Odense Pilot River Basin The Danish Pilot Project for Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive

(1)

Fyns Amt

Natur-og Vandmiljøafdelingen

PRB_Maastricht_31okt03.NR

Odense

PRB

InformalInformalmeeting ₂₃meeting ₂₃_-_-_{24 August 2006, Stockholm}_{24 August 2006, Stockholm}ofofWFD WFD CompetentCompetent AuthoritiesAuthorities

Odense Pilot River

Basin

The

Danish Pilot Project for Implementation

Danish Pilot Project for

Implementation

of

the

EU

Water

Framework

Directive

Harley

Harley Bundgaard Madsen Bundgaard Madsen Head

Head ofof MarineMarine-- and and HydrologyHydrology DepartmentDepartment, Fyn , Fyn CountyCounty, DK , DK

1.

Introduction

–

CA’s

in Denmark

2.

The

Article

5

provisional

report

3.

Pressure

and

impact

analyses

4.

Odense Fjord

-

Programme

of

Measures

5.

The

Basin

-

Integrated

Programme

of

measures

and

CE

-

Analyses

6.

(2)

Fyns Amt

Natur-og Vandmiljøafdelingen Odense

PRB

The 4 Water Districts

(3)

Fyns Amt

Natur-og Vandmiljøafdelingen PRB_Maastricht_31okt03.NR Odense

PRB

I, 2 I, 8 I, 5 I, 10 I, 1 II, 5 I, 4 II, 2 I, 11 II, 6 I, 6 II, 4 I, 9 I, 12 IV, 1 II, 1 I, 3 I, 7 II, 3 I, 13 III,1 I, 15 I, 14 Hovedopland e No rdjylland Lim fjorde n Mariage r Fjord Ra nde rs Fjo rd Djursla nd Århus Bu gt Ho rse ns Fjord Vade hav et Krus å / Vidå Lilleb ælt Kalu ndb org Ro skilde Fjo rd Øre su nd

Smålan dsfarv an det Køge Bugt Øster søe n Bornh olm Od ens e F jord Lilleb ælt Store bælt De t Sydfy ns ke Ø hav Nissum Bre dding

Ringkøb ing Fjo rd

M iljøcen terg ræ nser .sh p Denmark: •7 Competent Authorities (State level) •4 Water Districts •23 Sub basins Sub basins

(4)

Fyns Amt

Odense

(5)

Fyns Amt

PRB

CIS

-

WFD

S ta tus : 0 2 .0 6 .2 0 06

O th er activities – stru cture , o rg anisa tio n , w o rk p ro gram m e an d d eliverables to b e d ec id e d W orkin g G ro u p s – w ork p ro g ram m e and d eliverab les to be d ecid ed

W a te r D ire c to rs S teering of im plem entation process C hair: P residency, C o-chair: C om m ission S trate gic C o -o rd in atio n G r ou p

C o-ordination of work program m e C hair: C om m ission

A rt. 21 C om m ittee

W o rk ing G ro up A “E c o lo g ica l S ta tus ”

L e a d: J R C , D E , U K W o rk ing G ro up F “F lo o d s ” L e a d : C O M , F R W o rk ing G ro up D “R e p o rting ” L e a d: C O M , F R

In itia l p rio ritie s a g re e d b y W D

W o rk ing G ro up E “P rio rity S ub s ta n c e s ” L e a d: C O M W o rk ing G ro up C “G ro u nd w a te r” L e a d : C O M “W F D a nd A g ric ulture ” L e a d: F R , U K “W F D a nd h yd ro m o rp ho lo g y” L e a d: D E , U K O b je c tive s /E xe m p tio ns L e a d: D K , C O M W a te r s ca rc ity a nd d ro ug hts C he m ic a l M o nito ring L e a d : IT N o te : T h e in d ica tio n o n th e le a d is te n ta tiv e a n d n e e d s to b e co n firm e d . O th e r co -le a d s a re s till in v ite d .

(6)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Odense

Pilot River Basin

Denmark, Europe

Lake Bryrup

Odense Fiord

Natura 2000

areas _{Odense City}

(180.000 inhab.)

