of Hazardous Substances in Water Process kinetics Fate Regulation Industrial products Modelling Pollution control Risk assessment Cleaner industrial production Consumers’ awareness Harzard assessment Treatment technology Exposure assessment

Concepts for quantifying emissions to water Direct reporting from MS Via e-PRTR per facility Via WFD per RBD / sub-unit (Guidance 21, p.47) Via ESTAT / OECD JQ-IW per country (Table 7) Estimation from specific studies EU granted studies (NORMAN, KNAPPE, NEPTUNE,...) National monitoring programmes Own data from utilities To be extrapolated via UWWTD reporting database (WISE) Estimation from production, consumptions and uses (detergents, pharmaceuticals, EUSES approach) Aggregated data on emissions can be compared with river monitoring data from flux stations

Urban waste water treatment WISE MapViewer, ref. 2005/2006 Urban waste water treatment Live zoom Urban Waste Water Treatment Tertiary treatment (nutrient removal) Secondary treatment (removal of oxygen consuming substances) Primary treatment No treatment Zoom

Detailed knowledge is available on UWWTP locations, type, size, etc.

Currently, relatively few data are displayed on WISE MapViewer

Monitoring data sources to shortlist emerging pollutants ”global monitoring” e.g. in the arctics identifying trends in occurrence of bio-magnifying substances (AMAP Programme,..) River or Sea Convention priorities from own monitoring programmes (water, sediment, biota,..) National priorities from own monitoring programmes (water, sediment, biota,..) Local or regional investigative monitoring, see following examples linking with biomonitoring

Algae toxicity - Avedoere WWTP, DK – presented at NORMAN workshop 17-18.03.2008, see website Toxic Units for EC10,72h (DHI, 2006;) Year n Influent * Effluent 4 21 < 3,3 28 < 2 2005 4 / 2 ** Arithmetric average of flowproportionale week composite samples Algae: Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata ; ISO Standard 8692 * incl. Reject water ** 4 influent- og 2 effluent samples

Contributions to calculated Toxic Units for algae EC50 Avedoere WWTP (DK) – presented at NORMAN workshop 17-18.03.2008, see website

bioaccumulation in mussels – Avedoere WWTP exposed to undiluted treated effluents for 6-7 weeks

Selected results for bioaccumulation in mussels exposed to Avedoere WWTP effluent in 2002 – presented at NORMAN workshop 17-18.03.2008, see website

bioaccumulation in mussels, Avedoere WWTP, DK (2005) Bromated flame retardants – presented at NORMAN workshop 17-18.03.2008, see website

Tiered risk assessment approach Basic ecotoxicity and exposure data no No environmental hazard to be expected PEC / PNEC ≥ 1 ? yes Refined ecotoxicity and exposure data no PEC / PNEC still ≥ 1 ? yes (Knacker and Duis, 2003) Risk management

Summary Emission of hazardous substances may be quantified by different strategies Comparisons of independent estimations give an impression of data coverage and accuracy Coupling of monitoring by chemical analyses and bioassays give added value for monitoring efficiency and assessment of emerging pollutants

Thank you for your attention What do you think ?