1. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. 38 th Session WGSR Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Jean-Paul Hettelingh (CCE) Critical loads of heavy metals and their exceedances of Cd, Pb, Hg and tentatively of Cr, Ni, Cu, Zn, As and Se in Europe In collaboration with: TNO (emissions), EMEP/MSC-E (dispersion) Alterra (CL-other metals) Coordination Centre for Effects (CL-priority metals and exceedances )

2. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Critical loads of Cd, Pb and Hg and their exceedances Details in: CCE Status Report 2005, updated in 2006 by BG, CY, IT, NL, UA Elaborated in the TFHM Sufficiency and Effectiveness Report In press in reviewed scientific journal: Slootweg J, Hettelingh J-P, Posch M, Schütze G, Spranger T, De Vries W, Reinds GJ, Van ’t Zelfde M, Dutchak S, Ilyin I, European critical loads of cadmium, lead and mercury and their exceedances, Water, Air and Soil Pollution Forum. Summary in: ECE/EB.AIR/WG.1/2006/10, adopted at 25 th WGE session What do we want to protect: Endpoints with respect to: –1 Human health (drinking water) –2 Human health (food quality) –3 Ecotox. Effects on terrestrial ecosystems –4 Ecotox. Effects on aquatic ecosystems –5 Human health (Hg in fish) Exceedance in 2000 now use depositions computed by MSC-E based on emissions adjusted by TNO. Exceedance in 2020 based on three scenarios; CLE, FI and FIAM

3. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. 5 th percentile CL(Cd) to protect human health (g ha -1 a -1 ) 5 th percentile CL(Pb) to protect human health (g ha -1 a -1 ) 5 th percentile CL(Hg) to protect human health (g ha -1 a -1 ) 5 th percentile CL(Cd) to protect Ecosystems (g ha -1 a -1 ) 5 th percentile CL(Pb) to protect Ecosystems (g ha -1 a -1 ) 5 th percentile CL(Hg) to protect Ecosystems (g ha -1 a -1 ) Source: CCE SR2005 pp. 23

4. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Areas at risk of health or ecosystem effects in 2000 based on Official Emission data incl. TNO adjustments Between brackets: Areas at risk based on official 2000 emission data as published in the CCE SR2005 and the TFHM-S&E % area at risk of Health effects % area at risk of Ecosystem effects CdPbHgCdPbHg EU25 0.03 (0.1) 24.32 (8.1) 2.4 (3.9) 0.02 (0.0) 48.64 (7.4) 85.75 (51.2) Europe 0.83 (0.8) 16.65 (8.3) 2.4 (3.9) 0.07 (0.1) 53.44 (28.7) 85.34 (51.0)

5. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Scenario analysis in Europe: Exceedances to both public and environmental health by Cd, Pb and Hg depositions in 2000 compared to 2020-FIAM

6. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Exceedance by cadmium (Cd) deposition In 2000 and 2020-FIAM % area at risk: CLRTAP: 0.34 % EU25: 0.04 % % area at risk: CLRTAP: 0.02 % EU25: 0.02 %

7. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Exceedance by lead (Pb) deposition In 2000 and 2020-FIAM % area at risk in 2000: CLRTAP: 42 % EU25: 42 % % area at risk in 2020-FIAM: CLRTAP: 19 % EU25: 27 %

8. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. lead (Pb) deposition in 2000 as factor of critical loads

9. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. lead (Pb) deposition in 2000 as factor of critical loads Deposition is up to more than 10 x higher than critical loads.

10. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Exceedance by mercury (Hg) deposition In 2000 and 2020-FIAM % area at risk: CLRTAP: 77 % EU25: 68 % % area at risk: CLRTAP: 74 % EU25: 61 %

11. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Conclusions and recommendations regarding Cd, Hg and Pb Conclusions also reflected in the TFHM Sufficiency en Effectiveness report. Lead (Pb) and mercury (Hg) deposition significantly exceed critical loads. The health risk is stressed in the unedited TFH-draft 2006 report (Health risks of heavy metals from LRTP air pollution) Cadmium deposition does not cause widespread exceedance However, Cd exposure (not only from LRTAP) may lead to damage to critical organs while Cd is suggested to still be accumulating in the top-soil of arable land (see TFH draft 2006). Current critical load data of Cd, Pb and Hg can be applied in chain-model (emission, deposition, exceedance) assessments of policy scenarios. Uncertainty, in particularly of emission data, requires further attention. Note that model and data uncertainty does not markedly vary between scenarios.

12. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), arsenic (As), selenium (Se) reported in “ Emissions, depositions, critical loads and exceedances in Europe” (in press) Preliminary results of a collaborative project between TNO, EMEP/MSC-E, Alterra and CCE. Study commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Public Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM)

13. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Preliminary critical load methodology addressing other metals in Europe Steady State Mass Balance approach as described in the Mapping Manual. Critical limits (critical concentrations in soil drainage water): Proposed critical limit values (Alterra, 2006) MetalCC-Human health (μg.l -1 ) CC-ecotox (μg.l -1 ) Cr5044 Ni2025-700 Cu20001-50 Zn-20-90 As1070 Se101

14. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Tentative results in 2000 and in 2020 following CLE, FI and FIAM scenarios Scenario Percentage of area in Europe at risk caused by exceedance of critical loads of the following heavy metals: CrNiCuZnAsSe 20000.070.710.761.6602.41 2020-CLE0.080.400.441.0601.09 2020-FI0.010.210.341.0600.94 2020- FIAM 0.010.030.251.0600.33

15. 38 th Session of the Working Group on Strategies and Review, Item 3, Review of the 1998 protocol on heavy metals Coordination Centre for Effects(CCE), J.-P.Hettelingh. Conclusions No widespread exceedance in Europe of critical loads of Cr,Ni,Cu,Zn,As, Se in 2000; exceedance of Zn and Selenicum cover < 3% of the European ecosystem area. In 2020, this exceedance is reduced to about ≤ 1% In line with… “Presently, available information indicates that none of these other metals achieve high enough concentrations as a result of long-range atmospheric transport and deposition to cause adverse effects on wildlife and human health”…(Sufficiency and Effectiveness Report, A2). Therefore, the focus on priority heavy metals is justified from an effect-based perspective.