1. Source control of priority substances in Europe EU-project within the sixth framework program John Munthe IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute www.socopse.eu

2. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Environmental Institute (EI), Slovakia University of Southampton, School of Civil Engineering & the Environment (SOTON), United Kingdom Kiwa N.V. Netherlands Vyskumny Ustav Vodneho Hospodarstva (WRI), Slovakia Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Finland Instityt Ekologii Terenow Uprzemyslowionych (IETU/Envitech), Poland Norsk institutt for luftforskning (NILU), Norway Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientifi cas (CSIC), Spain Institut National de l´Environment Industriel et des Risques (INERIS), France Nederlands Organisatie Voor Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek (TNO), The Netherlands IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute Ltd (IVL), Sweden

3. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Project objective  to provide guidelines and decision support system tools for the implementation of the WFD with regard to selected priority substances

4. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date]

5. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Project organisation WP 1 Coordination WP 2 Material Flow Analyses WP 3 Management, Technologies WP 4 Decision Support System WP 5 Case Studies Final evaluation and report SAG WP 6 Dissemination and stakeholder interactions

6. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Work flow Substance flow analysis European scale Substance reports Control technologies Draft Decision Support System Case studies Five areas of Europe Final Decision Support SystemFinal Reports and Synthesis Web site DSS, synthesis Sources Emission control Guidebook + tools 1 2 3 Year

7. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Substance Flow Analysis - Sources  Describe the main flow-paths and releases of selected Priority Substances (PSs) to European waters  The information on flow-paths and releases of PSs is crucial for the development of the Decision Support System (DSS), the main product of the SOCOPSE project because it describes current state of contamination of European waters by various PSs SOCOPSe-wp2.ppt

8. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] MFA diagram for Hg in Europe in 2000 (numbers in tonnes/year)

9. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] MFA diagram for 5 PAHs in Europe Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, Benzo(a)pyrene

10. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Management, control technologies  A comprehensive inventory of technical emission reduction options, including process-oriented options, substitution, and end-of-pipe techniques.  Provide basis for an emission reduction strategy  Based on traditional literature studies as well as information gathered from surveys and interviews with key stakeholders.  Three workshops with industry have been performed in different parts of Europe to further collect information and receive comments on the draft reports

11. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Decision support system (DSS) Develop a DSS including supporting tools for management of PS Tools to asses the effectiveness of various measures or combinations of measures, and to make the right selection of measures The DSS will primarily be developed for authorities to make plans for the control of the PS at both European and national or river basin level

12. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] The SOCOPSE Decision support system (DSS) Current: Step by step guidelines (handbook) for implementation of WFD on PPs Planned: Web based DSS + information handling (databases and reports)

13. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Step 1 Problem definition

14. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Step by step guidelines for implementation of WFD on PPs

15. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date].........Step 6 Select solution/ management options

16. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Decision support system handbook  Draft version used in case studies  Available on www.socopse.eu (comments are welcome)www.socopse.eu

17. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Case studies Test and evaluate the decision support system by applying it to 5 case studies in different geographical regions and to integrate results and experiences to European scale

18. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Case study areas The five case studies which represent different geographical regions of Europe as well as different scales The five cases have different characteristics in terms of pollution sources and degree of contamination of priority substances.

19. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Case studies -substances  Vantaa River, Finland: PBDE, Nonylphenol, DEHP, PAH, TBT (TPhT)  Kłodnica River, Poland: Mercury, Cadmium, PAH  Meuse, NL, Fr, Lu, Be, D: PBDE, Hg, Cd, PAH, Pesticides  Ter and Llobregat Rivers, Spain: PBDE, Nonylphenol, Pesticides  Danube river, Vah subcatchment: PAH, Hg, Cd, NP, DEHP, TBT

20. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Plans for final year  Complete case studies (March 2009)  Based on results: - Update emissions database - Update reports on control options - Finalise DSS handbook  Synthesis (first half of 2009). Aim to provide guidelines for implementation of the WFD on Water District and European scale  Final conference/workshop: June 23-24, 2009

21. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Final products of SOCOPSE  Substance Flow Analysis (SFA). Report on main flowpaths and emissions of the selected substances in Europe. Draft version used in case studies to identify sources. Will be updated spring 2009. Database for identification on potential sources, emission factors (if available)  Substance reports. Compilations of methods (efficiency, cost) to reduce releases of PS (including end of pipe, substitution etc).  Emission reduction strategy report. Report where management options are ranked for different PPs and sources, based on efficiency and cost.

22. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Final products of SOCOPSE  Decision support system (DSS). Report (handbook) with stepwise procedures to fulfil WFD requirements for River Basin Management Plans. Brief report + appendices. Final draft available.

23. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Final products of SOCOPSE  Case study reports. 1 report for each case study with all steps taken in applying the DSS, evaluation of DSS, problems encountered and solutions found. Also how to use SFA, Substance reports etc.

24. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Web based DSS  A web version of the DSS will be available towards the end of the project.  Will contain DSS + all information and reports from the project accesible in the form of data, reports and illustrations  Will be maintained during project period and some time after.  We are looking for support to keep the web site alive, updated and up to date for several years to come including to: - add information on other PS and emerging substances - Integrate results from other projects

25. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Final products of SOCOPSE  Synthesis report. Very short summary of results. Synthesis of experiences from case studies + implications for WFD and other policies on PPs. Aimed at several levels i.e. WFD managers and european policy-makers. Recommendations for future develelopment of the WFD, common topics for WFD, REACH, IPCC etc.

26. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Synthesis report topics - emissions  Lack of information on emissions - and production, import, export, use, fate of PS in industrial waste, household products and municipal waste water  Diffuse sources important in many locations - Atmospheric deposition - Contaminated sites - Agriculture - Households and small industries: waste water (more or less treatment) For a long term strategy to reduce impacts from PS and chemicals in general, a cradle to grave perspective is needed and a higher degree of transparency in information on use, production and fate of chemicals.

27. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Synthesis report topics  General lack of monitoring data to assess water quality: Combination of SFA and fate models can be used to identify potential sources, pathways, concentration ranges and suitable monitoring sites

28. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Other synthesis report topics  Technical information on end of pipe control technologies and substitution partly available but information on cost of emission control options are scarce and unreliable  Information and knowledge not fully utilised – science to policy communication links should be improved  Decision making structure differs between member states and may influence possibilities to implement WFD.

29. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Continued WFD PS Implementation  SOCOPSE will provide guidelines, support tools and advice adapted to the current status of the directive and for the selected list of priority substances  Methods and tools can also be applied to other substances if additional substance-specific data is collected.  All results will be available on a SOCOPSE DSS website.  Our aim is to continue to develop the DSS website to include new substances and new information as it becomes avaliable

30. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Continued WFD PS Implementation  The SOCOPSE synthesis report will discuss Long-term strategies for WFD PS – A broader perspective – presentation at the SOCOPSE conference  Consider other sources (atmospheric transport and deposition, historical contamination, household products, small industries (WWTP)  Not only technical measures - Management options differ in approach, geographical scale and societal sector  Links to other legislation and international agreements  Transparency in information on production, use, releases of chemicals  Emerging substances

31. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date]

32. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date]

33. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Control of Hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea Region (COHIBA)  to identify the most important sources of the selected hazardous substances identified as being of specific concern to the Baltic Sea  to support the HELCOM countries in the selection of management options to reduce the discharges, emissions and losses of hazardous substances.  to provide input to the development of national implementation programmes /programmes of measures under the EU Water Framework Directive for hazardous substances.  to support the HELCOM Baltic Sea-wide thematic assessment on hazardous substances as required by the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan to be developed by 2010.  to enhance the application of the ecosystem approach also to the management of hazardous substances

34. [Title] [Lecturer], [Date] Control of Hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea Region (COHIBA)  Coordinated by Finnish Environmental Institute  Partners from all Baltic Sea states (FI, SE, ES, LV, LT, PL, DE, DK, RU)  Start in January 2009  Partly funded by Baltic Sea Region Programme

35. Contacts: john.munthe@ivl.se www.socopse.eu