HELCOM and non-HELCOM countries applied in CART calculations Bo - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transboundary riverine inputs from HELCOM and non-HELCOM countries applied in CART calculations Bo Gustafsson, BNI bo.gustafsson@su.se www.balticnest.org

What is it about? Environmental Politics/Policy  Clear water objectives  Nutrient concentrations close to natural levels  Natural occurrences of algal blooms  Natural abundances of Science Targets plants and animals Basin� Winter� Summer�  Oxygen concentrations a � Secchi� DIN� DIP� Chl� KT� 5.0� 0.49� 1.5� 7.6� close to natural levels DS� 5.0� 0.56� 1.9� 7.8� BP� 2.6� 0.30� 1.7� 7.4� BS� 2.8� 0.19� 1.5� 6.8� Country� Phosphorus� BB� 5.2� 0.07� 2.0� 5.8� DK� 38� Maximum GR� 5.2� 0.41� 2.7� 5.0� Science EE� 320� Allowable Inputs GF� 3.8� 0.59� 2.0� 5.5� FI� 360� (330+30)� � DE� 170� (110+60)� LV� 220� LT� 1470� PL� 7480� Politics/Policy Country-wise RU� 3790� reduction SE� 530� Science allocation �

Resolution The 7-basin resolution of MAI The catchment of each sub- basin is shown in colors

Maximum allowable inputs and needed reductions Maximum Allowable Inputs Reference inputs Needed reductions Baltic Sea Sub-basin TN TP TN TP TN TP tons tons tons tons tons tons Kattegat 74,000 1,687 78,761 1,687 4,761 0 Danish Straits 65,998 1,601 65,998 1,601 0 0 Baltic Proper 325,000 7,360 423,921 18,320 98,921 10,960 Bothnian Sea 79,372 2,773 79,372 2,773 0 0 Bothnian Bay 57,622 2,675 57,622 2,675 0 0 Gulf of Riga 88,417 2,020 88,417 2,328 0 308 Gulf of Finland 101,800 3,600 116,252 7,509 14,452 3,909 Baltic Sea 792,209 21,716 910,343 36,893 118,134 15,177

20000� Phosphorus 18000� Reference inputs Airborne� (tons/yr)� 16000� Waterborne� 14000� Atmospheric nitrogen input� 12000� 10000� deposition from EMEP Phosphorus� 8000� Waterborne inputs from 6000� the PLC data base 4000� 2000� Reference period 1997- 0� 2003 BB� BS� BP� GF� GR� DS� KT� 450000� Nitrogen 400000� Airborne� 350000� (tons/yr)� Waterborne� 300000� input� 250000� Nitrogen� 200000� 150000� 100000� 50000� 0� BB� BS� BP� GF� GR� DS� KT�

With expected reductions Needed reduction given by the difference Needed between the total Total load reduction loads to the basin to the basin Atm dep, and the MAI plus Total expected basin expected load reductions from non-HELCOM MAI

Allocation principles How the shares on inputs from different Contracting Parties to a Baltic Sea sub-basin are determined Example Nitrogen Baltic proper

The country-wise reduction is determined by the share of the inputs (polluter pays principle) for each basin and nutrient X =

The “Country - basin” catchments • Inputs are primarily assigned to the country doing the monitoring (owning the river mouth) • Major rivers carry nutrients from upstream countries (transboundary inputs) Reduction requirements are shared with the countries upstream

Allocation with expected reductions from non-HELCOM countries Example GUR Phosphorus Before allocation only atmospheric P load is CART: The reduction is Transboundary subtracted. shared between the sharing among coastal states, EE and LV both CPs and BY Other� Atm� 4%� of LV’s reduction requirement RU� 10%� BY� 41%� LV� EE� LT� 88%� 12%� 9%� LV� 28%� The 270 on LV is shared HELCOM� 96%� LV = 86 (28%) Needed reduction LT = 26 (9%) 308 ton RU = 30 (10%) LV = 270 (88%) BY = 128 (41%) EE =38 (12%)

Waterborne transboundary inputs The transboundary input (to the Baltic) is given by the observed input at the border between a and b, reduced by the retention in country b

