Implementation of WFD in Austria

V. Koller-Kreimel

2/2320. Juni 2005 2

Water status assessment

Approach Methodologies on quality elements Overall ecological assessment Values for characterisation of water status

3/2320. Juni 2005 3

Water status assessment –Approach

development of quality standards/classification systems (WFD compliant -> intercalibration process)

Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites

Performance of surveillance and operational monitoring based on the results of risk assessment

Application of standards/classification systems at sites

Use of grouping for water bodies which are not monitored (development of methodology)

Indication of confidence of status classification

4/2320. Juni 2005 4

Water status assessment – riversMethodologies for quality elements

ecological status: development of quality standards/classification systems

classification systems for all biological quality elements (based of the deviation from typespecific reference conditions)Limit values for specific pollutants (except priority substances)

Limit/guide values for general physico-chemical parametersLimit/guides values for hydromorphological parameters

chemical status: priority substances

5/2320. Juni 2005 5

Assessment methods /classification systems for biological elements

Development of biological assessment methods is finalised (indices for benthic invertebrates, fish, phyto-benthos, macrophytes, phytoplancton (lakes) – 5 classes

Introduced in EU-Intercalibration process

Intercalibration already finalised for benthic invertebrates, phytobenthos

Publication of biological methods on Ministry-website (Leitfäden)

Proposal for hydromorphological und general physico- chemical elements for high status (limit values) and indicating good status (guide values)

6/2320. Juni 2005 6

Fish: Fish Index Austria (FIA)

Biomass

% dominant typespecific species

% subdominant typespecific species

% rare species

# Habitat Guilds

# Reproduction Guilds

Index of fishregion

Length-frequency-Diagram of dominant species

Length-frequency-Diagram of subdominant species

Additional information: Age structure - expert judgement

9 Metrics:

7/2320. Juni 2005 7

Benthic invertebrates (Makrozoobenthos)

Metrics reacting on specific stressors –3 Moduls

Organic pollution – Saprobic index General degradation – Multimetric index

- A) eutrophication / backwater effects/ reduction of flow velocity (changing a „rhitral“ character to a „potamal“ character)

- B) Chanellisation, reduction of structures and habitats, species/diversity deficit

acidification – Acidification index

Assessment: worst case of the 3 moduls

8/2320. Juni 2005 8

Modul organic pollurtion

Saprobic index (Zelinka & Marvan)

Modul Acidification

Acidificationindex

Modul General degradation

Focus „eutrophication / potamal effects“

total number of taxal EPT Taxa Diversity index (Margalef) Structure-degradation-index % Oligochaeta&Diptera Taxa RETI % share of Litoral species

MultimetricIndex (b)

total number of taxal EPT Taxa Diversitäty index (Margalef) Structur-degradation-index

Focus „habitat &species diversity, channellisation“

MultimetricIndex (a)

„worstcase“

Ecological status class

bethic invertebrates

9/2320. Juni 2005 9

1) Trophie-Index (based on trophic reference condtions): reacting on nutrient pollution

2) Saprobic-Index (based on “saprobic reference conditions): reacting on organic pollution

3) Index of species composition („Referenzarten“): reacting on all effects including morphological changes

Phytobenthos classification: „worst-case of the 3 indices

Aquatic Flora – Phytobenthos

10/2320. Juni 2005 10

Makrophyten

Classification: Complex analyses of species composition

(deviation from typespecific reference conditions)

11/2320. Juni 2005 11

Legal implementation of biological classification

Ordinance on Surface Water - Ecology (Draft version available – part of 1st River basin management plan )

Overall biological assessment (part of ecological status assessment):

- worst classification of all biological elements

12/2320. Juni 2005 12

Water status assessment – riversApproach

ecological status: development of quality standards/classification systems

classification systems for all biological quality elements

(based of the deviation from typespecific reference conditions)Limit values for specific pollutants (except priority substances)

Limit/guide values for general physico-chemical parametersLimit/guides values for hydromorphological parameters

chemical status:

