The ScorePP Approach to Predict Releases of Priority Pollutants From Urban Sources Hans-Christian...
-
Upload
victoria-gallagher -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of The ScorePP Approach to Predict Releases of Priority Pollutants From Urban Sources Hans-Christian...
The The ScorePP ApproachScorePP Approach to Predict Releases to Predict Releases of Priority Pollutants From Urban Sourcesof Priority Pollutants From Urban Sources
Hans-Christian Holten Lützhøft1, Erica Donner2, Veerle Gevaert3, Webbey De Keyser3, Tonie Wickman4, Matej Cerk5, Eva Eriksson1,
André Lecloux6, Primož Banovec5 and Anna Ledin1
1DTU Environment, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark2Urban Pollution Research Centre, Middlesex University, London, UK
3BIOMATH, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium4Environmental Monitoring, Stockholm Stad, Stockholm, Sweden
5Faculty of civil and Geodetic Engineering, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia6Envicat Consulting, Avenue Montesquieu 36, B-1300 Wavre, Belgium
EEA SeminarCopenhagen
Monday 6 December 2010
PresentationPresentationMSc in pharmacy (1991-1996)
― Medicinal chemistry, organic synthesis of AMPA-receptor ligands
PhD (1996-2000)― Environmental Risk Assessment of Antimicrobials; experimental work on ecotoxicity and
environmental fate; literature study of ecotoxicity and occurrence in relation to fish farming activities
PostDoc at KU-Life (2000-2001)― Environmental fate of antimicrobials in soil and porewater
PostDoc at Novo Nordisk (2001-2003)― Stability testing of tablets – development of super enhanced stability testing methods
AssProf at KU-Life (2003-2005)― Intestinal absorption of pharmaceuticals
Pharmacist (2005-2006)AssocProf at DTU Environment (2006- )
― Source characterisation of (organic) priority substances; inherent properties, source tracking, source dynamics, urban releases
― Sampling, extraction, purification and analysis or organic substances― Monitoring; Stakeholder interaction
BackgroundBackgroundEuropean Water Framework Directive (EU WFD) implemented in 2000 with Environmental Quality Standards implemented in 2008Aim of EU WFD is to improve water quality of European water coursesBoth pollution source inventories as well as monitoring programmes have to be establishedEU member states are obliged to improve water quality through more than one measure, for instance
LegislationImproved handling and treatment of waste streams (municipal/industrial wastewater or stormwater)Voluntary initiatives
The EU 6th framework programme financed the DTU Environment coordinated ScorePP (Source control options for reducing the emissions of Priority Pollutants) project9 partners with 30+ collaborators across Europe and 4 case citiesSEP2006-MAR2010, 3½ years
AimAimThe main aim of the ScorePP project was to develop Source Control Options for Reducing Emissions of Priority Pollutants from urban areas
The specific aim of this task was to identify potential sources and to quantify releases of priority pollutants
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
ApproachApproach
Develop Source Classification Framework
Compile data on sources & releases
Classifying using the Emission String concept
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Establish releases based on the compiled data
Source Classification FrameworkSource Classification FrameworkRequirements
Content should be structured and organised in a harmonised wayEnsure that the different sources could be distinguished from each otherTo be dynamic and valid EU wide
InspirationUS EPA Source Classification Code (US EPA SCC)The Technical Guidance Document on Risk assessment (TGD)Harmonised codes likethe Common Nomenclature (CN), the National Classification of Economic Activities (NACE) and the NOmenclature for Sources Emissions (NOSE)EINECS, CAS#
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
National Classification of Economic Activities National Classification of Economic Activities (NACE)(NACE)A Agriculture, hunting and forestry J Financial intermediation
B Fishing K Real estate, renting and business activities
C Mining and quarrying L Public administration and defence; compulsory social security
D Manufacturing M Education
E Electricity, gas and water supply N Health and social work
F Construction O Other community, social and personal service activities
G Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles, motorcycles and personal and household goods
P Activities of households
H Hotels and restaurants Q Extra-territorial organizations and bodies
I Transport, storage and communication R Other
18 main classes and about 850 subclasses
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
NOmenclature for Sources of Emissions (NOSE)NOmenclature for Sources of Emissions (NOSE)101. Combustion processes (production of heat and electricity)
104. Production processes in manufacturing industry, involving fuel combustion
105. Production processes in manufacturing industry and water supply, not involving fuel combustion and use of solvents and other products
106. Processes specific to the extraction and distribution of fossil fuels and geothermal energy
107. Processes involving use of solvents and other products
108. Processes specific to the nuclear power industry
109. Waste treatment and disposal operations
110. Processes specific to agriculture, forestry, hunting and fishing
111. Processes characteristic of service branches
112. Processes common to all branches
113. Households
201. Road transport
202. Other mobile sources
301. Processes in nature
14 main classes and about 750 subclasses
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
ScorePP classification of the Urban Structure – ScorePP classification of the Urban Structure – the Urban Structure Descriptor (USD)the Urban Structure Descriptor (USD)
22 classes in use
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Source Classification Framework – Source Classification Framework – the the Emission StringEmission String concept concept
CAS #: unique identification of each substanceNOSE: unique identification of emission processes NACE: unique identification of economic activities related with the sourceThe ScorePP classifications
Urban Structure Descriptor (USD), comprising e.g.Construction sitesFacilities; e.g. factories, dentists, slaughter houses (i.e. legal entities)HouseholdsRiversRoadsWaste sites/landfills
Release Profile Descriptor (RPD)Temporal releases on a daily, weekly and yearly basis
Release Factor (RF)
All data are stored in a database
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Compiling dataCompiling dataOnline Risk Assessment Reports from EUHazardous Substance Data Bank and Household Product Database from US NLMHandbooks and electronic compilations, e.g. the Merck Index, Rippen, the e-Pesticide Manual, Kirk-Othmer’s Encyclopedia of Chemical TechnologyResearch articles
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Classifying sources using the ES conceptClassifying sources using the ES concept
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Classifying sources using the ES conceptClassifying sources using the ES concept
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Substances on the Water Framework Substances on the Water Framework DirectiveDirective
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
ScorePP priority pollutants (PPs) grouped according to their main uses and classified according to whether they are priority substances (PSs), added due to the EQS-proposal (EQS), example chemicals (EX) or added as they belong to the group of “organometallics” (OM). Priority hazardous substances (PHSs) are printed in bold. Classa PS (33) EQS (11) EX (11) OM (13) Biocide (31) Trifluralin
Hexachlorocyclohexane Alachlor Pentachlorophenol Endosulfan Simazine Atrazine Chlorfenvinphos Isoproturon Diuron Chlorpyrifos Hexachlorobutadiene Tributyltin compounds
Aldrin Endrin Isodrin Dieldrin Para,para’-DDT Para,para’-DDEb Para,para’-DDDb Orto,para’-DDTc
Tributyltin-cation Alpha-endosulfan Gamma-isomer lindane 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
Tetra-N-Butyltin Bis(tributyltin) oxide Phenylmercuric acetate Tributyltin methacrylate Tributyltinchlorostannane Methylmercury
Chlorinated solvent (6) Ethylene chloride Dichloromethane Chloroform
Trichloroethylene Tetrachloroethylene Carbontetrachlorid
Combustion (6) PAH Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Benzo(a)pyrene Benzo(b)fluoranthene
a: Classified according to the WFD and the EQS-proposal. The numbers in brackets represent the number of chemicals in each class; b: Degradation product of para,para’-DDT; c: Impurity of para,para’-DDT; d: The term “various” covers a range of uses like alloys, catalysts, pigments, batteries, dentistry, measuring and control equipment, biocide, impurity, cables, stabilisers, intermediate; e: The individual metals represents the ionic form(s).
Substances on the Water Framework Substances on the Water Framework Directive – continuedDirective – continued
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
ScorePP priority pollutants (PPs) grouped according to their main uses and classified according to whether they are priority substances (PSs), added due to the EQS-proposal (EQS), example chemicals (EX) or added as they belong to the group of “organometallics” (OM). Priority hazardous substances (PHSs) are printed in bold. Classa PS (33) EQS (11) EX (11) OM (13) Flame retardant (2) Pentabromobiphenylether
C10-13 chloroalkanes
Fuel additive (5) Tetramethyl lead Ethyltrimethyl lead Tetraethyl lead Methyltriethyl lead Diethyldimethyl lead
Intermediate (11) Naphthalene Anthracene Nonylphenol Fluoranthene Benzene Trichlorobenzenes Octylphenol Pentachlorobenzene
4-(para)nonylphenol Para-tert-octylphenol
Dimethylmercury
Plasticizer (1) DEHP Variousd (6) Hexachlorobenzene
Nickele Mercurye Leade Cadmiume
Diethylmercury
a: Classified according to the WFD and the EQS-proposal. The numbers in brackets represent the number of chemicals in each class; b: Degradation product of para,para’-DDT; c: Impurity of para,para’-DDT; d: The term “various” covers a range of uses like alloys, catalysts, pigments, batteries, dentistry, measuring and control equipment, biocide, impurity, cables, stabilisers, intermediate; e: The individual metals represents the ionic form(s).
SCF tested on a selection of WFD substancesSCF tested on a selection of WFD substances
Number of ESs for each PPNumber of ESs for each PP(ab 900 ESs in total)(ab 900 ESs in total)
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Which sources were identified for a Which sources were identified for a particular PP – DEHPparticular PP – DEHP
Handling of the pure substanceUndercoating of motor vehicles Production of electricityRelease from electrical cables – indoor and outdoorTreatment of waste; land fillsVarious manufacturing; sealants, paint, ink, ceramic, plastic, DEHP Release from floor and wall coveringVarious building materials; tubes, profiles, coated metal sheetsTextiles, clothing, footwear, shoes
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
To which To which compartmentcompartment are the substances are the substances released to?released to?
Air
Groundwater
Generally to the urban surfaceTo an impervious urban surfaceTo a permeable urban surface
Generally to water (wastewater or receiving waters)Directly to water (receiving waters)Indirectly to water (wastewater going to WWTP)
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Substances are released to …Substances are released to …Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Number of ESs in each urban structureNumber of ESs in each urban structure(ab 900 ESs in total)(ab 900 ESs in total)
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Archetype sourcesArchetype sourcesAgricultureConstruction sites and buildings
FacilitiesHouseholdsRoadsWaste disposal
Diffuse and other not immediately classifiable sources
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Number of ESs within Number of ESs within householdshouseholds(ab 85 ESs in total – 18 substances)(ab 85 ESs in total – 18 substances)
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Substances from Substances from householdshouseholds are released to … are released to …Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Fertilizers and pest controlDiuron: 7,5-25 mg/applicationCd: from fertilizers
Building materialsNi: 0,3-0,8 mg/m2 stainless steel/yrCd: 0,01-10 kg/yr from Zn-materialsDEHP: 16 tonnes/yr
ClothesDEHP: 950 kg/yr
GreywaterHg: 17µg/PE/dCd: 5 kg/yrTCE: 8-100 µg/LNi: jewellery, coins, washing etc. Benzo(a)pyrene: 1,8 µg/PE/d
Painting and car washDEHP: 12 kg/yr
Environmental releases due to Environmental releases due to householdshouseholds Heating
Anthracene: 0,8-102 mg/kg woodBenzo(a)pyrene: 2,7 mg/kg coalBenzo(a)pyrene: 27 µg/kg wood
SmokingAnthracene: 34 ng/cigaretBenzene: 10-100 µg/cigaretBenzo(a)pyrene: 5-1600 ng/cigaret
Clothes and building materialsDEHP:250 kg DCM: 10-80 µg/m2/hTCE: 3,6 µg/m2/h
FertilizersCd: 500 g/yr
Building materialsDEHP:600 kg/yr
