E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
2015 E-PRTR country report – Portugal
Created: 31-08-2015 by ETC/ACM
Content
1)
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1
2)
Country profile ............................................................................................................................ 2
3)
Top polluters ............................................................................................................................... 5
4)
Comparison with other countries ............................................................................................... 6
5)
Comparison with other national reporting obligations............................................................... 8
Ratio of E-PRTR releases compared to the total ETS verified emissions on country level.............. 8
Comparison of E-PRTR releases with CLRTAP national totals ......................................................... 8
6)
Findings 2015 to be addressed by the country ........................................................................... 9
7)
Summary of provided comments by Portugal 2013-2014 .......................................................... 9
1) Introduction
The E-PRTR Word country reports are produced as part of the annual EEA informal E-PRTR review
with the support of the ETC/ACM (Partner UBA-V)1. The purpose of the informal review is to provide
countries with feedback on their E-PRTR data in order to assist them to improve the data.
This report is based on the E-PRTR database of 27th May 20152. Summary information including
potential outliers is provided in sections 2 to 4 (see Figures 1 – 9). Comparisons of E-PRTR releases to
air with EU ETS and CLRTAP/UNFCCC data are included in section 5 (see Figure 10 and Figure 11).
You are invited to check all findings for your country and to provide feedback/comments to EEA
within section 6 (Table 1). All written feedback on informal review results provided by the country to
EEA from 2013 to 2014 is listed in section 7.
Additional data analyses for each country can be found in the Excel country file available for each
country as part of this review of E-PRTR data.
1
http://acm.eionet.europa.eu/
2
The database “eprtr_v7” can be downloaded at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/member-statesreporting-art-7-under-the-european-pollutant-release-and-transfer-register-e-prtr-regulation-10
In individual cases the results might slightly differ from the information provided in “Summary report on 2013 E-PRTR data”
while this report is based on the April data “Full_Database_2015_04_17.mdb” but some countries resubmitted E-PRTR data
between end of April and end of May.
1
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
2) Country profile
In the figures below the following changes in E-PRTR data reported by Portugal for the years 2013
compared to 2012 are illustrated:








Number of facilities
Number of facilities per reporting medium (release to air, release to water, release to land,
transfer in water, transfer of waste)
Waste quantity
Number of releases by media
Elected indicators (inhabitants, GDP, area)
Number of pollutants
Changes in quantity and number of releases to air, water and land
Changes in quantity and number of waste transfers
The findings are provided below the particular figures. You are invited to provide feedback for your
country in section 6.
Number of facilities reporting
for both years
for 2012 only
Air
Release in Transfer in
water
water
388
0
0
53
264
51
2013
59
514
2012
65
514
288
50
55
372
Number of facilities reporting by media
Land
Waste
for 2013 only
2012
2013
No reported releases to land might indicate incomplete reporting under E-PRTR and should be
checked by Portugal.
2
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
Air
Non hazardous
2012
2013
Waste
25
27
29
32
1.6%
No. of
facilities
Inhabitants
2012
GDP
2013
Area
Air
Release in
water
2012
Transfer in
water
0
0
1.1%
1.1%
30
Number of pollutants
1.6%
1.7%
1.8%
1.8%
Land
2013
Share in total E-PRTR
1.8%
Release in Transfer in
water
water
32
2012
0
0
178
160
385
418
521
578
954
3.0
3.0
0.2
0.3
Hazardous
997
Number of releases by media
Waste quantity (Mt)
Land
2013
Figure 1 Overall statistics - comparison of 2013 E-PRTR data with 2012 E-PRTR data
3
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
Change in quantity and number of releases to air under E-PRTR for 2013
(2012=100%)
100%
50%
0%
-50%
Pb
Hg
Cd
HCL
PCDD/PCDF
Quantity of releases
NH3
PM10
NMVOC
SO2
NOx
CH4
CO2
-100%
Number of releases
Note: The most frequently reported air pollutants have been selected for the above graph. They are also
reported under different directives and protocols (Kyoto Protocol, NECD, CLRTAP – including Gothenburg
Protocol, Heavy Metal Protocol and POPs Protocol). The pollutants are grouped from left to right in the
following way: greenhouse gases, air pollutants, heavy metals and POPs.
Figure 2 Comparison of quantities and number of releases to air of E-PRTR 2013 with E-PRTR 2012
The quantity of released PCDD/PCDF to air decreased by 87% from 2012 to 2013. This could indicate
an outlier and should be checked by Portugal.
Change in quantity and number of releases to water under E-PRTR for 2013
(2012=100%)
Quantity of releases
Pb
Hg
Cd
Total OC
Total P
Total N
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
-20%
-40%
-60%
-80%
-100%
Number of releases
Note: The typical wastewater parameters and main heavy metals have been selected for the above graph. The
pollutants are grouped from left to right in the following way: typical wastewater parameters and heavy
metals.
Figure 3 Comparison of quantities and number of releases to water of E-PRTR 2013 with E-PRTR 2012
The quantities of released Cadmium and compounds (as Cd) and Lead and compounds (as Pb) to
water decreased by 79% and 83%, respectively, from 2012 to 2013. This could indicate an outlier and
should be checked by Portugal.
4
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
Change in waste quantities and number of waste transfers under E-PRTR for 2013
(2012=100%)
10%
5%
0%
-5%
-10%
Quantity of transfers
Non-HW
for recovery
Non-HW
for disposal
HW outside country
for recovery
HW outside country
for disposal
HW inside country
for recovery
HW inside country
for disposal
-15%
Number of transfers
Figure 4 Comparison of quantities and number of waste transfers of E-PRTR 2013 with E-PRTR 2012
3) Top polluters
The below section provides an indication of potential outliers. You are invited to check the below lists
of top polluters for data accuracy (potential errors), completeness and consistency.
NEW: The ranking of top polluters in 2013 E-PRTR data is compared with the previous year’s ranking.
If there is a significant difference, the respective facility is highlighted and countries should check it
and provide comments in section 6.
 Facilities responsible for ≥ 90% of all countries E-PRTR release for a certain pollutant into air,
water and land and transfer in water for which > 3 E-PRTR release reports were reported
There were no findings related to Portugal.
 Facilities responsible for ≥ 90% of all countries E-PRTR release for a certain pollutant into air,
water and land and transfer in water for which ≤ 3 E-PRTR release reports were reported
There were no findings related to Portugal.
 Facilities among the top five (top ten for SOx and NOx) E-PRTR polluters of all countries for CO2,
CH4, N2O, SOx, NOx, NMVOC, NH3 and PM10 (released to air); Cd, Pb and Hg (released into air,
water or land or transferred in water)
There were no findings related to Portugal.
 Facilities among the top three polluting facilities for the whole E-PRTR in terms of off-site
transfers of waste per waste type and type of treatment
There were no findings related to Portugal.
5
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
4) Comparison with other countries
E-PRTR covers 32 countries (EU-273; plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and Serbia) and
data for the reporting years 2007 to 2013. For 2013, 32 countries submitted E-PRTR data. The total
number of E-PRTR facilities reported for the year 2013 amounted to 32,194. This represents an
increase of about 1.8 % in the total number of facilities for all countries compared to 2012.
The figures below illustrate Portugal’s E-PRTR reporting regarding the number of pollutants and
waste quantities compared to other countries.
You should check for any possible completeness or consistency issues for your country arising from
the following graphs.
Number of E-PRTR pollutants reported to air for 2013
50
40
30
20
10
0
UK FR BE ES DE IT NL PL GR NO CZ SE PT FI SK CH HU SI AT RO DK IE EE BG LT CY LV LU MT IS RS LI
Figure 5 Number of E-PRTR pollutants reported to air for 2013
Number of E-PRTR pollutants reported to water for 2013
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
IT FR ES UK DE BE CZ PT PL NL SE NO AT SK IE FI RO CH RS BG HU SI GR DK LV MT EE IS LT LU CY LI
Figure 6 Number of E-PRTR pollutants reported to water for 2013
3
From reporting year 2014, Croatia will also be covered by the reporting obligation and the coverage will therefore be
extended to 33 countries.
6
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
Number of E-PRTR pollutants reported to land for 2013
10
8
6
4
2
0
FR DE SK BG AT GR PL BE CH CY CZ DK EE ES FI HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PT RO RS SE SI UK
Figure 7 Number of E-PRTR pollutants reported to land for 2013
No reported releases to land might indicate incomplete reporting under E-PRTR and should be
checked by Portugal.
Quantities of transfers of hazardous waste (Mt) reported for 2013
25
20
15
10
5
0
NL DE IT UK FR ES BE EE FI NO PL SE CH AT DK CZ PT RO HU IE SK BG RS GR LU SI LT IS LV LI MT CY
Figure 8 Quantities of transfers of hazardous waste (Mt) reported for 2013
Quantities of transfers of non-hazardous waste (Mt) reported for 2013
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
UK DE PL ES IT FR NL BE BG FI RO SE IE DK CZ PT AT GR HU SK CH NO SI LU EE RS LV LT IS CY MT LI
Figure 9 Quantities of transfers of non-hazardous waste (Mt) reported for 2013
7
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
5) Comparison with other national reporting obligations
Ratio of E-PRTR releases compared to the total ETS verified emissions on country level
Share of CO2 releases in total ETS verified emissions for 2013
250%
200%
150%
100%
50%
0%
SE FI PT FR NL MT UK CY BE EE CZ DE GR IS HU IE NO BG SI RO PL IT LU SK ES LV DK AT LT
CO2
CO2 excl. Biomass
Figure 10 Ratio of E-PRTR releases compared to the total ETS verified emissions on country level
The ratio between the reported CO2 emissions under E-PRTR to the emissions reported under the EU
ETS in Portugal in the year 2013 is 119%. Portugal did not report on CO2 emissions excluding biomass.
Therefore, it is not possible to assess the consistency of the CO2 reporting under E-PRTR with the EU
ETS reporting without receiving additional explanatory information from the country.
Comparison of E-PRTR releases with CLRTAP national totals
Share of E-PRTR in national totals reported under CLRTAP for 2013
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
MAP
HM
PCBs
HCB
PAH
PCDD+PCDF
Zn
Ni
Hg
Pb
Cu
Cr
Cd
As
NMVOC
PM10
SOX
NOX
CO
NH3
POPs
100%
Note: E-PRTR releases of heavy metals (HM), Persistent organic pollutants (POPs), and main air pollutants
(MAP) were compared with CLRTAP data. In 2015, there has been no official submission of greenhouse gas data
to the UNFCCC Secretariat so far. Therefore, the comparison of E-PRTR releases with UNFCCC totals could not be
carried out.
Figure 11 Comparison of E-PRTR releases with CLRTAP national totals
Portugal did not report the following pollutants under E-PRTR: Chromium and compounds (as Cr),
Hexachlorobenzene (HCB), Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
8
E-PRTR informal review 2015 – country report Portugal
6) Findings 2015 to be addressed by the country
The following findings/potential problems for Portugal have been identified during the E-PRTR
informal review 2015. Please provide your feedback to the EEA (eprtr@eea.europa.eu) and the
ETC/ACM (etcacm-eprtr@umweltbundesamt.at) by adding your comments to Table 1 and send the
filled table as separate word file per email. This can be done easily by copying the table into a
separate word document labelled with your country´s abbreviation. Feel free to add rows to the
table as needed.
Table 1 Summary of findings and potential outliers identified during 2015 informal review
Issue
Finding
Completeness
(land)
Potential
outliers (air)
No reported releases to land.
Potential
outliers (water)
Comments by country
The quantity of released PCDD/PCDF
to air decreased by 87% from 2012 to
2013.
The quantities of released Cadmium
and compounds (as Cd) and Lead and
compounds (as Pb) to water
decreased by 79% and 83%,
respectively, from 2012 to 2013.
7) Summary of provided comments by Portugal 2013-2014
Portugal did not provide feedback on the E-PRTR informal review results 2013 to 2014.
9