Odense River Odense Fjord

(7)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Odense River

Basin

Land use:

Urban areas: 16% Agriculture: 68% Woodland: 10%

Nature (meadows, mires, dry grasslands, wetlands): 6%

Agriculture:

1870 farms (50% livestock farms)

Livestock production:

60.000 LU (59% pigs, 37% cattle), 1 mill. pigs/year

Livestock density: 0,9 LU/ha

Natura 2000 areas Odense City (180.000 inhab.) Odense River Odense Fjord Area: 1050 km2 250.000 inhabitants

(8)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Odense Pilot River

Basin

The

overall

aims

¾

Phase

1:

Testing

the

EU

Guidance

Documents

¾

Phase

2: Input to

CIS

-

working

groups

¾

First

step: An

Article

5

provisional

report

by November

2003

¾

Second

step:

Programme

of

measures

and

the

P

ilot

R

iver

B

asin

M

anagement

P

lan

by end

of

2006

¾

Odense PRB

should

be

integrated

with

the

EU

-

-Interreg

Interreg

-

project

BERNET

-

CATCH,

Euroharp

and

Harmonirib

(9)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

ODENSE Pilot River Basin

Article 5

–

Risk Analyses

¾

¾Nutrient Loads from agricultureNutrient Loads from agriculture

¾

¾Hazardous substancesHazardous substances 100%

100% Coastal waters

Coastal waters

¾

¾Nitrate load and Hazardous substancesNitrate load and Hazardous substances

¾

¾High abstractionHigh abstraction 50% 50% Groundwater Groundwater tables tables ¾

¾Nutrient loads from agricultureNutrient loads from agriculture 86% 86% Lakes Lakes ¾ ¾PhysicalPhysical z

zRegulation of river and river valley’s due to Regulation of river and river valley’s due to

land reclamation for agricultural purpose land reclamation for agricultural purpose

¾

¾Waste Water outlets Waste Water outlets

z

zstorm water, scattered settlementsstorm water, scattered settlements

96% 96% Rivers Rivers Main Pressures Main Pressures

Reasons for not fulfilling objectives

Water Water bodies bodies at risk at risk Odense Fjord Odense Fjord catchment catchment Odense Fjord Pressures

(10)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Programme

of

Measures

Conceptual

Diagram

Agriculture

Physical

Conditions

Households

and Industri

Env. Objectives

Env. Conditions

Economy ok?

- Cost effectiveness

- Disproportional?

Max. acceptable

(11)

Fyns Amt

PRB

Ulva Ulva Filamentous

Filamentous algaealgae and

and eelgrasseelgrass

Impact

on

Odense Fjord:

Eutrophication

(12)

Fyns Amt

PRB

Intersex on snails

- caused by TBT etc.

(13)

Fyns Amt

PRB

Odense

PRB

Provisional

Objectives

for

Odense Fjord

¾

Eelgrass

depht

limit: Ref.

-

25% (

draft

national

proposal

)

¾

Biomass

of

Sea

Lettuce

(

Ulva

):

Ref.+50%

¾

TBT, PCB and PAH in sediments and

biota

:

OSPAR

-

effect

limits

¾

Sechi

depht

¾

(14)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Target Load Estimation

Ecological condition of Odense Fjord versus nitrogen loading from the catchment

(Conceptual Diagram) Macr oalg ae Dept limit Eel-g rass es Nitro gen Conc entra tion Loading Tons N/Year •Moderate... •Good……. •High……….. •Reference.. •Poor…..….. •Bad……….. WFD-Classification

Ecological qualiy elements

Max N-loadings ( Target load )

(15)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Reference

conditions

Approach

¾

No

undisturbed

water

bodies

in Odense

Fjord (

or

DK)

¾

Historical

data

z

rooted

vegetation

around

1900

¾

Empirical

modelling

z

historical

data

¾

Dynamic

modelling

(MIKE 3

hydrodynamic

-

eutrophication

3

-

D model)

z

(16)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Reference

conditions

Odense Fjord

¾

Use

of

historical

data

on

depht

limits for

eelgrasses

(17)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Reference

conditions

Odense Fjord

Use of

¾

Dynamic 3 D

Modeling

Mineralisation Oxygen Demand Uptake Nutrients Phytoplankton Detritus Oxygen Reaeration Death Death Settling Settling Detritus Mineralisation Primary Production Oxygen Release Macro algae Macro algae Death Death Eelgrass Filtrators Death Grazing Filtrators Excretion N: P: Macroalgae/Sea Lettuce (Ulva):

(18)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Estimation of Nitrogen Target Load

N-conc. in fjord vs. N-load

Eelgrass depth limit vs. N-load

Combination of historical data, empirical and dynamic modelling

Eel-grass depht limit vs. N-conc

(19)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Risk Assessment

Nitrogen Load (land based) to

Odense Fjord

(Normalized to mean water discharge 1980

(Normalized to mean water discharge 1980--2002)2002)

“Target load” WFD –objective

fulfilled

(Agriculture)

Baseline 2003- 2015:

(400-500 tons N reduced loading)

Measures agriculture(400 tons N):

•Additional recreation of wetlands

•Increased demands on utilization of manure

•Increased demands on use of catch crops

•Further improvements on utilization of animal fodder

•CAP-reform

Measures point-sources: •Reduced outlets from waste disposal site and scattered settlements

Baseline 1986-2003:

(1200 tons N reduced loading)

Measures agriculture(700 tons N):

•Obligatory fertilization norms and fertilization planning

•Demands on utilization of manure

oManure tanks

oImprooved spreading techniques

oNo spreading during winter time

oReduced use of artificial fertilizers

•Demands on use of catch crops

•Improved utilization of animal fodder reducing N in manure

•Recreation of wetlands

Measures point-sources:

•Enhanced nitrogen removal on municipal waste water treatment plants

•Reduced outlets from storm water and scattered settlements

(20)

Fyns Amt

PRB

63,9 287 25 144 50 7,2 2.500 (3,6%)

• Organic farming – increased area

244 9 122 18 2,2 2.000 ( 2,8%)

• Voluntary measures – EU subsidies (CAP) 300 54 150 108 16,2 70.000 (100%)

• Reduced livestock production (10.000 AU) 34 254 17 508 9,0 70.000 (100%)

• Reduced N-fertilizer quota (20%)

125 112 66 214 14,1 5.000 (7,1%)

• Set aside for new forest. - New forests on cultivated areas. 29 400 29 400 11,6 4.000 (5,7%)

• Set aside for wetlands. – Wetlands in river valleys. 14 93 7 185 1,3 5.000 (7,1%)

• Catch-crops: Increased use

0 19 0 38 0 3.200 (4,6 %)

• Catch-crops: Optimized utilization of catch-crops on areas with manure

34 71 17 142 2,4 70.000 (100%)

• 10% higher utilization of animal manure 0 23 0 45 0 70.000 (100%)

• Better utilization of animal fodder

Cost Effectiveness DKK/kg N Tonnes N Cost Effectiveness DKK/kg N Tonnes N Reduced Nitrogen loading Odense Fjord (50% retention) Reduced Nitrogen leaching Cost 1.000.000 DKK € Area involved Hectare (percent of agricultural area) Measure

Scenario on agricultural measures in the catchment of Odense Fjord to meet environmental objectives

(21)

Fyns Amt

PRB

(22)

Fyns Amt

PRB

Pragmatic modelling

46 measures in play

¾

4 types of WFD measures

z

Reduction in diffuse sources/agriculture

z

Groundwater measures (agriculture and

hazardous substances)

z

Point sources (waste water and rain water)

z

Re

-

establish

hydromorphological

altered

streams

(23)

Fyns Amt

PRB

Hydromorphological

(24)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Loss of habitats in

Odense

River Basin

Wetlands 1890 and 1992

(25)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Integrated

Programme

of

Measures

The

importance

of

the

retention factor

Arreskov lake

Store Øre lake

Sorte lake

Brænde-gård lake Nørre lake

Ground water Ground water

Odense River

Basin Ground water

50% retention 80% retention 80% retention 80% retention 80% retention 80% retention 50% retention 50% retention

Søbo lake Nørre Søby lake

Lange lake Dallund lake Fjellerup lake Brahe Trolle Slotslake

Ground water Ground water

(26)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Cost

Effecitve

Analyses, Odense RB

Integrated

PoM

Provisional

results

¾

¾ YearlyYearly costscosts ofof meeting meeting thethe objectivesobjectives in Odense RB:in Odense RB:

z

z 12 12 milllionmilllion Euros (Euros (welfarewelfare economiceconomic costscosts))

z

z 70%70% distributeddistributed onon measuresmeasures to to improveimprove hydromorphologicalhydromorphological

conditions

conditions and to and to reducereduce pollution from storm pollution from storm waterwater and and wastewaterwastewater from

from sparselysparsely builtbuilt upup areasareas..

Waste water (point sources):

2.5-27 7 14 22 Agriculture Wetlands

Buffer strips/restoring streams Afforestation

Cost-effectiveness (Euros/kg N)

(27)

Fyns Amt

PRB

Conclusion

¾

It’s

possible

to

establish

the

chain

:

Reference

conditions

-

>

Env

.

objectives

-

->

>

Target

loads

-

>

Measures

-

>

CEA

-

-analyses

analyses

-

>

Cost

effective

PoM’s

, so…

¾

It

can

be

done, but

¾

it’s

necessary

to

z

be

pragmatic, and

pragmatic

, and

z

to have an

adequate

monitoring

program

¾

We

need

a

common

understanding

on

”disproportional

(28)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Odense Pilot River

Basin

Thank

you

for

your

(29)

CEA-analyses - Measures agriculture N-reduction and hydromorphology of rivers

Effect of measures Odense Fjord Tons N Measures

Catch crops in river valleys

Extensification of cultivation in river valleys

Permanent grassland groundwater zones

5% higher utilization of N in animal manure

Catch crops

Reduced N-Norm (-10%) in river valleys

Restrictions of cultivation on erosion potentiel areas Permanent grassland Afforestation 863 Use of measure (% of agriculture land)

(30)

Fyns Amt

PRB

Lessons learned?

¾

¾ Total cost of WFD in Odense River Basin?Total cost of WFD in Odense River Basin?

z

z Measures to restore streams large share of total costMeasures to restore streams large share of total cost

•

• HAS SIGNIFICANT DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS ON HAS SIGNIFICANT DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS ON NUTRIENT

NUTRIENT

z

z Point sources storm water runPoint sources storm water run--off relatively large costs in some off relatively large costs in some

water bodies

¾

¾ Pragmatic approach can give remarkably improved foundation for Pragmatic approach can give remarkably improved foundation for

decision making

z

z Target setting at water body level for all parameters is a majorTarget setting at water body level for all parameters is a major

task

z

z Can the existing data carry more detailed models? Can the existing data carry more detailed models?

z

(31)

Fyns Amt

Odense

PRB

Cost

effective

analyses

Step by step

1.

1. OperationalOperational objectivesobjectives. Sub. Sub-basin-basin levellevel ofof analysisanalysis decideddecided 2.

2. EstimateEstimate and includeand include effectseffects ofof baseline measuresbaseline measures 3.

3. IdentifyIdentify relevant measuresrelevant measures to solveto solve problems in waterproblems in water bodiesbodies

z

z Unit Unit effectseffects (Kg N/ha)(Kg N/ha)

z

z Unit Unit costscosts(EURO/ha)(EURO/ha)

z

z CostCost-effectiveness-effectiveness (EURO/kg N)(EURO/kg N)

z

z MaximumMaximum potential dosagepotential dosage in eachin each sub-sub-basinbasin ((e.g. by GIS)e.g. by GIS)

4.

4. CostCost-effectiveness-effectiveness curvescurves for eachfor each sub-sub-basinbasin and groundwaterand groundwater areaarea 5.

5. EstimateEstimate downstreamdownstream effectseffects ofof measuresmeasures to getto get an integratedan integrated analysisanalysis 6.

6. Find most costFind most cost--effectiveeffective solution includingsolution including downstreamdownstream effectseffects and calculateand calculate total total

costs

costs ofof POMPOM

7.