“ ” “B ” “ ” “ ” Transboundary waterborne reference data ö from PLC 5.5 and used in CART - 2013 “ ” From Via To Border Retention To Baltic Share of input TN TP TN TP TN TP TN TP tonnes tonnes tonnes tonnes (%) (%) From non-Contracting Parties: Czech Poland BAP 5,700 410 0.4 0.28 3,420 295 1.1 1.7 Belarus Lithuania BAP 13,600 914 0.54 0.53 6,256 430 2.1 2.5 Ukraine Poland BAP 4,124 127 0.4 0.28 2,474 91 0.8 0.5 Belarus Poland BAP 5,071 331 0.4 0.28 3,043 238 1.0 1.4 Total BAP 15,193 1,055 5.1 6.1 Belarus Latvia GUR 8,532 1,360 0.27 0.32 6,228 925 7.9 41.4 Between Contracting Parties Lithuania Latvia BAP 5,516 158 0.39 0.58 3,365 66 1.1 0.4 Poland Russia BAP 4,400 320 0.30 0.37 3,080 202 1.0 1.2 Germany Poland BAP 2.337 101 0.8 0.6 Total BAP 8,782 369 3.0 2.1 Lithuania Latvia GUR 7,185 282 0,27 0,32 5,245 192 6.7 8.6 Russia Latvia GUR 4,256 734 0,54 0,71 1,957 215 2.5 9.6 Total GUR 7,202 407 9.2 18.2 Finland Russia GUF 0.48 0.82 5,353 49 5.2 0.7

End result are tables with detailed Country by basin reduction requirements* Example: Nitrogen Baltic proper Transboundary� shares � Country� by� basin� reduction� Nitrogen� Non- before� deduction� CART � HELCOM� Baltic� proper � HELCOM� transboundary� shares � countries � countries � DK� 2136� � � 2136� EE� 382� � � 382� FI� 424� � � 424� DE� 6922� 497� � 7419� LV� 2360� -715� � 1645� LT� 9550� 715� -1330� 8935� PL� 45178� 158� -1900� 43436� RU� 3153� -655� � 2498� SE� 8356� � � 8356� Gothenburg� Protocol� expected� reduction� in� non� Contracting� parties� 14725� � � 14725� Expected� reduction� from� shipping� 5735� � � 5735� BY� � � 1977� 1977� CZ� � � 727� 727� UA� � � 526� 526� Sum� 98921� 0� 0� 98921� � *Complete tables for basins with CART>0 in the summary report to 2013 Ministerial Meeting

In the Ministerial Declaration summarized as

CART follow-up ● Follow-up of how the countries perform on nutrient input reductions ● Have been done on data 1994(5)-2012

Definition of Net inputs Net inputs = airborne +waterborne +transboundary to other countries -transboundary from other countries

Evaluation against input ceilings Ceiling = Net Reference inputs (1997-2003) – CART

Example: Nitrogen Baltic proper Reference inputs 97-03, PLC 5.5 Ceiling BAP Water Air Transb. Net CART 7910 DK 1864 8182 0 10046 2136 1413 EE 1134 661 0 1795 382 1569 FI 0 1993 0 1993 424 27473 DE 6847 25708 2337 34892 7419 6091 LV 10134 967 -3365 7736 1645 33093 LT 42536 2384 -2891 42028 8935 160857 PL 192832 19655 -8194 204293 43436 9253 RU 10950 3881 -3080 11751 2498 30942 SE 31382 7916 0 39298 8356 33002 OC 0 47727 0 47727 14725 1434 SS 0 7169 0 7169 5735 7322 BY 0 0 9299 9299 1977 2693 CZ 0 0 3420 3420 727 1948 UA 0 0 2474 2474 526 325001 Sum 297679 126243 0 423922 98921

Estimation of transboundary input time-series 1994-2012 Assume that transboundary inputs change in proportion to the total waterborne input from the country-basin catchment Example: German contribution to PL is calculated from PL waterborne inputs (about 0.87% of PLs waterborne inputs)

A good example - Lithuania

Lithuania supplied time-series of inputs at borders Nitrogen Phosphorus 10000 1000 9000 900 800 8000 700 7000 600 6000 BY -> LT BY -> LT 500 5000 LT -> LV, BP LT -> LV, BP 400 4000 LT -> LV, GR LT -> LV, GR 300 3000 200 2000 100 1000 0 0 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 Time-series of flow-normalized transboundary nitrogen input to the Baltic Sea based on monitoring at the border taking into account retention.

Border monitoring data important Input� ->� BP� Simple� approach� Using� border� data� � TN� TP� TN� TP� Riverine� inputs� 40952� 1776� 41772� 1781� Point� 223� 11� 223� 11� Net� -1855� -194� -4445� -383� transboundary� Atm.� Dep.� 2098� 0� 2098� 0� Net� 41418� 1593� 39648� 1409� � � � � � Input� ->� GR� � � � � � TN� TP� TN� TP� Net� 5245� 192� 5156� 65� transboundary� Atm.� Dep.� 455� � 455� � Net� 5700� 192� 5611� 65� Table� 4:� Comparison� between� 2010-2012� average� normalized� inputs� from� the� Follow� up� assessment� and� the� analysis� of� Lithuanian� data� time-series� done� here.�

Effect of new data on retention An example is to calculate input ceilings in two cases and compare with the ceilings derived from 2013 Ministerial Decl.: Scenario 1: retention increased enough to half transboundary contributions Scenario 2: retention is reduced with 50% (German and Finnish contributions are doubled)