Nitrates pollution in the EU: policy approaches, lessons

Nitrates pollution in the EU: policy
approaches, lessons learnt and
challenges
Alia Atitar de la Fuente
DG Environment
Unit Agriculture, Forests & Soil
Nitrates Sector
Reggio Emilia
14 March 2014
Outline of the presentation
- Trends in livestock production, manure and fertiliser use,
nutrients surplus in the EU
- Overview of nitrate levels in Europe (results from the 20082011 reporting period)
- The Nitrates Directive: how it works
- The Nitrates Directive: successes and challenges
- Other policies and measures on manure management
- Specific issues: manure processing, horticulture
- Conclusions
Trends in livestock production periods 2004-2007 and 2008- 2011
in EU27 (based on EUROSTAT)
Cattle: 2% decrease
in EU 27. Significant
increase in the
Netherlands (+6%),
Poland (+4%) and
France (+4%).
Dairy cattle: 5% decrease
in EU 27. Significant
increase in Luxembourg
(+8%), the Netherlands (+4%) and Denmark (+3%).
Pig: 5% decreased in EU 27. Significant increase in Greece (+10%),
the Netherlands (+7%), Luxembourg (+6%), and Estonia (+3%).
Poultry: no change on average in EU-27. Significant increase in Latvia
(+28%), Slovenia (+22%), Austria (+19%), and the Netherlands
(+13%).
Estimated consumption of manufactured fertilisers, 2009
(kg of nutrient per hectare of UAA) (EUROSTAT)
Nitrogen surplus in EU27(kg N per ha), average 20012004 vs 2005-2008 (EUROSTAT)
- Water quality
• - Total number of monitoring stations increased in EU27
(+10% compared to 2004-2007)
- - Water quality improved from 2004-2007 to 2008-2011
% of groundwater stations
exceeding 40 and 50 mg/l
nitrates
% of surface water stations
exceeding 40 and 50 mg/l
nitrates
Groundwater - Period 2008-2011
13,9% of stations > 50 mg/l nitrate (15% in 2004-2007 period)
5,6% of stations – 40-50 mg/l nitrate (6% in 2004-2007 period)
2008-2011 compared to 2004-2007
Stable and decreasing: 73,4%
Upward: 26,6%
2004-2007 compared to 2000-2003
Stable and decreasing: 66%
Upward: 34%
Period 2008-2011
Average values of nitrate concentrations in groundwater stations
Surface waters - Period 2008-2011
2,2 % of stations > 50 mg/l nitrate (3% of stations in the 2004-2007 period)
2,4% of stations – 40-50 mg/l nitrate (3% of stations in the 2004-2007 period)
2008-2011 compared to 2004-2011
Stable and decreasing: 81,4%
Upward: 18,6%
2004-2007 compared to 2000-2003
Stable and decreasing: 70%
Upward: 30%
Period 2008-2011
Annual average values of nitrate concentrations in fresh surface water stations
Period 2008-2011
Trophic state of surface waters
Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC)
• OBJECTIVE: reduce water pollution caused by nitrates from
agricultural sources and prevent further such pollution
Key elements of the Nitrates Directive
1) Water monitoring
Water courses, lakes, coastal & transitional & marine waters, groundwaters
(issue: density of monitoring, comparability)
2) Identification of polluted waters or waters at risk of pollution
3) Designation of nitrate vulnerable zones (or adoption of the
"whole territory approach")
4) Elaboration of codes of good agricultural practices
5) Elaboration of action programmes (obligatory within NVZ)
6) Reporting
MSs → Commission (NVZ, AP, CGAP)
Commission → Parliament, Council, general public (implementation of
Directive)
Identification of polluted waters
1. Surface freshwaters, which contain or could contain > 50
mg/l nitrates, if no action is taken
2. Groundwater which contain or could contain> 50 mg/l
nitrates if no action is taken
(issue: monitoring depth)
3. Natural freshwater lakes, other freshwater bodies,
estuaries, coastal waters and marine waters which are found
to be eutrophic or in the near future may become eutrophic
if no action is taken
(issue: methodology)
Designation of NVZ
Two possible approaches:
1) Designation of NVZ (land draining into polluted waters or
that might become polluted if no action is taken)
2) Implementation of the action programme
on the whole territory (art. 3(5))
Finland, Germany, Luxemburg, Austria, Netherlands,Denmark,
Ireland, Lithuania, Malta, Romania and Slovenia
Designation of Nitrates Vulnerable Zones
Nitrates Directive
State of implementation
on NVZ:
•Bigger NVZ area in EU over time
•Further designation required
in several areas as regards e.g.
