Acid Rain –Lessons Learned from >50 Years of

Science and Policy InteractionsPeringe Grennfelt

IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute

Geneva 11 December 2019

Celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Air Convention

Acid Rain - Discovery year 12 BC1

Acid Rain - A new environmental threat, with large

consequences for man and environment.

Svante Odén’s message in Dagens Nyheter 24

October 1967.

Acid rain became immediately a top story.

The issue was brought to international attention

within weeks and

OECD decided within a couple of years to conduct a

scientific investigation of the international

dimension of the problem.

Svante Odén.

1) BC = Before the Convention

Göran Persson tookOdén’s observations to the OECD

The OECD project 1972-77

Transboundary transport of Sulphur

Involved 11 West European countries

Main Conclusion: “Sulphur compounds do travel long

distances in the atmosphere and has shown that the air

quality in any European country is measurably affected by

emissions from other European countries” (OECD 1977)

The project paved the road for the European Monitoring and

Evaluation Programme (EMEP), starting in 1977

Brynulf Ottar

Anton Eliassen

SciencePolicy

The first alarm,

Odén 1967

OECD projekt 72-75

CLRTAP

Convention 1979

First S Protocol

1985

Second Sulphur

Protocol 1994

Gothenburg

Protocol 1999

EU CAFE Proposal

Critical loads and

levels

Soil acidification verified

Multipollutant integrated

assessment model

Dynamic modelling

Recovery

Dis

co

ve

ryC

on

se

ns

us

Inn

ova

tive

str

ate

gie

s

Lin

ka

ge

sw

ith

em

erg

ing

iss

ue

s EU NEC Directive

Gothenburg Prot.

Revison 2012

Climate, human

health,intercontinental

transport, nitrogen

NOx Protocol 1988

Start ICPs.

Start of EMEP 1977

2010

1970

1980

1990

2000

A quick look at the timeline

Catchment recovery

experiments (Gårdsjön)

EU NEC Directive

OECD: ”Acid rain a

transboundary problem

Late 80’s, and 90’sCritical loadsCost-effective strategiesSecond sulphur protocolGothenburg Protocol

Early 80’sForest damagesFirst sulphur protocolICP programmes on effects

1970’sLake acidification Transboundary transportEMEP and CLRTAP

After 2000RecoveryHealth effects Nitrogen Climate interactionsHemispheric transport

SNSF project 72-80

CLRTAP Assessment

Report 2016

Sweden’s case study

1972

UN Confeference

Conclusion 1972

Forest dieback changed the scene

Forest damages observed in Germany in 1980

Professor Bernhard Ulrich highlighted the problem

The large problems in Eastern Europe –

The “Black Triangle”

The 30% club and the first sulphur protocol 1985

Sta of rt hthe ICPs

NGOs became important

UK minister of environment visiting Sweden and Norway 1985

Beginning of1980s

Bernhard Ulrich

Critical Loads and Integrated

Assessment Modelling

Critical Loads first discussed in 1982

The large steps were taken through a workshops in

Norway and Sweden 1986 and 1988

The Executive Body decided in 1988 to use the concept

Mapping of Critical loads became central for the future

protocols

acidity

acidity

nutrient N

nutrient N

Jan Nilsson

The Second sulphur protocol based on IAM

Key features

– Exceedance of Critical Loads for ecosystems effects

– Source attributions of deposition

– Costs for control

– Integrated assessment models linked emissions, their

control and costs to exceedances of critical loads

– An optimized strategy by which a certain environmental

improvement should be reached to the least cost for all

Europe.

– The objective was expressed as gap closure of the

exceedances of Critical Loads.

Bob Wilson Leen Hordijk

THE GAP

GAP CLOSURE

Beginningof 1990s

A multi-pollutant multi-effect agreement -

The Gothenburg Protocol 1999

Revision of the NOx protocol requested a

more advanced solution.

The IAM for the Gothenburg Protocol

managed to include several problems and

several compounds

Key model development at IIASA

Large success in negotiations

End of the 1990s

Max Posch Lars NordbergMarkus Amann

US and Canada

Ellis Cowling took advantage of the European findings.

In 1971 he invited Odén to the US and highlighted Acid Rain as

a NA problem

Monitoring networks established in Canada (1976) and the US

(1978)

First agreement between US and Canada 1980

The US NAPAP assessment study formed the scientific and

technical fundament for the policy from 1990

Main policy measures

– The amendment of the Clean Air Act in 1990

– Cap and Trade programs

– Agreements and close collaboration with Canada

Ellis Cowling

US SO2 emissions from the power sector

Science Policy

First alarm, Odén 1967

OECD projekt: “Acid rain

a transboundary problem”

1979 Air

Convention

First S Protocol

1985

Second Sulphur

Protocol 1994

Gothenburg

Protocol 1999

EU CAFE Proposal 2005

Critical loads and

levels 1988

Soil acidification verified

Multipollutant integrated

assessment model

Dynamic modelling

Recovery

Dis

co

ve

ryC

on

se

ns

us

Inn

ova

tive

str

ate

gie

s

Lin

ka

ge

sw

ith

em

erg

ing

iss

ue

s

NEC Directive 2001

2012 Gothenburg

Prot. revison

Climate, human

health,intercontinental

transport, nitrogen

NOx Protocol 1988

Start ICPs.

Start of EMEP 1977

Europe

Catchment recovery

experiments (Gårdsjön)

Revision NEC Directive 2016

OECD

Report 1977SNSF project 72-80

CLRTAP Assessment

Report 2016

1970 US NAAQS,

CCAA

Acid rain in North

America. Likens 1972

1977 CCAA

Amendment

1990 NAAQS revison

US Cap and trade

Programme

Whole lake acidification

experiment

Modelling acid rain –

RADM and MAGIC

Dynamic modelling

Recovery

1991 US/Canada

AQ Agreement

Climate, Air toxics.

1990 CCAA Amendment

NAPAP Scientific

Assessment 1980-1990

US National Atmospheric

Depostion Program 1978

US Community Multi-scale

Air Quality Model

US Canada

Memorandum of

understanding

1980

Precipitation chemistry

network Canada 1976

CLRTAP Assessment

Report 2016; NA

version

North America

1999 Ozone Annex to

US/Canada AQ Agreement

2014 PM2.5 Annex to

US/Canada AQ Agreement

PolicyScience

2010

1970

1980

1990

2000

2018 Air Convention strategy

2010

1970

1980

1990

2000

Sweden’s case study

UN Conference 1972 UN Conf.

Conclusion 1972

US and Canada developed science and policy in parallel and close collaboration with Europe

After 2000

Focus on health effects (inclusion of urban scale)

Additional policies and scales

– Climate (2003- )

– Hemispheric scale TFHTAP (2004 -)

– Nitrogen (2007 -)

– Short lived climate pollutants (2009-)

Revision of the Gothenburg Protocol 2012

– Particles included (health effects)

– Objectives set for 2020 and beyond

Continuous improvements. Ecosystems

are recovering. Agriculture still a problem

EU important complementary policy

organisation

Acid rain – a success story

Decreasing emissions

Europe SO2

NOx

NH3SO2

NOx

Recoveringecosystems

Monitoring and mapping

Engagement from parties

The inclusion of the scientific bodies (EMEP

and WGE) within the Convention formed trust

and legitimacy.

EMEP monitoring

– 42 countries

– Approx. 350 indidiual stations

ICP programmes on ecosystem effects

– Five monitoring programs on ecosystems

– Mapping of Critical Loads

– >5000 forest sites

Emission inventories

EMEP sites (SO4), 2015Lessons learned

Scientific research and collaboration

core activities

Many research programmes, such as the SNSF project

in Norway, and the scientific bodies under the

Convention, contributed to a common scientific

understanding.

Lessons learned:

– Openness and sharing of data crucial

– The development of science and monitoring networks

nationally increased the political understanding.

The Gårdsjön Roof Project

Norwegian RAIN Project

Lessons learned

US ozone experimentZeppelin Station

Meeting places between

science and policy

Formed bridging concepts

– Blame matixes

– Critical Loads

– Integrated assessment modelling

Workshops formed a mutual understanding,

transparency and legitimacy

– Technical workshops

– The Saltsjöbaden workshops

Task force on Integrated Assessment

Modelling

Lessons learned

Future challenges – where are we heading?

Still many unknowns

– PM origin and nature

– Health effects

– Air pollution climate interactions

– Ozone origin and effects on ecosystems

– Air pollution and biodiversity

New ways of international cooperation including infrastructures – technical and scientific support

New organisations and initiatives: SDGs, WHO, WMO, UN Environment, CCAC, ILC, Copernicus etc.

There is a need to mobilise

– New financial resources

– New generations of scientists that are willing to cross disciplinary boundaries

Final remarks

This talk is based on a Symposium organized a year ago to manifest

the 50 years of acid rain research and policy. About 70 participants

many of them with experience going back to the first decade of the

acid rain history participated.

All information can be found at http://acidrain50years.ivl.se

Ambio paper recently published

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13280-019-01244-4

Thanks to all those giving inspiration to this talk and contributing with photos etc.

Including Max Posch, Filip Moldan, Dick Wright, Karl Meiwes, Ellis Cowling, EMEP and

WGE centres,

New winds – the man-dominated system

from the last century is gone

The leadership ofthe Air Convention

2019

Good Luck for the FutureThank you