Automatic measurement stations for river water quality Historic, evolution of needs and prospects

1. Automatic measurement stations for river water quality Historic, evolution of needs and prospects Jean Prygiel Agence de l’Eau Artois-Picardie

2. Historic of measurement stations • First objective: use automatic stations capable of working without human help for several days running. • Standstill stations for monitoring natural environments: Lys at Armentières in 1972 (operated by AEAP) ; Houlle at Moulle in 1973 (operated by Sté Lyonnaise des Eaux); Ecaillon at Thiant in 1975 (operated by Sté Eau et Force). • Repetitive observed variations after several weeks running. Only first months were considered as informative. • The standstillstations were then restricted to surveillance of drinking water production sites. • Putting an end to automatic stations by the Water Agencies but passing over to « moving » stations in Artois-Picardie.

3. Moving stations (trucks) 1975: first moving station (truck) for monitoring rivers only, 1976-1980: coming out of moving equipments (small tows) for monitoring industrial effluents and rivers for: - the study of not well known measurement stations, - recognizing sites for standstill equipments, - the study of selfpurification, - The study of particular pollutions (storm water reservoirs, sewage treatment plants, algal proliferations, drainage…) 1982: passing over to 2 automatic stations for rivers and effluents with specific personnel affected,

4. Two environment and effluents stations in 1984-1986 Monitored parameters: TOC, total N, Turbidity, Flow, Conductivity, pH, T°C, Refrigerated sampler, Pluviometry for the effluent station (yellow station), Same parameters + NH4, NO3, PO4, O2 for the river station (blue station), 10 minutes frequency and possibility to realize mean samples. Pointing out pollution peaks due to natural phenomena (rains) or not (accidental or volunteer discharges, specific pollutant activities, good functioning of works…) Stations working separately or in twos.

5. The stations have been set at level regularly. In 2007, it was decided to stop measurements on industrial and urban discharges being considered as to be carried out by private companies.  Since 2007, the Agency thus dispose of 2 automatic stations only for rivers’ surveillance. 4 to 5 campaigns per year, of two months each, in twos or separately.

6. What future for automatic stations? Possible threats on automatic stations • - Stations could disappear for many reasons such as General Revision of Public Politics (RGPP), using external structures as private companies, changes in water agency organization… ? • the routine work, and not considering the new needs : • * functioning and tools becoming commonplace

7. * Insufficient data analysis end, insufficient technical and scientific valorization, limited spreading towards our external partners,

8. New needs (regulation) • Monitoring works (storm water reservoirs, Wastewater Treatment Plants, restoration of environment…) • - Taking into account new kinds of polllution: vegetal proliferations, micropollutants (metals, pesticides..), drug residues… • - Monitoring diffuse and intermittent pollutions (WFD investigation controls) • - Anticipating lawsuits (WFD litigations) • - Measuring flows especially when leaving the basin (estuaries, belgian border) • - Making the link between causes (physico-chemistry, chemistry) and effects (biology)

9. New needs (knowledge) • Better understand the functioning of rivers and lakes (calcareous concretions, cyanobacterial blooms…) - Study of spatial and temporal variability of measurements - Compare instant measurements with in continuum measurements (better taking into account of thresholds effects)

10. Some solutions ? Updating equipments: * Updating existing material (recording stations, captors, remote transmission…) * Acquisition of new tools (luxmeter, pigment analyser, ecotoxicology?…)

11. * Development (and acquisition?) of new tools (dissolved metals with the USTLille) * Flows mesurements + better use of average samples for non automatic measurements (organic micropollutants) and comparatives (macropollutants)

12. Some solutions? • * Updating practices • Quality process (management and training of personnel, management of material, campaign organization according to needs, better reactivity, complete validated and diffusable reports...) • Overture towards external partners using external structures for certain tasks not being realized by the Agency (data analysis for example) development of partnerships and collaborations with institutional and scientific partners

13. Scientific partnerships and collaborations Partnership agreements Agency/Universities Partnerships AEAP – Lille1 since 1997 (continental waters) Partnership AEAP – LOG in 2009 (marine waters) For operational research studies or common interest actions at a local level, and partnership events Deûle campaign on the ex Metaleurop site at Courcelles les Lens (from 15 April to 15 May 2009) associating the Water Agency Artois-Picardie, the Oceanology and Geosciences Laboratory (LOG), the Geosystems Laboratory(Analytical and Marine Chemistry team) and the ANCH Laboratory of the Free University of Brussel

14. Main objectives Tests of several analysis techniques in continuum of dissolved metals and effect of locks and fluvial traffic, Consistency of instant pigments’ data (filtrations) compared to high frequency measurements (AOA and fluoroprobe), Comparison of pigments’ measurements (filtrations) done by the LOG and the analyses laboratory of the Agency, Links between algal analyses (qualitative and quantitative analyses of phytoplankton) and pigments’ analyses, Links between physico-chemical and biological variables, (Effects of dissolved metals on phytoplankton).

15. Projects and prospects for automatic stations 1. Finalization of the 2009 Deûle measurements campaign, 2. ‘Le Quesnoy’ campaign in 2010 for monitoring the effect of barley straw on cyanobacterial proliferations (AEAP, Geosystems, LOG), 3. Evaluation of flows on a coastal river, and comparison with monthly data of the « Flow in nutritive elements » network (AEAP/DREA/CQEL/Ifremer)