13/2320. Juni 2005 13

Classification

general physico –chemical parameters values for „high status“ (limit value) values for „good status“ (guide value – supporting ecological funtioning of

a „good status“ biology)

90-percentiles derived from typespecific reference conditions

Hydromorphological status 5 class (typespecific) assessment system of the hydromorphological situation (see „Leitfaden für die hydromorphologische Zustandserhebung“)

o Limit values / description for high status

o Guide values/ description of „good hydromorphological situations - supporting ecological funtioning of a „good status“ biology

14/2320. Juni 2005 14

Specific pollutants: Quality standards based on

ecotoxicology (precautionary principle):

Leagal implementation (already done):

Ordinance on Surface water – chemical standards for

dangerous substances (2006)

15/2320. Juni 2005 15

Overall ecological status assessment

Decision tree – worst case approach

High status (very good): all elements (all biological elements, hydromorphology, all general physico-chemical parameters, all specific pollutants (except priority

substances) have to meet the values set for high status (class I)

Good status:Worst case of biological elements: good status class and worst case of specific pollutants: limit values for good status not exceed

classification of general physico-chemical paramters or hydromorphological parameters only give supplementory information (relevant for plausibility check)

Moderate/ poor / bad status: limit values for specific pollution are exceeded and/or worst case of biological elements (most sensitive biological element relevant for the specific pressure) classifies as moderate/poor/bad

16/2320. Juni 2005 16

Entsprechen die physikalisch-chemischen

Bedingungen dem sehr guten Zustand

Entsprechen die hydromorphologischen Bedingungen dem sehr

guten Zustand

Gewährleisten (a) die allgemeinen physikalisch-chemi-schen Bedingungen die Funktionsfähig-keit des Ökosystems und die Einhaltung der Werte der biologischen Qualitäts-elemente und werden b) die UQN für die spezifischen Schad-stoffe eingehalten?

Entsprechen die Werte für die biologischen

Qualitätskomponenten dem sehr guten

Zustand?

Einstufung aufgrund der Abweichung der

biologischen Werte vom sehr guten Zustand

Weichen die Werte für die biologischen

Qualitätskomponenten nur leicht vom sehr guten Zustand ab?

Sehr guter Zustand

Guter Zustand

unbefriedigender Zustand

Mäßiger Zustand

Schlechter Zustand

Ist die Abweichung mäßig?

Ist die Abweichung deutlich?

Ja

Ja

Ja

Ja

Nein

Größer

Ja Ja

Ja

Größer

Nein

Nein

Nein

Nein

Decision tree for Overall Ecological Status Assessment

17/2320. Juni 2005 17

Water status assessment – riversApproach

ecological status: development of quality standards/classification systems

classification systems for all biological quality elements

(based of the deviation from typespecific reference conditions)Limit values for specific pollutants (except priority substances)

Limit/guide values for general physico-chemical parametersLimit/guides values for hydromorphological parameters

chemical status: EU standards for priority substances (limit values)

18/2320. Juni 2005 18

Legal implementation of quality standards via Ordinances

Surface waters - Specific pollutants (dangerous substances)

implemented in 2006

Surface waters -Ecology draft version

Groundwater Qualityimplemented, but has to be adapted (trend!)

Groundwater-Quantity under development

Class limits and method how to assess status of water bodies

19/2320. Juni 2005 19

Water status assessment –Approach

development of quality standards/classification systems (WFD compliant -> intercalibration process)

Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites

Performance of surveillance and operational monitoring based on the results of risk assessment

Application of standards/classification systems at sites

Use of grouping for water bodies which are not monitored (development of methodology)

Indication of confidence of status classification

20/2320. Juni 2005 20

Monitoring

Up to 2006:

Surface waters - ca. 285 monitoring sites (fixed)

Focus on the assessment of organic and chemical pollution

Since 2007: Based on the results of risk analyses 2004 (water bodies „possibly at risk“ or „at risk“)

surveillance monitoring (fixed permanent sites, all elements) operative Monitoring – non permanent:

Main focus: hydromorphological pressures ( as pollution problems are already known)

21/2320. Juni 2005 21

Operational Monitoring rivers > 10 km2

2007-2009Focus on rivers > 100 km2

2010 –Further clarification rivers > 100 km2

Focus on rivers 10-100 km2

22/2320. Juni 2005 22

Operative Monitoring

monitoring 2007 – 2009 Water bodies > 100 km² : ca. 940

• ca. 200 water bodies due to pollution ca.75 water bodies (point sources)

ca. 125 water bodies (nutrients, diffuse organic pollution)

• ca. 800 water bodies due to hydromorphology

Grouping is only used for diffuse pollution or

hydromorphological alterations!

