EMEP Monitoring programme Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU)

EMEP Monitoring programme

EMEP Monitoring programme

Wenche AasEMEP/CCC (NILU)

Wenche Aas, EMEP/CCC. CAPACT meeting Almaty 16-18 Oct 2006

OutlineOutline EMEP monitoring programme

Why, where, what Monitoring strategy

Quality assurance EMEP Manual for sampling and analysis Nationally Centrally by EMEP/CCC

How to organize the work nationally


The EMEP vision;

To be the main science based and policy-driven instrument for international cooperation in atmospheric monitoring and modelling activities, emission inventories and projections, and integrated assessment to help solve transboundary air pollution problems in Europe

Artic Ocean

Atlantic Ocean

Pacific Ocean

Slovenia

Hungary

Slovakia

Poland

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Finland

Sweden

Georgia

Norway

Belarus

Czech Rep. Ukraine

Denmark

Moldova

Germany

Yugoslavia

Austria

Bulgaria

Liechtenstein

Turkey

Italy

Monaco

Cyprus

Switzerland

Malta

Netherlands

Greece

Belgium

F.Y.R.ofMacedonia

Luxembourg

Albania

France

Bosnia andHerzegovina

Spain

Croatia

Portugal

IrelandUnited Kingdom

Romania

Russian Federation

Iceland

Kara SeaBarents Sea

North Sea

Atlantic Ocean

Mediterranean Sea

Black Sea Caspian Sea

Aral Sea

Canada

of America

Kyrgyzstan

Kazakhstan

AzerbaijanArmenia

Uzbekistan

Turkmenistan Tajikistan

EMEP Topics

•Acidification and Eutrophication

•Photochemical oxidants

•Heavy metals

•Persistent Organic Pollutants

•Particulate matter

UN-ECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (50 Parties) - 8 Specific protocols, where the first is

European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) (41 Parties)


Objectives of the EMEP measurement programme•Establish pollutant concentrations, deposition, emissions and transboundary fluxes on the regional scale, including intercontinental transport and boundary conditions for urban air quality

•Identify the trends with time as well as their sensitivity to European emission reductions

•Assess the success of international abatement strategies for atmospheric pollutants

•Improve the understanding of atmospheric chemical and physical processes

•Provide data for the validation of models

•Provide data which, in conjunction with models, are the basis for the assessment of environmental problems related to air pollution including comparison with effect thresholds and exposure levels

•Provide measurements required to assess the effects of atmospheric pollutants

•Serve to explore the environmental concentrations of new substances and support the development of cost-effective abatement strategies.


Light blue = no risk

Forests – acid dep. Semi-natural – acid dep. Freshwater – acid dep.

Health - PM Health+vegetation - ozone Vegetation – N dep.

Environmental problems in 2020


Intercontinental transport of Hg

Total annual Hg deposition in the Northern

Hemisphere

Mercury deposition to Europe:contribution of continents of NH

4%12%

3%5%

15%

61%

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Eur

ope

Asi

a

Am

eric

as

Nor

ther

nA

fric

a

Oce

ans

Sou

thH

emis

.

Tota

l Hg

depo

sitio

n, t/

y

NaturalAnthropogenic


Monitoring Strategy 2004-2009Monitoring Strategy 2004-2009 Adopted in December 2004

Three levels approach

Level 1 Basic (1.st priority for new Parties)

Level 2 Supersites (added to level 1 sites)

Level 3 Research driven supersites

Parties responsibility to implement the

Strategy


Monitoring programme:Level 1•Main ions in precipitation and in air •heavy metals in precipitations•ozone •PM10 and PM2.5 mass •meteorology

at ca 125 sites

Level 2, supersite (joint EMEP/GAW)• POPs• Heavy metals in air and aerosols• VOC• EC/OC, OC speciation• Mineral Dust• PM speciation incl. gas particle ratio

+ all level 1 activities

15-20 sitesBoth levels are mandatory by all Parties


Programme Parameters Minimum time resolution

Level-3 sites (monitoring at these sites do not require all level-1 and level-2 parameters) Dry deposition flux of Nand S SO2, NH3, HNO3 (SO4

