Upload
others
View
7
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Acid Rain –Lessons Learned from >50 Years of
Science and Policy InteractionsPeringe Grennfelt
IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute
Geneva 11 December 2019
Celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Air Convention
Acid Rain - Discovery year 12 BC1
Acid Rain - A new environmental threat, with large
consequences for man and environment.
Svante Odén’s message in Dagens Nyheter 24
October 1967.
Acid rain became immediately a top story.
The issue was brought to international attention
within weeks and
OECD decided within a couple of years to conduct a
scientific investigation of the international
dimension of the problem.
Svante Odén.
1) BC = Before the Convention
Göran Persson tookOdén’s observations to the OECD
The OECD project 1972-77
Transboundary transport of Sulphur
Involved 11 West European countries
Main Conclusion: “Sulphur compounds do travel long
distances in the atmosphere and has shown that the air
quality in any European country is measurably affected by
emissions from other European countries” (OECD 1977)
The project paved the road for the European Monitoring and
Evaluation Programme (EMEP), starting in 1977
Brynulf Ottar
Anton Eliassen
SciencePolicy
The first alarm,
Odén 1967
OECD projekt 72-75
CLRTAP
Convention 1979
First S Protocol
1985
Second Sulphur
Protocol 1994
Gothenburg
Protocol 1999
EU CAFE Proposal
Critical loads and
levels
Soil acidification verified
Multipollutant integrated
assessment model
Dynamic modelling
Recovery
Dis
co
ve
ryC
on
se
ns
us
Inn
ova
tive
str
ate
gie
s
Lin
ka
ge
sw
ith
em
erg
ing
iss
ue
s EU NEC Directive
Gothenburg Prot.
Revison 2012
Climate, human
health,intercontinental
transport, nitrogen
NOx Protocol 1988
Start ICPs.
Start of EMEP 1977
2010
1970
1980
1990
2000
A quick look at the timeline
Catchment recovery
experiments (Gårdsjön)
EU NEC Directive
OECD: ”Acid rain a
transboundary problem
Late 80’s, and 90’sCritical loadsCost-effective strategiesSecond sulphur protocolGothenburg Protocol
Early 80’sForest damagesFirst sulphur protocolICP programmes on effects
1970’sLake acidification Transboundary transportEMEP and CLRTAP
After 2000RecoveryHealth effects Nitrogen Climate interactionsHemispheric transport
SNSF project 72-80
CLRTAP Assessment
Report 2016
Sweden’s case study
1972
UN Confeference
Conclusion 1972
Forest dieback changed the scene
Forest damages observed in Germany in 1980
Professor Bernhard Ulrich highlighted the problem
The large problems in Eastern Europe –
The “Black Triangle”
The 30% club and the first sulphur protocol 1985
Sta of rt hthe ICPs
NGOs became important
UK minister of environment visiting Sweden and Norway 1985
Beginning of1980s
Bernhard Ulrich
Critical Loads and Integrated
Assessment Modelling
Critical Loads first discussed in 1982
The large steps were taken through a workshops in
Norway and Sweden 1986 and 1988
The Executive Body decided in 1988 to use the concept
Mapping of Critical loads became central for the future
protocols
acidity
acidity
nutrient N
nutrient N
Jan Nilsson
The Second sulphur protocol based on IAM
Key features
– Exceedance of Critical Loads for ecosystems effects
– Source attributions of deposition
– Costs for control
– Integrated assessment models linked emissions, their
control and costs to exceedances of critical loads
– An optimized strategy by which a certain environmental
improvement should be reached to the least cost for all
Europe.
– The objective was expressed as gap closure of the
exceedances of Critical Loads.
Bob Wilson Leen Hordijk
THE GAP
GAP CLOSURE
Beginningof 1990s
A multi-pollutant multi-effect agreement -
The Gothenburg Protocol 1999
Revision of the NOx protocol requested a
more advanced solution.
The IAM for the Gothenburg Protocol
managed to include several problems and
several compounds
Key model development at IIASA
Large success in negotiations
End of the 1990s
Max Posch Lars NordbergMarkus Amann
US and Canada
Ellis Cowling took advantage of the European findings.
In 1971 he invited Odén to the US and highlighted Acid Rain as
a NA problem
Monitoring networks established in Canada (1976) and the US
(1978)
First agreement between US and Canada 1980
The US NAPAP assessment study formed the scientific and
technical fundament for the policy from 1990
Main policy measures
– The amendment of the Clean Air Act in 1990
– Cap and Trade programs
– Agreements and close collaboration with Canada
Ellis Cowling
US SO2 emissions from the power sector
Science Policy
First alarm, Odén 1967
OECD projekt: “Acid rain
a transboundary problem”
1979 Air
Convention
First S Protocol
1985
Second Sulphur
Protocol 1994
Gothenburg
Protocol 1999
EU CAFE Proposal 2005
Critical loads and
levels 1988
Soil acidification verified
Multipollutant integrated
assessment model
Dynamic modelling
Recovery
Dis
co
ve
ryC
on
se
ns
us
Inn
ova
tive
str
ate
gie
s
Lin
ka
ge
sw
ith
em
erg
ing
iss
ue
s
NEC Directive 2001
2012 Gothenburg
Prot. revison
Climate, human
health,intercontinental
transport, nitrogen
NOx Protocol 1988
Start ICPs.
Start of EMEP 1977
Europe
Catchment recovery
experiments (Gårdsjön)
Revision NEC Directive 2016
OECD
Report 1977SNSF project 72-80
CLRTAP Assessment
Report 2016
1970 US NAAQS,
CCAA
Acid rain in North
America. Likens 1972
1977 CCAA
Amendment
1990 NAAQS revison
US Cap and trade
Programme
Whole lake acidification
experiment
Modelling acid rain –
RADM and MAGIC
Dynamic modelling
Recovery
1991 US/Canada
AQ Agreement
Climate, Air toxics.
1990 CCAA Amendment
NAPAP Scientific
Assessment 1980-1990
US National Atmospheric
Depostion Program 1978
US Community Multi-scale
Air Quality Model
US Canada
Memorandum of
understanding
1980
Precipitation chemistry
network Canada 1976
CLRTAP Assessment
Report 2016; NA
version
North America
1999 Ozone Annex to
US/Canada AQ Agreement
2014 PM2.5 Annex to
US/Canada AQ Agreement
PolicyScience
2010
1970
1980
1990
2000
2018 Air Convention strategy
2010
1970
1980
1990
2000
Sweden’s case study
UN Conference 1972 UN Conf.
Conclusion 1972
US and Canada developed science and policy in parallel and close collaboration with Europe
After 2000
Focus on health effects (inclusion of urban scale)
Additional policies and scales
– Climate (2003- )
– Hemispheric scale TFHTAP (2004 -)
– Nitrogen (2007 -)
– Short lived climate pollutants (2009-)
Revision of the Gothenburg Protocol 2012
– Particles included (health effects)
– Objectives set for 2020 and beyond
Continuous improvements. Ecosystems
are recovering. Agriculture still a problem
EU important complementary policy
organisation
Acid rain – a success story
Decreasing emissions
Europe SO2
NOx
NH3SO2
NOx
Recoveringecosystems
Monitoring and mapping
Engagement from parties
The inclusion of the scientific bodies (EMEP
and WGE) within the Convention formed trust
and legitimacy.
EMEP monitoring
– 42 countries
– Approx. 350 indidiual stations
ICP programmes on ecosystem effects
– Five monitoring programs on ecosystems
– Mapping of Critical Loads
– >5000 forest sites
Emission inventories
EMEP sites (SO4), 2015Lessons learned
Scientific research and collaboration
core activities
Many research programmes, such as the SNSF project
in Norway, and the scientific bodies under the
Convention, contributed to a common scientific
understanding.
Lessons learned:
– Openness and sharing of data crucial
– The development of science and monitoring networks
nationally increased the political understanding.
The Gårdsjön Roof Project
Norwegian RAIN Project
Lessons learned
US ozone experimentZeppelin Station
Meeting places between
science and policy
Formed bridging concepts
– Blame matixes
– Critical Loads
– Integrated assessment modelling
Workshops formed a mutual understanding,
transparency and legitimacy
– Technical workshops
– The Saltsjöbaden workshops
Task force on Integrated Assessment
Modelling
Lessons learned
Future challenges – where are we heading?
Still many unknowns
– PM origin and nature
– Health effects
– Air pollution climate interactions
– Ozone origin and effects on ecosystems
– Air pollution and biodiversity
New ways of international cooperation including infrastructures – technical and scientific support
New organisations and initiatives: SDGs, WHO, WMO, UN Environment, CCAC, ILC, Copernicus etc.
There is a need to mobilise
– New financial resources
– New generations of scientists that are willing to cross disciplinary boundaries
Final remarks
This talk is based on a Symposium organized a year ago to manifest
the 50 years of acid rain research and policy. About 70 participants
many of them with experience going back to the first decade of the
acid rain history participated.
All information can be found at http://acidrain50years.ivl.se
Ambio paper recently published
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13280-019-01244-4
Thanks to all those giving inspiration to this talk and contributing with photos etc.
Including Max Posch, Filip Moldan, Dick Wright, Karl Meiwes, Ellis Cowling, EMEP and
WGE centres,
New winds – the man-dominated system
from the last century is gone
The leadership ofthe Air Convention
2019
Good Luck for the FutureThank you