1 EUROPEAN TOPIC CENTRE ON WATER Progress on EWN – rivers Steve Nixon ETC/Water.

1

EUROPEAN TOPIC CENTRE ONWATER

Progress on EWN – rivers

Steve NixonETC/Water

2


Rivers- basic3439 stations from 27 countries

568

310

100

200

300

400

500

600

AT BA BG CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HU IE IT LI LT LU LV MK NL NO PL RO SE SI SK

Num

ber o

f sta

tions

3


164 reference stations from 20 countries

29

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

BA BG CZ DE DK EE FI FR GB GR IE LT LV MK NO PL RO SE SI SK

Num

ber

of s

tatio

ns

4


2768 representative stations from 25 countries

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

AT BA BG CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HU IE IT LT LU LV MK NL PL RO SE SI SK

Num

ber

of s

tatio

ns

5


449 flux stations from 16 countries155

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

BG DK EE FI FR GB HU IE LT LV MK NL NO PL RO SE

Num

ber

of s

tatio

ns

6


No Eurowaternet-river contributions from:

• Belgium• Iceland• Portugal

• Turkey• Switzerland• Albania• Croatia• Serbia and

Montenegro

7


Rivers – country benchmarking

Assessment based on:• Number and type of stations provided• Station characteristics• Proxy pressure information• Determinands• Data quality

OVERALL LEAGUE TABLE!!!!!!!!

8


River station aspects evaluated

• Numbers of background plus representative stations

• Size of rivers included• Designation of station type• Geographic coverage• Geographic coordinates of stations• River name• Catchment name• Water Body name/ID• River Basin District name

Station aspects evaluationEstonia 93.6 Romania 62.6 Hungary 84.1 Poland 60.2 FYROM 79.9 Sweden 60.0

Liechtenstein 77.8 Finland 59.4 Denmark 76.4 Bosnia and

Herzegovina 57.2

Latvia 73.9 Italy 55.1 France 72.9 Netherlands 42.4 Austria 72.2 Greece 41.5

Czech Republic 71.6 Norway 39.3 Lithuania 71.5 Belgium 0

Slovak Republic 71.0 Iceland 0 Bulgaria 69.2 Portugal 0 Slovenia 67.7 Turkey 0

Luxembourg 66.7 Switzerland 0 United Kingdom 66.6 Albania 0

Ireland 65.4 Croatia 0 Spain 65.3 Serbia and

Montenegro 0

Germany 62.7

10


Stations – key gaps in data/information

• Number of stations in some countries• Geographic coverage• Size distribution of rivers – not enough

small and medium rivers• Water Body and River Basin District names

11


River characteristics aspects evaluated

• Upstream catchment area• Station altitude• River flow – long term annual average

Characteristics aspects evaluationCzech Republic 100.0 United Kingdom 70.5

Estonia 100.0 Luxembourg 66.7 Liechtenstein 100.0 Norway 66.7

Austria 99.9 Spain 64.3 Latvia 99.5 Bulgaria 43.6

Slovak Republic 99.4 Netherlands 32.5 Denmark 99.2 Italy 31.5 Hungary 99.0 Belgium 0 Romania 99.0 Greece 0 Sweden 98.9 Iceland 0

Lithuania 98.5 Ireland 0 Poland 98.3 Portugal 0 FYROM 96.7 Turkey 0 France 95.4 Switzerland 0

Germany 94.5 Albania 0 Finland 91.8 Croatia 0

Slovenia 81.9 Serbia and Montenegro

0

Bosnia and Herzegovina 75.7

13


Characteristics – key gaps in data/information

• River flow - gaps in data from 28 of 35 countries (none from 10)

• Station altitude – gaps in data from 20 countries (none from 9)

• Catchment area – gaps in data from 16 countries (none from 7)

14


Proxy pressure aspects evaluated

• Corine Land cover• Population density

Proxy pressure aspects evaluation

Estonia 100.0 Netherlands 27.5 Liechtenstein 100.0 Ireland 24.7

France 99.7 Finland 0.6 Spain 97.9 Albania 0

Denmark 93.2 Austria 0 Latvia 88.9 Belgium 0

Czech Republic 87.5 Bulgaria 0 Sweden 86.8 Greece 0

Slovak Republic 85.9 Iceland 0 Poland 81.5 Italy 0

Luxembourg 81.3 Lithuania 0 Hungary 79.8 Portugal 0 Slovenia 69.0 Turkey 0

United Kingdom 63.0 Switzerland 0 Germany 60.5 Bosnia and

Herzegovina 0

Norway 50.0 Croatia 0 FYROM

39.4 Serbia and

Montenegro 0

Romania 31.1

16


Proxy pressure – key gaps in data/information

• 15 countries with no or minimal information• Further 5 countries with less than 50 % of

the requested information supplied

17


Quality determinand aspects evaluated

• Number of stations with nutrient and organic pollution indicator data

• Latest year of data for each determinand group (2002 = 100%)

• Summary statistics• Time series – stations with 10 years and

greater 20 years consistent time series for each determinand group

Quality determinand aspects evaluationHungary 91 Bosnia and

Herzegovina 66

Lithuania 86 Norway 64 Latvia 86 United Kingdom 64 Austria 86 Bulgaria 61 Finland 85 FYROM 61 Sweden 85 Ireland 45 Slovenia 83 Romania 45 Estonia 81 Netherlands 32 Poland 80 Liechtenstein 12

Slovak Republic 79 Belgium 0 Germany 77 Iceland 0 Denmark 75 Portugal 0

Czech Republic 74 Turkey 0 Greece 73 Switzerland 0 France 72 Albania 0 Spain 70 Croatia 0 Italy 70 Serbia and

Montenegro 0

Luxembourg 69

19


Quality determinands – key gaps in data/information

• Total phosphorus data• Standard deviation and percentiles of data –

4 not provided any• 10 of the 27 countries providing data do not

have consistent time series of 10 years• 6 of the 27 countries providing data do not

have consistent time series of 20 years or more

20


Quality of data submitted – number of queries per number of data submitted

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

ES HU NL CZ LT BG FR IT PL GR GB RO AT DE MK DK FI LV EE

1 in

'n' d

ata

poin

ts

Overall “League Table” Estonia 94 Romania 59

Hungary 88 Finland 59 Latvia 87 Norway 55

Denmark 86 Bosnia and Herzegovina

50

France 85 Bulgaria 43 Slovak Republic 84 Italy 39 Czech Republic 83 Ireland 34

Sweden 83 Netherlands 34 Poland 80 Greece 29

Slovenia 75 Belgium 0 Spain 74 Iceland 0

Germany 74 Portugal 0 Liechtenstein 72 Turkey 0 Luxembourg 71 Switzerland 0

FYROM 69 Albania 0 United Kingdom 66 Croatia 0

Austria 65 Serbia and Montenegro

0

Lithuania 64

1 EUROPEAN TOPIC CENTRE ON WATER Progress on EWN – rivers Steve Nixon ETC/Water.

Documents

Transcript of 1 EUROPEAN TOPIC CENTRE ON WATER Progress on EWN – rivers Steve Nixon ETC/Water.