--, NH4+, NO3

-) Hourly/Daily Dry deposition flux of O3

O3 Hourly/Daily

Hydrocarbons C6-C12 Hourly/Daily NOy chemistry NO, NO2, PAN, organic nitrates Hourly/Daily

OC speciation Both water soluble and water insoluble OC

Hourly/Daily

“Black carbon” BC Hourly/Daily Size/number distribution dN/dlogDp Hourly/Daily Light scattering Aerosol optical depth Hourly/Daily Vertical profiles O3 soundings, PM lidar, Hourly/Daily Mercury speciation TGM, RGM and TPM Daily/Weekly Congener-specific POPs PCBs, PAHs, PCDDs and PCDFs Daily/Weekly Multi-compartment (air, soil, water)

POPs and Hg Daily/Weekly

Monitoring programme, Level 3Monitoring programme, Level 3

Optical properties Scattering and absorption coefficients

Research driven and voluntary,


Positive consequencesPositive consequences Many countries have initiated national revision plans, the

general impression is that most Parties intend to comply with requirements.

The strategy is used as an important instrument towards the funding authorities. CCC may assist when needed.

Generally large interest from research groups to get involved in EMEP measurements.

A better link between the traditional monitoring community and the research groups has been established

Particulate matter observations are in very good progress

Support to establish EMEP level 1 sites in some EECCA countries


ChallengesChallengesLevel 1 Some Parties have given little response. Probably due

to large difficulties to find national resources, most problems in Eastern Europe

Many sites lack a few parameters to get a complete measurement program of level 1


New EMEP sites in the EECCA regionNew EMEP sites in the EECCA region

MD: Leovo

UA: Danube delta

KZ: Borovoye

GE: Abastumani

AR: In process


New sites that will be establish: New sites that will be establish:

Georgia: Abastumani

Moldova: Leovo Kazakhstan: Borovoye

Support from:CAPACT http://www.unece.org/ie/capact

Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


Expectations, EECCA countries Expectations, EECCA countries

A very important region High emissions Strategic area for hemispheric transport issues Little monitoring today

Expected that most countries will sign the EMEP protocol soon.

Need to establish EMEP level 1 sites in each country. Support can be found, i.e from foreign aid money, EU, UNECE. Training and capacity building is necessary.

Beeing part of an international monitoring programme, as on transboundary air pollution, will in addition, give competence and awarness on other envirionmental issues


ChallengesChallengesLevel 1 Some Parties have given little response. Probably due

to large difficulties to find national resources, most problems in Eastern Europe

Many sites lack a few parameters to get a complete measurement program of level 1

Level 2 POPs and Hg monitoring receives little attention Photooxidats receives little attention (but EU directive

addressing PAHs offers assistance) Full chemical speciation of particles is difficult. It’s

costly and there are problems to harmonise methodology (i.e for EC/OC)


~ 70 samples(NILU 2006)~30 samples

(NMR 2007-2008)

~2*50 samples (NFR 2006-2008)

~ 50 samples(INTAS 06-08)?

Interlinked POP passive sampling campaigns have been initiated to improve the poor spatial coverage at present:GAPS study


PurposePurpose

Comparable measurements needed to make regional and global assessments

Need methods that are easy to use, cheap and long lasting for trend analysis (changing methodology may affect the trend

A harmonisation of methodology has been developed during the last 30 years and are still developing –close cooperation between CCC and international experts


Necessary national commitmentsNecessary national commitments

Proper siting for representative measurements

Use recommended field methods for precipitation, gas and aerosols (main comp, HM, POP, PM, VOC)

Use recommended lab methods Follow QA/QC procedures in field and lab Reporting of data in proper format incl

information of methods, detection limits, precisions, siting information etc (so called meta data)


QA activities in EMEPQA activities in EMEP• Site characterization

• Documentation of methods and material -detection limits, precision, accuracy,-instructions for maintenance and

calibration

• Manual and standard operating procedures (SOPs)

