Project commissioned by the Dutch ministry of VROM to TNO, EMEP-MSCE and the CCE

1. Revision of the heavy metal protocol: calculation of emissions, costs, depositions and exceedances of four scenarios Project commissioned by the Dutch ministry of VROM to TNO, EMEP-MSCE and the CCE

2. 4scenarios Emissions (tonnes)

3. Cadmium deposition CLE2010 Option 1

4. Lead deposition CLE2010 Option 1

5. Mercury deposition CLE2010 Option 1

6. Critical loads, effects Results of call for data 2005 + update in 2006 17 parties, ~ million ecosystems + EU-background database

7. Exceedance critical load of Cadmium CLE2010 Option 1 Critical loads are exceeded in 0.6% (CLE2010), 0.4% (FIMH), 0.2% (Opt2), 0.1% (Opt1) of natural areas in the EMEP domain.

8. Exceedance critical load of lead CLE2010 Option 1 Critical loads are exceeded in 20 % (CLE2010), 14 % (FIMH), 13 % (Opt2), 11 % (Opt1) of natural areas in the EMEP domain.

9. Exceedance critical load of mercury CLE2010 Option 1 Critical loads are exceeded in about 71 % (CLE2010), 71 % (FIMH), 69 % (Opt2), 69 % (Opt1) of natural areas in the EMEP domain.

10. Uncertainty; assigning source of resuspension • Historic depositions • Fertiliser & manure • Mineral

11. Uncertainty of deposition and environmental effects • Resuspension of heavy metals is currently not assigned to sources of Parties to the Convention. • It is unlikely that more knowledge on resuspension will stop exceedances by lead and mercury depositions from being widespread. • Further analysis of environmental effects of heavy metal deposition including the treatment of resuspension, may need to include dynamic modelling.

12. Ecotoxogological effects Critical loads: [HM]free,crit => Critical Load Reversed path: Deposition => [HM] free (at steady state) Dose-response function (RIVM): [HM] free => effects on species

13. Thank you ! (CCE Status Report 2010, TNO report) Emissions: hugo.deniervandergon@tno.nl Depositions: ilia.ilyin@msceast.org Exceedances: jean-paul.hettelingh@pbl.nl

14. Objectives of the study • Assess the impact of the revision of the heavy metal protocol with respect to : • Emissions, measures • hugo.deniervandergon@tno.nl • Depositions • ilia.ilyin@msceast.org • Critical load exceedances • jean-paul.hettelingh@pbl.nl (CCE Status Report 2010, TNO report)

15. 4scenarios • CLE2010: Current legislation in 2010 • FIHM: Full implementation of HM protocol in 2020; • Option 1 of the amended HM protocol for dust plus measures to abate mercury emissions (ECE/EB.AIR/WG.5/2010/10) • Option 2 of the amended HM protocol for dust plus measure to abate mercury emissions (ECE/EB.AIR/WG.5/2010/10)

16. 400 350 300 9 Waste 8 Non-Road transport 250 7 Road transport 6 Solvent use Emission (tonnes/yr) 200 5 Fossil fuel production 4 Industrial production 3 Industrial combustion 150 2 Residential combustion 1 Energy industries 100 50 0 2010 CLE 2020 CLE 2020 FIHM 2020 Opt1 2020 Opt2 Cadmium sectoral emissions 332 Industrial production 29% 52% 43% Industrial combustion Residential combustion Energy industries

17. Lead emissions 5900 Road transport 33% 60% 47% Industrial production Industrial combustion Residential combustion Energy industries

18. Mercury emissions +10% 255 14% 16% Energy industries

19. Exceedance critical concentration of mercury

20. Input from manure & fertiliser

21. (Re)Suspension ?

22. Final conclusions (1:2) • FIMH leads to substantial reductions in EMEP Parties to the Convention, not part of EU27, except CHE and NOR. (Reduction of 120, 2253 and 12 tonnes for Cd, Pb and Hg respectively) • Option 2 reduces a further 46 and 866 tonnes yr-1 of Cd and Pb. Option 2 is a realistic choice if the ambition is to revise the HM protocol on par with the IPPC BAT Directive • Under Option 1, 76 and 1598 tonnes yr-1of Cd and Pb are reduced additional the FIMH. Therefore, substantial further reductions are achieved under Option 1. • Hg emission reductions are roughly similar between Option 1 and option 2, mostly because gaseous Hg reductions don’t differ.

23. Conclusions (2:2) • High flow rates of of emissions of coal fired power plants lead to substantial emissions of gaseous Hg, in spite of ELV < 0.03 mg Nm-3 (selective removal of gaseous Hg from PP flue gasses are not addressed in IPPC BAT), • Amending the HM protocol according to Option 1 and 2 may bring about considerable reduction of PM2.5.emissions in Europe, • Costs of revision of the HM protocol for UNECE Europe are estimated to be 11.6, 1.3 and 2.6 billion € for Option 1, Option 2 and the addition Hg emission reduction measures respectively, • While the emission reductions are reflected in the lowering of critical load exceedances everywhere, still broad parts of Europe’s nature remain at risk, • Uncertainty analysis requires further assessment of the state of implementation in CLE and of the treatment of resuspended deposition.

24. Call for data • Critical loads for nitrogen and acidification On EMEP 5 * 5 km grid • GIS operations, grid file will be available • Empirical N loads • Additional and updated ranges and modifying factors from Noordwijkerhoudt • Next steps for soil + vegetation model-combinations, site specific