eutrophication
(e.g. Baltic Sea catchment)
•NVZ revision process has to fully
consider WFD/MSFD objectives
Codes of Good Agricultural Practice
Measures in Annex II
•Periods when fertilizer application is inappropriate
•Capacity and construction of storage vessels for livestock manure
•Land application on water-saturated, flooded, frozen or snow-covered
ground
•Buffer strips near water courses
•Application of fertilizer on steeply sloping ground
•…
Action Programmes
Annex III + Annex II
•Periods when fertilizer application is prohibited
•Min. requirements for capacity and construction of storage facilities
for livestock manure
•Limitation of land application of fertilizer
•Max. application standard of 170 Kg N/ha/year from livestock manure
•Land application on water-saturated, flooded, frozen or snow-covered ground
•Buffer strips near water courses
•Application of fertilizer on steeply sloping ground
•Procedures for land application guaranteeing uniformity of spreading
Main positive developments of the Nitrates directive
Average water QUALITY is improving in
groundwater and surface waters
Manure seen as a RESOURCE
Increased manure EFFICIENCY through better
application timing and advanced spreading
techniques
Improvements in manure STORAGE
Phase feeding to match animal N needs and
reduce excretion
Other relevant legislation
Overall impact of intensive livestock rearing:
•Prevention and control of industrial emissions: Directive on
industrial emissions 2010/75/EU (IED)/IPPC(pig and poultry)
Air emission from livestock manure:
•National emission ceilings in place for 2010 in the NEC Directive
(2001/81/EC) (now under revision)
•Air Quality Directive (1999/30/EC)
Ammonia contributing to particulate matter in the
atmosphere
Rules for placing livestock manure and/or processed
products on the market:
•The Animal By-products Regulation (1069/2009/EU)
supplemented with Regulation (142/2011/EU)
•On-going Revision of the fertilizers regulation
Specific issues: manure processing, horticulture
•
•
Manure processing
Livestock production systems have various effects on the
environment (emissions to air, losses to waters, impacts on
biodiversity, etc.)
Better management of manure is a key solution to improve
water quality and environmental performance of agriculture
Main results from the study 2011 "Manure processing
activities in EU)
7.8% of the livestock manure production in the EU, equal to 108
million ton, is being processed.
The largest share of the livestock manure production is being
processed in Italy, Greece and Germany, with 36.8, 34.6
14.8% of their manure production respectively
and
However there is a lack of data
However, these figures hide very different realities (1):
Purposes: energy production, nutrients recovery, N removal, etc.
Processing strategies:
 Surplus area: focus is nutrients recovery or N removal
 No surplus area: increase economical value (efficiency),decrease
costs, etc.
However, these figures hide very different realities (2):
•
Environmental performance: in terms of energy consumption,
CO2 emissions, etc.
Study: Manure processing activities in Europe:
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-nitrates/studies.html
Main challenges for manure processing
•Manure processing encloses a very broad range of technologies
with different objectives, environmental performance, etc.
 A case-by-case approach is needed to:
Define market and legislative framework:
Standards (chemical values, nutrient contents, unwanted
substances-heavy metals, etc.)
•
Chose the right processing strategy and technology:
•
Surplus/non surplus area
Improve environmental performance:
•
Energy consumption, etc.
Deal with costs:
•
transport costs/Local solutions
Foster knowledge and research
Manure processing:
win-win solutions for farmers and the environment
?
YES… provided…
There is an integrated approach with preventive measures
aiming at reducing the pollution at source
Manure processing is part of such an integrated approach
A case by case approach to deal with the challenges of
manure processing (legal framework, environmental performance,
etc.)
Manure processing does not result in a reduction of level of
ambition of other manure management measures (balanced
fertilisation, adequate storage, etc.)
Conclusions
• Nitrates Directive: successful policy approach  water quality
improvement
• Nitrates Directive: a piece of an integrated policy towards protection
of water quality and environment
• Challenges still remain (hot spots of pollution, eutrophication,
controls, etc.)
• Technology development (manure processing, etc.)
• Co-benefits in relation to other policies (Phosphorus, Ammonia
emissions, etc.)
THANK YOU!

Download Report