Dioxin in the Elbe river basin: policy and science under the water framework directive 2000–2015 and toward 2021

被引:0
|
作者
Ulrich Förstner
Henner Hollert
Markus Brinkmann
Kathrin Eichbaum
Roland Weber
Wim Salomons
机构
[1] University of Technology Hamburg-Harburg,Institute of Environmental Technology and Energy Economics
[2] RWTH Aachen University,Department of Ecosystem Analysis, Institute for Environmental Research, ABBt – Aachen Biology and Biotechnology
[3] POPs Environmental Consulting,undefined
来源
关键词
Activated carbon; Biota-EQS; Bitterfeld region; Chemical status; Dredged materials; Flood risks; Marine strategy; NGOs; RBC Elbe; Sediment management concept;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
A critical review of the last 25 years of dioxin policy in the Elbe river catchment is presented along seven main theses of the River Basin Community (RBC)-Elbe background document “Pollutants” for the Management Plan 2016–2021. In this period, polychlorinated dibenzodioxins/-furans (PCDD/Fs) and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (dl-PCBs) will play a major role: (i) as new priority substances for which environmental quality standards (EQSs) need to be derived (Directive 2013/39/EC); (ii) in the search for innovative solutions in sediment remediation (i.e., respecting the influence of mechanical processes; Flood Risk Directive 2007/60/EC); and (iii) as indicators at the land–sea interface (Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC). In the Elbe river catchment, aspects of policy and science are closely connected, which became particularly obvious in a classic example of dioxin hot spot contamination, the case of the Spittelwasser creek. Here, the “source-first principle” of the first cycle of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) had to be confirmed in a controversy on the dioxin hot spots with Saxony-Anhalt’s Agency for Contaminated Sites (LAF). At the Spittelwasser site, the move from “inside the creek” to “along the river banks” goes parallel to a general paradigm shift in retrospective risk assessment frameworks and remediation techniques for organic chemicals (Ortega-Calvo et al. 2015). With respect to dioxin, large-scale stabilization applying activated carbon additions is particularly promising. Another important aspect is the assessment of the ecotoxicology of dioxins and dl- PCBs in context of sediment mobility and flood risk assessment, which has been studied in the project framework FloodSearch. Currently, the quality goals of the WFD to reach a “good chemical status” are not met in many catchment areas because substances such as mercury do and others probably will (PCDD/Fs and dl-PCB) exceed biota-EQS values catchment area-wide. So far, relating biota-EQS values to sediment-EQSs is not possible. To overcome these limitations, the DioRAMA project was initiated, which has led to improved approaches for the assessment of dioxin-contaminated sediment using in vitro bioassays and to a robust dataset on the interrelation between dioxins and dioxin-like compounds in sediments and biota.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Applying participatory multicriteria methods to river basin management: improving the implementation of the Water Framework Directive - Introduction
    Messner, F
    [J]. ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING C-GOVERNMENT AND POLICY, 2006, 24 (02): : 159 - 167
  • [42] Integrating climate change mitigation into river basin management planning for the Water Framework Directive - A Danish case
    Kaspersen, Bjarke Stoltze
    Jacobsen, Torsten Vammen
    Butts, Michael Brian
    Boegh, Eva
    Muller, Henrik Gioertz
    Stutter, Marc
    Fredenslund, Anders Michael
    Kjaer, Tyge
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2016, 55 : 141 - 150
  • [43] Hydro-economic Modeling in River Basin Management: Implications and Applications for the European Water Framework Directive
    I. Heinz
    M. Pulido-Velazquez
    J. R. Lund
    J. Andreu
    [J]. Water Resources Management, 2007, 21 : 1103 - 1125
  • [44] Water Framework Directive Implementation in Greece: Introducing Participation in Water Governance - the Case of the Evrotas River Basin Management Plan
    Demetropoulou, Leeda
    Nikolaidis, Nikolaos
    Papadoulakis, Vasilis
    Tsakiris, Kostas
    Koussouris, Theodore
    Kalogerakis, Nikolaos
    Koukaras, Kostas
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GOVERNANCE, 2010, 20 (05) : 336 - 349
  • [45] Effects of precipitation on vegetation and surface water in the Yellow River Basin during 2000-2021
    Shi, Xiaorui
    Yang, Peng
    Xia, Jun
    Zhang, Yongyong
    Huang, Heqing
    Zhu, Yanchao
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCES, 2024, 34 (04) : 633 - 653
  • [46] An integrated approach to river basin management based on EU water framework directive using GIS and remote sensing
    Cluckie, ID
    Park, JS
    Christian, R
    Candy, H
    [J]. RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT II, 2003, 7 : 449 - 457
  • [47] The politics of multi-scalar action in river basin management: Implementing the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD)
    Hueesker, Frank
    Moss, Timothy
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2015, 42 : 38 - 47
  • [48] The Strengths and Weaknesses of Deliberation on River Basin Management Planning: Analysing the water framework directive implementation in Catalonia (Spain)
    Pares, Marc
    Brugue, Quim
    Espluga, Josep
    Miralles-de-Imperial, Julia
    Ballester, Alba
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GOVERNANCE, 2015, 25 (02) : 97 - 110
  • [49] Unfolding the Water Framework Directive Implementation at the River Basin District Scale: An Italian Case Study on Irrigation Measures
    Pellegrini, Emilia
    Bortolini, Lucia
    Defrancesco, Edi
    [J]. WATER, 2019, 11 (09)
  • [50] Economic assessment of non-market environmental benefits of water quality: an application of the Water Framework Directive to the Guadalquivir River Basin
    Martin-Ortega, Julia
    Berbel, Julio
    Brouwer, Roy
    [J]. ECONOMIA AGRARIA Y RECURSOS NATURALES, 2009, 9 (01): : 65 - 89