Plus releases of HCB, HCH, PeCB, TBTs, chlorpyrifos, endrin, Pb, trifluralin and NPs
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Environmental releases due to Environmental releases due to vehicular transport on vehicular transport on roadsroads
AnthraceneCombustion: 5,2-28 µg/kg fuel burned, depending on vehicle and fuel type
BenzeneCombustion: 4-10 mg/km driven, depending on vehicle type
Benzo(a)pyreneCombustion: 1-8 µg/km driven, without and with catalyst
Cadmium (from both break linings, tyres, fuel and asphalt)7 kg/year is released in Stockholm with 780.000 inhabitants
DEHP (from undercoating)200 kg/year is released in Stockholm with 780.000 inhabitants
MercuryTyres: 4-240 µg/km depending on vehicle typeRoads: 3-17 µg/km depending on vehicle type
NickelCombustion: 21-107 and 3,2-2310 ng/km driven, for gasoline and diesel, respectivelyBrake-linings, tyres and asphalt: 91-182 ng/km
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Statistics for Denmark year 2007Statistics for Denmark year 2007
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Environmental releases due to Environmental releases due to vehicular transport on vehicular transport on roadsroads
Depending on fuel and vehicle type:
Anthracene: 12-67 kg Nickel: 4,4-117 kg
Benzene frombusses, lorries etc: 105 tonnes
Cadmium: 49 kg
Mercury: 0,3-12 tonnes
Plus releases of anthracene from wear & tear of tyres and asphalt and release of anthracene, benzene, benzo(a)pyrene due to leakage & spillage
Benzene from cars: 154 tonnes
Benzo(a)pyrene: 360 kg
DEHP: 1,41 tonnes
Release of nickel from Danish highways: 108 kg
Thomas Ruby Bentzen, PhD thesis (2008)
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
ConclusionsConclusionsSCF established – based on literature knowledge about sourcesAbout 900 ESs established for the 25 WFD substances
Ranging from 5 ESs for atrazine and 133 ESs for nickelOverall 16% with concrete knowledge about release quantitiesOverall 65% without any quantitative data on release into the technosphere
WFD substances occur in a wide variety of sources and activities in urban settings and are released to all studied compartments
Most sources are related to production activitiesOther large categories are households, waste disposal, agriculture, construction and transportSubstances from households are mainly released to air, wastewater and to the urban surfaceSubstances released to air (both from household and transport) are mainly bi-products from combustion
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
Conclusions – continuedConclusions – continuedClassifying the sources according to the Urban Structure descriptor enables
Sources to be linked to GIS, thus enhancing visualisationDefinition of archetype sources and thus a better targeting of mitigation options and Emission Control Strategies
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
OutlookOutlookSCF has been used on national scale to calculate releases from a particular archetype source, i.e. roads (Holten Lützhøft et al., 2009)SCF has been used to identify pollution sources in catchments of Copenhagen (Holten Lützhøft et al., submitted)
SCF can be used to establish a pollution inventory for a given catchment in the process of either identifying pollution sources or identifying the most appropriate emission control strategy (Eriksson et al., 2010)Implemented European wide it will help in the process of prioritising finances and work power
It would be interesting to perform a comparison of pollution inventories with human health statistics, i.e. the spatial incidents of cancer compared with for instance the expected releases of benzo[a]pyrene
Aim Approach Substances Results Conclusions
AcknowledgementAcknowledgementThe presented results have been obtained within the framework of the project ScorePP - “Source Control Options for Reducing Emissions of Priority Pollutants”, contract no. 037036, a project coordinated by Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark within the Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development section of the European Community’s Sixth Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration.