vulnerability of water quality examplified on the … · 2005-10-28 · vulnerability of water...

1

AVEC Conference, september 2005

M. MEYBECKUMR Sisyphe, CNRS / Univ. Paris VI

VULNERABILITY OF WATER QUALITY VULNERABILITY OF WATER QUALITY EXAMPLIFIED ON THE RIVER SEINEEXAMPLIFIED ON THE RIVER SEINE

2

OUTLINEOUTLINE

AVEC CONFERENCE 2005AVEC CONFERENCE 2005

•Local impacts vs. Earth System

• Issues and Pressures

• Time analysis

• Space analysis

• Budgets

• Scenarii: CC & HD

3

SPACE SCALES IN RIVER BASINSSPACE SCALES IN RIVER BASINS


4


5

TIME SCALES IN RIVER BASINSTIME SCALES IN RIVER BASINS


6

SCHEMATIC POSITIONS OF CONTINENTAL AQUATIC SYSTEMS SCHEMATIC POSITIONS OF CONTINENTAL AQUATIC SYSTEMS SHARED BY SOCIOSHARED BY SOCIO--SYSTEMS AND EARTH SYSTEMSYSTEMS AND EARTH SYSTEM

• The Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response cycle in socio-systems is generally observed at short to medium periods (10-50 y)• The parallel Environmental impacts-Earth System response- Regional to Global Change is a long term reaction (100-1000 y) still poorly known

EARTH SYSTEM

COMPONENTS

GLOBAL CHANGE DRIVERS

HUMAN DRIVERS

RESOURCESERVICES

RIVERINE SYNDROMES

EARTH SYSTEM

RESPONSE

EARTH SYSTEMS CHANGES

SOCIO-SYSTEMS EARTH SYSTEM

SHORT TERM REACTION

LONG TERM REACTION

SOCIETAL RESPONSES

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS

CONTINENTAL AQUATIC SYSTEMS

CONTROL

FUNCTIONS

PRESSURE

USE


7

ISSUES IDENTIFIED ON THE SEINEISSUES IDENTIFIED ON THE SEINE


•1830’s microbial pollution (cholera outbreak)

• 1960 organic pollution/O2 balance

• 1976 eutrophication

• 1980’s metals, POPs

• 1980 nitrate

• 2000’s endocrine disruptors

• not identified as an issue: salinization

• not possible acidification

• not really addressed radionuclids

• 2000 possible thermal pollution

8

PIREN SEINEPIREN SEINE


•Multidisciplinary programme from historians to biogeochemists

• Long-term water quality records

•Long-term pressures and material reconstruction flow analysis

• Sedimentary archives

• Whole basin water quality models

• Scenarios

9

SEINE RIVER BASINSEINE RIVER BASIN


• 65 000 km² x 17 million people = 250 people/km²vs. 50 p./km² for world average on

exorheic

• Water dilution power moderate: runoff 8 l/s/km²vs. 10 l/s/km² for WA

• Sediment dilution power very low: 10 t/km²/y and 25 mg/L TSSvs. 200 t/km²/y and 500 mg/L for WA

10


SEINE BASIN RELIEFSEINE BASIN RELIEF

• 90 % of the basin is flat, climate and lithology are uniform

11

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION


• The Seine is naturally very vulnerable to most human pressures

• The Seine River is one of the most impacted fluvial system

• The Seine combines multiple syndromes of river change

• These trends can be reconstructed over 50 to 100 years

• Spatial complexity should also be carefully addressed

• Man and River relationships are begining to be deciphered

• Our perception and knowledge of environmental quality issues is evolving fast: is water quality a societal construction?

0°

45°

50°

5°

12


TYPOLOGY OF AGRICULTURETYPOLOGY OF AGRICULTURE

• 12 main regions (20 soil types x 20 crop rotation x 20 farming practises)

• Used for scenarii analysis

Ducharne, 2005

13



• Most of the drained network is regulated

• Intensive agriculture is wide spread and single point sources: Paris megacity

PIREN-Seine, 2004

14

• Paris megacity (25 000 km²): 10 Mpeople vs. Natural low flows in Paris 50 m 3/s

• About 1/3 of France industrial activity1/3 of France intensive agriculture (cropping)

• Highly regulated and navigated river sluices; dredging

loss of habitat

• Old Human and agriculture occupation > 2000 years

• No mining; 90 % carbonated rocks

• River basin authority since 1964 (effective in 1970)

PARIS MEGACITYPARIS MEGACITY


15

GREATED PARIS AND SEINE NETWORK SEEN BY GREATED PARIS AND SEINE NETWORK SEEN BY SATELLITESATELLITE

• Lutetia was settled herebecause the river was easy to cross

• Since 2000 y it has grown up to a megacity of 10 M people and2500 km2 of built-up land

• Paris impact on its basinextend few 100 km upstream and downstream

•Natural fluxes of some material(nutrients, metals) have beenmultiplied by 10 to 100

SA 2a


16



PIREN-Seine, 2004

17

PARIS MEGACITY HISTORYPARIS MEGACITY HISTORY


•In 1900’s, about 2 Mpeople, now 10 Mpeople aggregated

• Sewer system started > 1850 (combined sewers than separated sewers)

• City very industrialized until 1960’s

18

REGATA ON THE SEINE RIVER REGATA ON THE SEINE RIVER AT THE PONT NOTREAT THE PONT NOTRE--DAME (1700’S)DAME (1700’S)

• Notre Dame is typical of urban bridges of the late Middle Age

• Floating water mills were still in use at that time sharing the river with fluvial transportation

• Until 1900 the Seine river was used for multiple purposes including recreation

DN5,Carnavalet Museum


19

SEINE RIVER AT ARGENTEUIL (MONET) (1880’s)SEINE RIVER AT ARGENTEUIL (MONET) (1880’s)

• Personnal use of waterscape greatly favours the relation between citizens and water bodies

• Sailing is not allowed any more in the Seine

FH 14


20

MAIN SEWAGE COLLECTOR IN PARIS, LATE 1800’SMAIN SEWAGE COLLECTOR IN PARIS, LATE 1800’S

• The Paris sewage network has been conceived after the cholera outbreaks in the 1830’s

• It took several decades to decide, plan and achieve this network, the waste watersbeing derived through siphons and tunnels some 50 km away

• Continuing the recycling of organic carbon and nutrients started in the Middle Age,waste waters were firts spread on agricultural land purchased by the city of Paris

• The modern waste water treatment was mostly developed in 1960-1990 in a giant facility(10 M people) ; the treated sludge is still reused as fertilizer

FD 16 ; Paris Souterrain


21

FLUVIAL TRANSPORT OF NEW CARS ACROSS GREATER FLUVIAL TRANSPORT OF NEW CARS ACROSS GREATER PARISPARIS

• Throughout the XXth centurryfluvial navigation has been a major driver of the river Seine management

• Other industrial drivers have been the Sewage worksinstitution representing 10 MParisians and the major water companies using the river asdrinking water supply and Paris city using river banks ashighways

• Since few years Paris riverbanks are now on UNESCOworld’s list of protected sitesand common citizens aregradually beginning to reuseriver amenitiesFE 25


22

SEINE WATER QUALITY TRENDS (1901SEINE WATER QUALITY TRENDS (1901--1991) UPSTREAM OF PARIS 1991) UPSTREAM OF PARIS CITY (POP DENSITY ≈CITY (POP DENSITY ≈ 120p/km120p/km22))

• Nitrate levels have markedly increased due to industrial fertilisers use from 1950• Dissolved oxygen is not affected by Greater Paris whose sewage water have been gradually collected, treated and released some 80 river km downstream

• Chloride levels have moderately increased from 1901 to 1971

C.Cun CRECEP0

5

10

15

20

25

30NITRAT E

CHLORID ES

OXYGENDISSO LVED

S


23

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1865 1885 1905 1925 1945 1965 1985

eau non-traitéeeau traitéeUntreated watertreated water

PARIS MEGACITY: VOLUME OF TREATED AND UNTREATEDPARIS MEGACITY: VOLUME OF TREATED AND UNTREATEDSEWAGE WATER (1865SEWAGE WATER (1865--1990) (101990) (1066 mm33/y)/y)

S. Barles ; Piren Seine, 2003• 1900: 85% treated• 1940: 18% treated• 1990 87% treated

Treatment lag


24

WASTE WATERS VOLUMES WASTE WATERS VOLUMES COLLECTED AND TREATED (103 mCOLLECTED AND TREATED (103 m33/d) (1880/d) (1880--1990)1990)

S. Barles ; Piren Seine, 2003

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980

débit des égoutscapacité de traitement

Achères

Carrières-Triel etMéry-Pierrelaye

Achères IAchères II

Achères III

Achères IV et Noisy-le-Grand

Valenton IA

collectedtreated


25

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1815 1835 1855 1875 1895 1915 1935 1955 1975

vidanges (*10000 m3/an)

vidanges (*10 l/hab/an)

taux de raccordement à l'égout (%)

taux de traitement (%)

FROM DOMESTIC SLUDGE COLLECTION TO URBAN FROM DOMESTIC SLUDGE COLLECTION TO URBAN SEWAGE IN PARIS (1815SEWAGE IN PARIS (1815--1990)1990)

A. Sewage collection advised by hygienists for the first time (after cholera outbreaks)B. 1885 Sewage collection recommended by city of Paris

1894 Sewage collection « obligatory within 3 years »C. 1931 90 %collection achievedFrom 1935 to 1970, the majority of population was collected but not treated

0

20

40

60

80

100

Collected domestic sludges 104 m3/ypercapita sludge production (10L/y)% pop. collected to sewer% of collected sewage treated

%

S. BarlesPiren Seine, 2003

Treatment lag


26

SCHEMATIC SCHEMATIC EVOLUTION OF EVOLUTION OF

ORGANIC ORGANIC (CARBONACEOUS) (CARBONACEOUS)

POLLUTION IN THE POLLUTION IN THE SEINE BASINSEINE BASIN

CONFERENCECONFERENCE

PIREN SEINE

Paris treatment (IInd)Rest of basin connexion

Mega Paris sewage connexion

Treatment

27

RHINE RIVER ASPHIXIATION (1960RHINE RIVER ASPHIXIATION (1960--1995)1995)

The O2 minimum period lasted 15 years until sewage collection and Oxygen Demand treatment was implemented (1960-1975)

OG17

R. Breukel

River Rhine near Lobith, oxygen saturationpe

rcen

tage

1950 70 9560 80 90

average

minimum


28

A SUCCESS STORYA SUCCESS STORY : NUTRIENTS CONTROL IN THE : NUTRIENTS CONTROL IN THE RHINERHINE R.R.

• The major effort of sewage collection was between 1960 and 1975 : it resulted in particulate P abatment and NH4

+ decrease

• P-PO43- control then decrease was only achieved after the 1985 ban of

P detergents and the dephosphatation in most treatment plants

Van Dijk & Marteijn, 1993


29

NITRATE TRENDS IN WORLD RIVERSNITRATE TRENDS IN WORLD RIVERS

•From 1960 to 1990 nitrate has increased in most large rivers

•Maximum rates are observed in smaller catchments exposed

to intensive fertilizer use

SD11

Seine

Rhine

Danube

Mississippi

Thames


30

OXYGEN DAILY CYCLES AND RIVER DISCHARGE OXYGEN DAILY CYCLES AND RIVER DISCHARGE EUTROPHIED LOIRE RIVER (DAMPIERRE 1992)EUTROPHIED LOIRE RIVER (DAMPIERRE 1992)

• Daily O2 cycles may reach 9 mg/L !• They are destroyed by river floods

PA67

F. Moatar (Univ. Tours, 1999)

�O2

Q


31

RIVER EUTROPHICATIONRIVER EUTROPHICATION : DAILY pH CYCLES IN : DAILY pH CYCLES IN THE LOIRE RIVER (AT DAMPIERRE)THE LOIRE RIVER (AT DAMPIERRE)

• During spring and summer algal blooms (chloro A > 100 µg/L) the daily pH cycles may reach 1.2 pH units

• Such events can only be noted during stable low flows : they aredestroyed by floods

PA68

F. Moatar (1999,Univ. Tours)


32

Evolution Evolution of of polymetallic polymetallic contamination contamination indicator indicator in in the the Seine basin (Poses)Seine basin (Poses)

1

10

100

1000

mars-80 déc-82 sept-85 juin-88 mars-91 nov-93 août-96 mai-99 févr-02

Log(

MP

I)

MES

Sédiments

Laisses de crue

très forte

forte

extrème

moyenne

faible

très faible

bruit de fond géochimique


33

• Treated solids of the sewage water plant of the parisian area (8 Mpeople)•Paris urban sewage sludge was extremely concentrated (�70 to 700) in heavy

metals in the early 1980 ’s• Due to noted effort in industrial reuse of metals and raw water treatment the

contamination decreased from 2 (Cu, Hg, Pb, Zn) to 18 (Cd) between 1980 and 2000

• Treated urban sludges are still high in metals for agricultural reuse (criteria have also been decreased by the EU over that period)

Year

10000

1000

100

10

1

1980 1984 1988 1992 20001996

1980

6000

2000

1600

180

10

2000

2000

900

700

10

5

Geo

logi

cal

back

grou

nd

60

15

23

0.25

0.03

Sew

age

slud

gere

use

cri

teri

a

?

?

?

?

?

Concentration (g/kg)

METAL CONTAMINATION: EXPONENTIAL DECREASE FOR PARIS METAL CONTAMINATION: EXPONENTIAL DECREASE FOR PARIS MEGACITYMEGACITY

Zn

Cu

Pb

Cd

Hg


34

Cadmium

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

1000.0

1976 1981 1987 1992 1998 2003

µg.g-1ASS

SPM

DS

FDBGR

EMSTD

Cd contamination in Cd contamination in the the Seine basinSeine basin


35

Copper

10

100

1000

10000

1976 1981 1987 1992 1998 2003

µg.g-1ASS

EM

BGR

SPM

DSFD

STD

Cu contamination in Cu contamination in the the Seine basinSeine basin


36

Lead

10

100

1000

10000

1976 1981 1987 1992 1998 2003

µg.g-1

ASS

EM

BGR

SPM

DS

FD

STD

Pb contamination in Pb contamination in the the Seine basinSeine basin


37

Mercury

0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

100.00

1976 1981 1987 1992 1998 2003

µg.g-1ASS

EM

BGR

SPM

DS

FD

STD

Hg contamination in Hg contamination in the the Seine basinSeine basin


38

Nickel

10

100

1000

1976 1981 1987 1992 1998 2003

µg.g-1

ASSEM

BGR

SPM

DS FD

STD

Ni contamination in Ni contamination in the the Seine basinSeine basin


39

Zinc

10

100

1000

10000

1976 1981 1987 1992 1998 2003

µg.g-1 ASSEM

BGR

SPM

DSFD

STD

Zn contamination in Zn contamination in the the Seine basinSeine basin


40

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Re s t of Ba s in

Othe r pa rt of Ile -de -Fra nce

Pa ris a nd s uburbs

Decrease of the number of lead related industries in Decrease of the number of lead related industries in the Seine basin for Paris and suburbs, other part of the Seine basin for Paris and suburbs, other part of IleIle

de France, and whole basin de France, and whole basin


41

CdCd consumption in France (1975consumption in France (1975--2000) (t per year)2000) (t per year)

Cd

0

500

1000

1500

2000

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

nonferrous alloys and otherBatteriesStabilizersCoating and platingPigments


42

Pb consumption in France (1950Pb consumption in France (1950--2000) (t per year)2000) (t per year)

Pb

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Leaded gasolineAccumulatorsCablesMetalChemicals including oxides


43

All metals

• A= total maximum number of variables that should be considered if all regulations were implemented• B= number of variables actually routinely monitored in the first grade surveys• C= monitoring capacities of Least Developed regions.

Meybeck, 2004

Sediment archives

Biotic indices Pigments

DOC POCNutrients

COD BOD

Endocrinedisruptors

Microbial counts

BIOLOGICAL VARIABLES

O2NH4

+,Cl-

NO3- Major

ionsPOPs*Selected

metalsCHEMICAL VARIABLES

T° Radionuclides*PHYSICAL VARIABLES

pHcond.

TSS

Pesticides*

(*: non natural products)

1900 1950 2000

Total number

1

10

100

A

C

1000

B

1850

Exponential growth of water quality descriptorsExponential growth of water quality descriptorsand occurrence of their first analysis in regular surveysand occurrence of their first analysis in regular surveys


44

HOW TO ASSESS “NITRATE POLLUTION” ISSUE IN THE SEINE HOW TO ASSESS “NITRATE POLLUTION” ISSUE IN THE SEINE BASIN?BASIN?

50

UF

VC

C

30

20

40

10

0

UC

UC

UF

C

VF

F

F

mg NO3-/L

A B C 1975...

D 1998...

E

?

99%

99%

90%

1%

10%25%

75%

90%75%

25%

10%

1%

x16

x8

x4x2x1.5

R

B

R

O

Y

G

B

BL

R

OYGB

• A: Frequency distribution (1971-2002) of nitrate at river outlet

•B: Spatial distribution of 1971/02 medians (n≈200 stations)

•C: WHO drinking water standard

•D: new grid for river ecosystem management

•E: Grid based on natural background

Meybeck, 2004


45

EVOLUTION OF FOUR WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN THE EVOLUTION OF FOUR WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN THE LOWER SEINE (1850LOWER SEINE (1850--2000)2000)


I. Limited perception + optimistic criteria

A. Nitrate drinking water criteria; B. Organic pollution/oxygenation; C. Metals in Paris sewage sludge 1985 criteria; D. Atrazine

BASIN AUTHORITY (1964)

46

EVOLUTION OF FOUR WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN THE EVOLUTION OF FOUR WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN THE LOWER SEINE (1850LOWER SEINE (1850--2000)2000)


II. 2005’s knowledge + most constraining criteria

A. Nitrate: eutrophication criteria; B. Organic pollution/oxygenation; C. Metals in Paris sewage sludge (2005 criteria; sedimentary archives); D. Atrazine (estimated)

BASIN AUTHORITY (1964) SCIENTIFIC PROGR. (1989)

47


SEINE BASIN RELIEFSEINE BASIN RELIEF

• 90 % of the basin is flat, climate and lithology are uniform

Ducharne, 2005

48

POPULATION DENSITY TREND IN THE SEINE BASIN POPULATION DENSITY TREND IN THE SEINE BASIN (1970(1970--2000) 2000)


PIREN-Seine, 2004

49

502010

5

2

1

10 20 50 100 150 250 250BGR AGRPOP.

DENSITYp km-2

PARIS MEGACITY

Hg, Ag

NH4+

Pb, ZnNa

+

DOC, SO4--

Mg, Ca, HCO, Co

++ ++

-3

POINT SOURCES IMPACT

STREAMORDER

DIFFUSE SOURCES IMPACT 5020

105210.5

BGR AGR 3 4 5 6 7 8

ALGAL POC Cd

NO3-

ClK, PP

+

TSSMIN

SiO2

C/CN

C/CN

ORDER

XENOBIOTICS

STREAMORDER

MAX. ATRAZINE

PCBs

BGR AGR 3 4 5 6 7 8

0.1

1.0

10.0

C/COUT

SCHEMATIC RANKING OF MEDIAN WATER QUALITY INDICATORS IN SCHEMATIC RANKING OF MEDIAN WATER QUALITY INDICATORS IN THE SEINE RIVER BY STREAM ORDERS FROM HEADWATERS TO THE SEINE RIVER BY STREAM ORDERS FROM HEADWATERS TO

RIVER MOUTH (500 KM) RIVER MOUTH (500 KM)


50

WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN THE SEINE BASIN (2000): WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN THE SEINE BASIN (2000): SCHEMATIC LONGITUDINAL PROFILE FROM HEADWATERS TO SCHEMATIC LONGITUDINAL PROFILE FROM HEADWATERS TO

ESTUARIESESTUARIES

• The water quality assessment of a given basin is very dependant on the station location

Meybeck, 2004

RIVERMOUTH

BAYMEGASEWER

PARISMID-ORDERBASINS

RURALHEADWATER

BASINS

PRISTINEHEADWATERBASINS

VERY LIMITED

LIMITED

MEDIUM

HIGH

VERY HIGH

PARIS IMPACTSHADOW

IMPACTSCALE

ESTUARY

OXYGEN DEFICIT

EUTROPHICATION

METAL CONTAMINATION

ACIDIFICATION

NITRATE CONTAMINATION

SALINISATIONNEGLIGIBLE


51

IMPACT PROFILES OF PARIS MEGACITY ON THE IMPACT PROFILES OF PARIS MEGACITY ON THE SEINE R.SEINE R.

1. Organic pollution2. Sewer overflow3. Estuarine nitrification4. Metals

5. Habitat degradation6. Atmospheric pollutants7. Timber rafting (1500-1920)

1 A2

76

5

4

31 B

IMPACT SEVERITY

SEVERE

MODERATE

NEGLIGIBLE

EXTERNAL DISTAL PROXIMAL LOCAL EXTERNALPROXIMAL DISTAL

400 km 200 km 50 km 0 300 km50 km 200 km

UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

ENGLISH CHANNELSEINE ESTUARYPARIS MEGACITY


52

MIDDLE AGE NITROGEN CYCLE IN SEINE BASINMIDDLE AGE NITROGEN CYCLE IN SEINE BASIN

• The natural cycle of Nitrogen is generally very closed with limitedexport by rivers• Impact of human activities has been reconstructed on the bassis ofmonastic arcjives from Burgundy Abbeys (XIIth)

G. BILLEN

.

OH 23


53


NITROGEN BUDGET, 1000 t N/YEARNITROGEN BUDGET, 1000 t N/YEAR

NK

Nitrate

527 1

nitrifi-cation

Agric. soils

Aquifers

Forest soils

Animal husb

Fertilizers inputs

AtmN2 fix.

export import

20

35Increased N

stock in aquifer

Wetland denitrification

5175

140

65

7585

570

560

60

42030

170

2

River bed denitr.

. 8

UPST DOM

. IND..

Megacity sewage

3

EST.

Estuarine denit.

. 7

NATURAL SOURCES

AGRICULTURAL SOURCES

URBAN AND INDUSTRIAL SOURCES

BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLING

Inpu

ts to

Eng

lish

chan

nel

12

5

PIREN-Seine, 2004

54


PHOSPHOROUS BUDGET, 1000 tPHOSPHOROUS BUDGET, 1000 t N/YEAR N/YEAR

PIREN-Seine, 2004

Total urban sources: 7.1

8.5

export

0.1 2.5

95

112

90 5

27

0.27.5

érosion

0.3

reten -tion

Accumulation

import

4.5 0.1 11.5

reten -tion

1

NATURAL SOURCES

AGRICULTURAL SOURCES URBAN AND INDUSTRIAL SOURCES


Agric. soils

Fertilizers inputs

Animal husb

Forest soils

UPST

DOMIND.

Megacity sewage

EST.

Inpu

ts to

Eng

lish

chan

nel

55


ZINC BUDGET, ZINC BUDGET, 1000 t N/YEAR1000 t N/YEAR

PIREN-Seine, 2004

4

NormandieAmt. basin

Poses

13 28

12 63 139

2 5?

Ile de France

64

278

40

23

dredging

natu

rel

rura

l

Urb

ain

&in

dust

riel

natu

rel

rura

l

Urb

ain

&in

dust

riel

dredging

Inpu

ts to

Eng

lish

chan

nel


56



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0 20 40 60

Rip

aria

n re

tent

ion

Eure

Marne

Seine amt

Oise

GdMorin

Pt MorinSurmelin

Drained surface (% SAU)

0

10

20

30

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Ile de France

Dra

ined

sur

face

(% S

AU

)

Seine basin

• The percent drained area has dramatically increased since WW II

• The riparian denitrifcation has decreased by a factor 2

PIREN-Seine, 2004

57


CLIMATE CHANGE SIMULATIONS (SEINE BASIN)CLIMATE CHANGE SIMULATIONS (SEINE BASIN)

Ducharne, 2005

58


TYPOLOGY OF AGRICULTURETYPOLOGY OF AGRICULTURE

Ducharne, 2005

• 12 main regions (20 soil types x 20 crop rotation x 20 farming practises)

• Used for scenarii analysis

59


INCREASE OF NITRATE CONCENTRATIONS (%) DUE TO INCREASE OF NITRATE CONCENTRATIONS (%) DUE TO CLIMATE CHANGE ONLY IN SEINE AQUIFERSCLIMATE CHANGE ONLY IN SEINE AQUIFERS

Ducharne, 2005

60



PIREN-Seine, 2004

61


• Average monthly water quality is highly variable and depends on HD x CC scenarii

• Water quality criteria are those establish for 2000

EXPLORING FUTURE BIOGEOCHEMISTRY AT MOUTH EXPLORING FUTURE BIOGEOCHEMISTRY AT MOUTH (Poses) WITH DIFFERENT SCENARIOS(Poses) WITH DIFFERENT SCENARIOS

Ducharne, 2005

62

Sc1

Sc2

0

50

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Phyt

o, µ

gChl

a/l

J F M A M J J A S O N D

0

50

100

0 500 1000 1500Total P input, tP/year

max

phy

to, µ

gChl

a/l

19912000

P reduction without any Chloro. decreasedThreshold

20001991

Sc2Sc1

Billen, Garnier, 2004

SCENARIOS OF PHOSPHOROUS INPUT REDUCTION SCENARIOS OF PHOSPHOROUS INPUT REDUCTION AND IMPACT ON CHLOROPHYL IN THE SEINE RIVER AND IMPACT ON CHLOROPHYL IN THE SEINE RIVER


• Scenario 2000: P reduction in city sewage (> 10 000)

• Scenario 1: P reduction in village sewage (> 2000)

• Scenario 2: 50% P reduction from diffuse sources

Sc1

Sc2

63


SUMMER OXYGEN AND AMMONIUM PROFILES IN THE SUMMER OXYGEN AND AMMONIUM PROFILES IN THE SEINE (1970SEINE (1970--2003) AND SCENARIO FOR 20072003) AND SCENARIO FOR 2007

0

5

10

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

oxyg

ène,

mgO

2/l 2007

1998-2003

1969-1971

0

4

8

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

amm

oniu

m, m

gN/l

distance, km Achères RouenParis

1969-1971

1998-2003

2007

• The explored scenario concerns nitrifcation/denitrification processes at Paris sewage treatment plant (8 Meq people)

Billen, Garnier, 2004

64

LES BAIGNEURS (ILE DE LA JATTE) BY SEURATLES BAIGNEURS (ILE DE LA JATTE) BY SEURAT

• Due to sewage collection of Paris city, one could bath downstream of Pariscenter in the late 1800’s

• Despite continuous efforts since 1970 the water quality of the Seine does notallow such recreational use in 2000

• It may neverhappen due to the occurence of the combined sewers overflowsystem in Paris center, aged 100y

HD 15


65

• Issue not identified (e.g. Redfield Ratio change; metal contamination)

• Lack of scientific tools (riverine eutrophication; coastal eutrophication)

• Controversial issue (e.g. P limitation)

• Intensive lobbying (metal; nitrates)

• Lack of early warning (atrazine; endocrine disruptors)


SOME RESPONSES FAILURESSOME RESPONSES FAILURES

66

• What is happening? Natural processes / social-societal processes

• Which water body?

• When has it happened? State trajectory reconstruction

• Why does it occur ? Pressures

• How did it happened ? Drivers

• Who is responsible ? Pressures/drivers analysis

• Who is suffering ? Impact analysis

• Who is controlling ? Regulation/envir. survey analysis

• Where are the drivers?

• Where are the pressures ?

• Where are the change of state?

•Where are the impact ?

• Where are the responses ?

ISSUE IDENTIFICATIONISSUE IDENTIFICATIONAVEC CONFERENCE 2005AVEC CONFERENCE 2005

67

SCHEMATIC POSITIONS OF CONTINENTAL AQUATIC SYSTEMS SCHEMATIC POSITIONS OF CONTINENTAL AQUATIC SYSTEMS SHARED BY SOCIOSHARED BY SOCIO--SYSTEMS AND EARTH SYSTEMSYSTEMS AND EARTH SYSTEM

• The Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response cycle in socio-systems is generally observed at short to medium periods (10-50 y)• The parallel Environmental impacts-Earth System response- Regional to Global Change is a long term reaction (100-1000 y) still poorly known

EARTH SYSTEM

COMPONENTS

GLOBAL CHANGE DRIVERS

HUMAN DRIVERS

RESOURCESERVICES

RIVERINE SYNDROMES

EARTH SYSTEM

RESPONSE

EARTH SYSTEMS CHANGES

SOCIO-SYSTEMS EARTH SYSTEM

SHORT TERM REACTION

LONG TERM REACTION

SOCIETAL RESPONSES

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS

CONTINENTAL AQUATIC SYSTEMS

CONTROL

FUNCTIONS

PRESSURE

USE


68

• Managers need tools as scenarios exploration based on models

• Models need a lot of process understanding, socio-economic data, field data for validation

• Each issue has it own DPSIR trajectory, its own spatial development

• Issue perception depends on society consensus scientific knowledge etc..


CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS

69

ATMOSPHERE

SOIL

VEG

GW

AGRIC. HUMANS

SLP

COAST

FILTERSWL

SED

LK

SED

FLP

SED

EST

SEDF1 F2 F3 F4 F5

F0

SED

Sédim. deposition

Biogeoch. cycling

FILTERS POSITIONS

Gaz escape; evap.

SOIL

ARHEIC

In addition to the soil/plant filter (F0), different types of filters control the pathways and transfers of river borne material: slopes and piedmonts (F1), headwaters wetlands (F2), lakes (F3), inundated floodplain (F4) and estuaries (F5). Human impacts are very limited.

RHEIC

Fev

F0

F1 F2

F4

F5COAST

ARHEIC

F3

Fev

SCHEMATIC POSITION OF RIVER MATERIAL FILTERS WITHIN PRISTINE SCHEMATIC POSITION OF RIVER MATERIAL FILTERS WITHIN PRISTINE RIVER SYSTEMS.RIVER SYSTEMS.


70

Regulated water flux

Contaminatedwater

GROUNDWATER

F1

LK FLPL

F4

EST

F5

WL

F3

CROPSOIL

INDURB

AGRI

MININGENERGY

TRANSPNET

STORAGE

Fo

ATMOSPHERELRAP

J

COAST

B C D E

SLP

F1 F2

A

IH

VEGETATION

G

F6 F7 Artificial filters

Artificial river network

Fluxes of contaminants

Socio economic systems

Sub pristine environment

Impacted/regulated environment

Natural filtersF0 / F5Pristine water

Material, informationand financial fluxes within anthroposhere

Agrochemicals

Transition environment

STP WD

F6

RESERV

Crop

Sediment

F5 Coast

F3F2

F0

F4

F1

F6F7

D

H

EH

C

F1

LRAP

FILTERS POSITIONSJ

IRRIGATED FIELDF7

CROPA

Fev

Evaporation

FLUVIAL SYSTEM FUNCTIONING IN THE ANTHROPOCENE FLUVIAL SYSTEM FUNCTIONING IN THE ANTHROPOCENE POLLUTED/REGULATED FLUVIAL SYSTEMPOLLUTED/REGULATED FLUVIAL SYSTEM


71

SUCCESSFUL RESTOARTION CYCLE OF WATER QUALITY: CUMULATED SUCCESSFUL RESTOARTION CYCLE OF WATER QUALITY: CUMULATED ECOSYSTEM AND SOCIOSYSTEMS INERTIAECOSYSTEM AND SOCIOSYSTEMS INERTIA

Impact detection, scientific consensus, societal inertia and polluters lobbying are reponsible for delayed or partial responses. As a result critical environmental conditions are reached with severe ecological, economic or health impacts. Pressure-Response-Remediation cycles take decades. Meybeck et al., EUROCAT WP5, 2004

T0


72

Chaque critère peut être analysé selon une échelle d’impacts, ce qui permet la comparaison.

Les profils moyens d’impact combinent les ordres hydrologiques et l’ impact de Paris: ils sont tous différents.

Les impacts de Paris s’exercent sur l’amont du bassin et très en aval (Baie de Seine), après le filtre estuarien.

Meybeck et al., 2004. Cahiers IAURIF

BAIESSA

Mégalopole ParisienneOrdres 6 et 7

Ordre 4 à 6 Amont paris

Petits Bassins AgricolesOrdres 1 à3

Petits Bassins ForestiersOrdres 1 à 3

POSES

ECHELLE D’IMPACT

ESTUAIRE

BV

D

5

2

4

1

1A

3

4A

TRES FAIBLE

FAIBLE

MOYEN

FORT

TRES FORT

NEGLIGEABLE

Ordre 8


RELATIVE QUALITY OF AQUATIC SYSTEM (SEINE RIVER)RELATIVE QUALITY OF AQUATIC SYSTEM (SEINE RIVER)

73

SCHEMATIC METAL CONTAMINATION IN RIVERSSCHEMATIC METAL CONTAMINATION IN RIVERS


• E: Rhine (As, Hg, Cd, Pb…)• F: Alpine Rhone (CH) (Hg)• G: Sepik (PNG) (Cu…)

• A: R. Tinto (SP) (Hg, As, Zn…)• B: Wales (UK) (Sn…)• C: Brittany (F) (Pb, Ag…)• D: Idrija (ISLO) (Hg…)

vulnerability of water quality examplified on the … · 2005-10-28 · vulnerability of water...

Documents