23/2320. Juni 2005 23

Operative Monitoring – Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites

Vorschlag GZÜV neu

Pressure Number of sites

Position of monitoring site

Morphological alteration 1- 2 In the longest part of dominant alteration

Water abstraction 1 Immediately below the water abstraction

Hydropeaking 1 1km (rivers with catchment < 1000 km²) or 2 km (rivers with catchment > 1000 km²) below the discharge

Migration barrier 1-2 - Upstream of barrier- In case of several barriers additionally downstream of the last barrier

Only in natural fish habitat region!

Impoundment / reservoir 2 -Beginning of impoundment (“Stauwurzel”)-Upstream of the dam (flow velocity < 0,30 m)

24/2320. Juni 2005 24

Operative Monitoring – Methodology for the selection of representative monitoring sites

Pressure/Impact Numer of monitoring sites

Position of monitroing site

General physico-chemical parameter

(organic pollution, nutrients)

1 At the end of the water body- Taking into account mixing zone of point sources (mind.1 km)

Specific pollutants, priority substances

1 At the end of the water body- Taking into account mixing zone of point sources (mind.1 km)

25/2320. Juni 2005 25

Operative Monitoring

usually not all biological elements are monitored – but only those which are most sensitive for the specific pressure

Example (relevant for Austrian water types): morphol.– bank fixation: fish morphol. - soil fixation: benthic invertebr. morphol. - general: fish river regulation: fish impoundment: fish, benthic invertebr. water abstraction: fish, benthic invertebr. hydropeaking: fish, benthic invertebr. migration barriers: fish nutrient pollution: phytobenthos, macrophytes organic pollution: benthic invertebr. thermal pollution: fish, benthic invert.

26/2320. Juni 2005 26

Legal Basis

Surveillance Monitoring:

Sites of high importance (>2500 km2)

Additional sites for intensified inform.

Reference sites (change of natural situation)

Operative Monitoring:

WB „possibly at risk“ or „at risk (pollution, hydromorphology)

Evaluation of effectiveness of measures

International/bilateral monitororing obligations

Overlapping

Also used for International Networks (i.e. TNMN)

Investigative Monitoring

Ministry level

Provincial level

27/2320. Juni 2005 27

Reporting on status assessment

Maps (basis for management plans) Biological Class (worst case of biological elements) Ecological status (indication) – general physico-chemical elements Ecological status – specific pollutants (except priority substances) Overall Ecological status (worst case biology and specific pollutants) Chemical status – priority substances

Status assessment is done for all water bodies based on - monitoring results (WFD compliant – intercalibrated - assessment

methods) - or grouping (tranfer of monitoring results to water bodies of same type

and impacts)

Status assessment - Indication of confidence ____ „Status – very high confidence: directly monitored____

„Status – high confidence: grouping_ _ _

„Status – low confidence“: no monitoring results available or no grouping possible then of Risk-results will be transposed

28/2320. Juni 2005 28

Programme of measures

for hydromorphological alterations

29/2320. Juni 2005 29

POM - Hydromorphology

No EU-„basic“ measures existing as there is no specific EU-regulation dealing with hydromorphology

Austrian situation:

subsidy for restoring continuity (fish migration aid) and restauration of morphology(starting Jan 2009)

Planned: general standard for the definition of ecological minimum flow (based on low flow

conditions NQt and MJNQt) Standard for how to design a fish migration aid Selected Water bodies with high morphological status to be protected from (hydropower)

use

30/2320. Juni 2005 30

Existing Regulations (2)

Since 1990 – Ecological focus Hydropower

New plants or renewal of licence water abstraction – minimum ecological flows: determined

individually on project level fish passes for longitudinal continuity

Old plants restore ecological minimum flow (difficult to enforce)

Flood defense: Mesasures have to be done in an ecologically sound way

January 2009: subsidies for fish migration aids and restauration of river morphology/ habitats

31/2320. Juni 2005 31

Additional new regulations planned to achieve the objectives of the WFD

Old Plants National standard for ecological minimum flow National standard for fish migration aids

Decommission of hydropower plants only in case

- No interest of hydropower production- where a new HP plant is a better „sustainable“ solution

32/2320. Juni 2005 32

Catalogue for measures to improve ecological situation impacted by hydromorphological alterations

Basis for the selection of cost-efficient measures

Basis for HMWB designation- Art. 4 (3 ) test

Which measures are needed to achieve good ecological status

and which of them would have a significant impact on use?

33/2320. Juni 2005 33

• consist of tables and explanatory text

• Tables include information on

- pressures + drivers + effect of pressure on biological elements

- types of measures + their effect on biology + additional effects for example on uses,

- time frame of expected biological reaction, lifetime of measure

- impact/effect of measure on „causer“ an on other sectors/uses

- specific costs (Investitment cost, runninig costs)

Catalogue of measures - Hydromorphology

34/2320. Juni 2005 34

Hydropower in Austria

35/2320. Juni 2005 35

Electricity generation in Austria

Electricity production in Austria 2004

large hp

small hp

others

large hp54,5%

6,5% small hp

others*

39,0%

source: E-control

*caloric, wind, solar, etc.

hp……….. hydropower

total electricity generation: 64 TWh

About 2/3 is generated by hydropower.

Since 2002 the proportion of hp generation decreased due tohigher consumption higher use of caloric generation

hydropowergeneration

36/2320. Juni 2005 36

Structure of hydropower generation in Austria

maximumcapacity

No ofplants

% of total No

GWh % of total hp gen

small hydro-power

< 200 kW 1442 63 337 0,8

200 - 500 kW 292 13 385 0,9

500 kW–1 MW 184 8 468 1,1

1 – 2 MW 118 5 598 1,4

2 – 5 MW 73 3 745 1,8

5 – 10 MW 34 1 881 2,1

total 2143 93 3.414 8,1

large hp > 10 MW 156 7 38.000 91

TOTAL 2299* 100 41.000 1001 2

storage power plantsrun-off-river power stations

Additional > 2000 very small plants (only for private supply)

37/2320. Juni 2005 37

Results of Impact-Pressure Analysis (2007)

River stretches significantly impacted by hydropower

Number Length km % of river net*

Water abstraction -

no ecological minimum flow 2586 3.331 10,6

impoundment 574 1.064 3,5

hydropeaking (>1:5) 78 802 2,6

River fragmentation (barriers)

> 2000

* river net > 10 km2: 31.000 km

38/2320. Juni 2005 38

Hydropower and WFD

Study on the possible effects of WFD implementation on Hydropower in Austria (Stigler-Studie, 2005):

- Estimation of costs to restore continuity (fish migration aids)

Large Hydropower > 10 MW: 60 - 144 Mio € Small hydropower < 10 MW: 90 Mio €

- Costs/production losses for restoring ecological minimum flow

39/2320. Juni 2005 39

WFD implications on Austrian WFD implications on Austrian hydropowerhydropower

loss of power generation financial lossProviding ecological minimum flow TWh % hp sector % total hp* Mio €/a ´ generation

small HP < 10 MW 0,4 - 1,2 (0,8) 10 - 32 1,0 - 3,0 15-50

large HP > 10 MW 0,15 - 0,6 (0,4) 5 - 20 0,4 - 1,5 4-16

total 0,55 - 1,8 (1,2) (3,0) 19 - 66

*total hp generation: 38 TWh

40/2320. Juni 2005 40

Other supplementory measures for reduction of pollution

point source pollution: site specific measures advisory boards for farmers Pilot projects

…see catalogues of measures (i.e. public water managment,

agriculture)