1. Developments in Critical Loads and Dynamic Modelling Maximilian Posch Coordination Center for Effects (CCE) ICP Modelling & Mapping (ICP M&M) Working Group on Effects (WGE) MNP, Bilthoven, The Netherlands

2. Update of CL and DM data in spring 2005: 2 calls for data: 1.CLs of heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Hg): - different criteria (ecosystem/health) - 18 NFCs responded - EMEP/MSC-E provided depositions/conc. (emission uncertainties!) - Health->agriculture->fertiliser inputs important - Pb more exceeded than Cd - use in review/revision of HM Protocol as yet undecided - CCE Report distributed; available on www

3. Update of CL and DM data in spring 2005 (2): 2. CLs of acidity & nutrient N and DynMod of acidity: - 14/13 provided update (of 24 NFCs) - EMEP/MSC-W provided deposition data (also BC deposition!) - Overall, not many changes in CLs - DynMod clearly adds to complexity … - CCE Report being sent out; already available on www

4. Coverage: Grid: CL data from NFCs – Green: Also DynMod – Red: Also Target Loads

5. Exceedance of acidity CLs (1): Exceedance %: EU25: 17.9 11.0 7.0 4.1 3.7 3.4 1.8 Europe: 8.6 6.1 4.3 3.2 3.0 2.9 0.9

6. Exceedance of acidity CLs (2): Exceedance %: EU25: 17.9 11.0 7.0 4.1 3.7 3.4 1.8 Europe: 8.6 6.1 4.3 3.2 3.0 2.9 0.9

7. Exceedance of eutrophication CLs (1): Exceedance %: EU25: 65.2 60.4 55.9 45.7 40.9 38.6 24.6 Europe: 28.5 28.0 26.9 23.6 22.3 21.6 9.6

8. Exceedance of eutrophication CLs (2): Exceedance %: EU25: 65.2 60.4 55.9 45.7 40.9 38.6 24.6 Europe: 28.5 28.0 26.9 23.6 22.3 21.6 9.6

9. Use to date (Gothenburg Protocol, NEC Directive): - Within every 150x150 EMEP grid cell so-called (protection and) exceedance isolines were calculated by the CCE and provided to CIAM/TFIAM. - This is an approximation; and results in a large amount of data. Also, the implementation in optimization algorithms is non-trivial. New challenges: - 50x50 grid: number of grids 500  4,000 - ecosystem-specific depositions (>= 3 per grid cell)  too many data and equations for optimisation … The Use of CLs in Integrated Assessment (IA) i.e. how CL data are used by CIAM/TFIAM

10. AAE k is the AAE in receptor k for the new (or to be determined) emissions E p,j of pollutant p in emitter area j; AAE 0,k is the AAE for the reference emissions E 0,p,j ; N p is the number of emitter regions for pollutant p, P is the number of pollutants (P=3), f is a unit conversion factor, K is the number of receptor areas. a p,k,j are the coefficients – impact factors -- determining the linear model, characterising the ‘strength’ of the relationship between emissions of pollutant p in country j and AAE in region k. … therefore new methodology: Linearised relationship between AAE and emissions: [Similar methodology used in Life Cycle Impact Assessment]

11. Graphical representation of impact coefficients for eutrophication:

12. Graphical representation of impact coefficients for acidity:

13. How good is the linear approximation? (1) Country-to-country relationships (acidity & nutrient N): 2 examples: BE  NL and DE  SE SO 2 : red; NO 2 : green; NH 3 : blue acidity nutrient N

14. How good is the linear approximation? (2) (a) All countries  GB (b) All countries to Europe acidification: red eutrophication: green

15. Ongoing Work: - Derive impact factors for Target Loads instead of CLs (exceedance  non-attainment) - Investigate how time information (RDT and DDT) can be used in IAM

16. More information: CCE reports 2005: - Heavy Metals Report - Status Report 2005 CCE website: www.mnp.nl/ccewww.mnp.nl/cce Thank you for your attention!