• Lab intercalibration

• Co-located experiments (field comparison)

• Training courses

• Data checking and validation-e.g calculate ion balance and time trends

• Flagging data


Field inter-comparisons, SO4 in air

Field inter-comparisons, SO4 in air

Estonia

Spain


Lab intercomparisons annuallyLab intercomparisons annually

Rel bias %Rel standard dev %


QA flags based on lab and field intercomp.QA flags based on lab and field intercomp.

qa flagg field lab qa flagg field lab qa flagg field qa flagg field lab qa flagg field labAT 22-- B - - - - - - - - - - - -CH 3200 B A 33-- B - - - - - - - - -CZ 12-- B - 0300 - A - - 00 - A --00 - ADE 0100 A A --00 - A 00-- A --00 - A --30 - BDK 0000 A A --00 - A 00-- A --00 - A --00 - AEE 1200 B A 6210 B A - - - - - - - -ES 32-- B -- 30-- B -- 00-- A - - - --20 - AFI 1010 A A - - - 00-- A --00 - A --00 - AFR 2003 B C - - 20-- BGB 1010 B A 5300 B A 00-- A - - - -HU - - - 1310 B A - - - - --40 - BIE 00-- A - 5000 B A - - - - - -LT 1000 B A 3200 B A 10-- B 1010 B A --00 ALV 5010 B A 0200 B A 22-- B 1030 B B 0210 A ANL 11-- B - 03-- - - 00-- A - - - -NO 0000 A A 0020 A A 00-- A --20 - A --00 - APL 0010 A A 4340 B B 01-- A --00 - A --01 - APL05 2000 B A 5200 B A 32-- B --10 - A --00 - ASE 0000 A A 1010 B A 00-- A --00 - A --00 - ASI 0031 A B --00 - A 20-- B --00 - A --00 - ASK --10 - A 5300 B A - - --00 - A - - -TR 0010 A A --00 - A - - --10 - A --20 - AYU - - - 53-- B - - - - - - -

SNH4SO2 NO2 SO4 SNO3


National organisation of EMEP monitoringNational organisation of EMEP monitoring

Signing the EMEP protocol gives a national responsibility usually charged by the Ministry of Environment

The daily work are usually being done my hydrometeorological institutes or similar by contract of the Ministry

A close contact with universities and other research communities needed to interpret data and co-benefits the infrastructures both in lab an field


Data flow (a typical example)Data flow (a typical example)

Measurements are evaluated in the labs after accredited procedures or similar

Project leader usually at the same institute QA/QC the data

Approval by the national government

Continuously Monthly or annually Annually

International bodies like EMEP/CCC

AnnuallyApproval by the international bodies (EMEP: Steering Body)

AnnuallyOften different databases and formats


Data reporting, the site “NN” storyData reporting, the site “NN” story

W M O -G A W

E IO N E T

A M A P

H e lcom

O S P A R

IC P IM

IC P F o re st

E M E P

N a tio n a l d b .

M a in C o m p. in P re c ip .

W M O -G A W

E IO N E T

A M A P

H e lcom

O S P A R

IC P IM

IC P F o re st

E M E P

N a tio n a l d b .

M a in C o m p . in A ir

A M A P

H e lcom

O S P A R

IC P IM

E M E P

N a tio n a l d b .

H M (a ir o r p re c .)

A M A P

H e lcom

O S P A R

IC P IM

E M E P

N a tio n a l d b .

P O P s (a ir o r p re c .)

W M O -G A W

E IO N E T

IC P IM

IC P F o re st

E M E P

N a tio n a l d b .

O zo ne

S ite "N N "

Need to have instruments to avoid duplication of data in the different programmes and define where the official data are.


SummarySummary

EECCA region of high importance and relevance

EMEP is a long lasting programme that need long commitments from the national authorities

Quality assurance is an essential part of the monitoring programme

EMEP/CCC assists when support letter etc is needed or training of QA/QC procedures Reporting of data etc

EMEP Monitoring programme Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU)

Documents

Transcript of EMEP Monitoring programme Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU)