UNITED
NATIONS
EP
UNEP(DTIE)/Hg/PAG.1/INF 4
Distr.: General
12 February 2009
English only
United Nations
Environment
Programme
Global Mercury Partnership
Partnership Advisory Group
First meeting
Geneva, 31 March – 2 April 2009
2007-2008 - Reporting of the mercury air transport and fate research
partnership area
UNEP Global Mercury Partnership
Note by the Secretariat
Individual partnership area evaluations have been prepared by the partnership areas in response to Annex I
Section 3.f.iv of the UNEP Global Mercury Partnership Overarching Framework. The mercury air transport
and fate research partnership area has a drafted partnership area evaluation. It is available in the annex to this
document for information.
1
Annex:
2007-2008 – Evaluation of the Mercury air transport and fate research
partnership area
1. General Information
1.1 Individual partnership
area:
1.2 Individual partnership area
lead:
Mercury Air Transport and Fate Research (MFTP)
Prof. Nicola Pirrone
Director
CNR-Institute for Atmospheric Pollution
Rome, Italy
n.pirrone@cs.iia.cnr.it
1.3 Reporting year/period:
2007-2008
1.4 How many meetings were
held over the reporting period?
Number of face to face meetings: 3
Number of teleconferences: > 5
Other: meeting of the partnership lead and USEPA
representative and experts in Washington DC in August
2008 on the MFTP report.
1.5 How many partners are
part of this partnership area?
6 Countries which include several research and other
governmental and private institutions. Currently 2 support
letters, found at: www.chem.unep.ch/mercury/Sector-SpecificInformation/Fate%20and%20Transport.htm
A formal process of joining the partnership was established
under the Overarching Framework. Partners are reminded to
submit partnership support letters to UNEP. Information on
joining the partnership can be found at:
www.chem.unep.ch/mercury/partnerships/new_partnership.htm
1.6 How much funding was
raised through this partnership
area? What about in-kind
assistance?
Not available – However, partners have contributed to several
initiatives during the last 2 years including meetings and
preparation of the MFTP Report submitted to UNEP.
The UNEP Mercury Trust Fund supported approximately
240,000 USD in the Inventory pilot project.
1.7 What is the objective of the individual partnership area?
To support the decision of the GC and specifically the activity of the over-arching partnership by:
 Accelerating the development of sound scientific information to address uncertainties and data gaps
in global mercury cycling and its patterns (e.g., air concentrations and deposition rates, sourcereceptor relationships, hemispheric-global air transport/transformation, emission sources).
 Enhancing sharing of such information among scientists and between them and policymakers.
 Providing technical assistance and training, where possible, to support the development of critical
information.
2. MONITORING PERFORMANCE
(tracking partnership activities and partner contributions)
2.1 Please provide a short overview of the key current partnership area efforts (brief description,
2
expected outcomes, budget, timeframe).
(a) Contribution on different aspects related to atmospheric emissions from natural and anthropogenic
sources, measurements in air and other environmental media, modeling atmospheric transport and
deposition patterns to aquatic and terrestrial receptors and re-emission to the atmosphere. For more
details please see Business Plan and related MFTP report submitted to UNEP earlier this year.
(b) Expected outcomes are technical reports, special sessions in conferences and workshops, and
development of joint projects. This activity has been quite successful during the last two years in
terms of sharing of information and capacity building. Please see Business Plan (BP) for details.
(c) All partners have received financial support from their government as well as form private
institutions to carry out their tasks and contribute to the MFTP goals and objectives. (see BP for
details).
(d) Details on financial commitments of partners to the MFTP activity are not available, however,
partners are willing to support the activity of the MFTP in the years to come. The outcome of the
next GC meeting in February 2009 will certainly allow countries to commit themselves in achieving
the tasks of the MFTP as well as of other partnership areas in the years to come.
(e) The time frame of planned activities along with Long Term Priority actions are reported in the BP.
(f) Development of Emission Inventories
UNEP is undertaking field testing of the 'Toolkit for Identification and Quantification of
Mercury Releases' in the Asian region. In doing so, UNEP is working with Yemen,
Pakistan, Cambodia, the Philippines and Syria in developing initial mercury inventories
and associated action plans.
Results from this project are available at
www.chem.unep.ch/mercury/Sector-Specific-Information/
Fate%20and%20Transport(1).htm .
The results help provide valuable insights to these countries and to the UNEP Global
Mercury Partnership in strategic activities in moving forward.
2.2 Please provide a short overview of any key upcoming, planned partnership area efforts (brief
description, expected outcomes, budget, timeframe).
Details are provided in the BP, in the following is reported a brief outline:
 Harmonization of greenhouse gas and development of mercury global emissions inventories, e.g., by
filling current gaps in geographic and source coverage which includes information on regions not yet
accounted for and on sources not yet accounted for in currently used databases, e.g. biomass burning,
artisanal gold mining, coal-bed fires and natural.
 Possible partnership activities to further the understanding of atmospheric mercury through a
measurement program at K2 Italian Research Station.
 The MFTP partners are involved in several special sessions of the 2009 International Conference as a
Global Pollutant to be held in Guiyang in China and will provide lectures in the next 14th International
Conference on Heavy Metals to be held on 16-20 November 2008 in Taipei, Taiwan.
 Relevant information will be gained through International Polar Year 2008 activities. The partners are
collaborating together to mutually benefit from the knowledge and information generated under this
activity.
 Further coordination and liaison with various organizations and programs (such as United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme, UNEP Regional
Seas);
 The MFTP is going to publish the MFTP Report with Springer in order to make this report broadly
available to the scientific communities as well as to private and governmental institutions.
 Cooperation involving US release of various monitoring data from its high altitude monitoring station
in Mauna Loa, Hawaii.
 Close coordination with the Group on Earth Observations (GEO), the organization working to built
3

GEOSS (the Global Earth Observation System of Systems), to include mercury in GEOSS work
plans.
UNEP will be updating the Toolkit for identification and quantification of mercury releases,
November 2005 Pilot Draft. Timeframe for completion: May 2009.
2.3 Please provide a short overview of key partnership area efforts completed since the previous
Governing Council (brief description, outcomes, costs, timeframe).
a. Completion of a 500-page Air Transport and Fate Research Report that describes the state of the
science in global emissions, air monitoring and air modeling. This report was coordinated by the
Partnership lead and involved over 70 scientists from 12 countries, including all partnership
countries. It provides significant technical information as a background document for the UNEP
Emissions Report, which had been requested by the UNEP Governing Council in time for its 2/09
meeting.
b. Capacity building on mercury measurements provided to scientists from research institutions in
China. It is a joint project with SEPA in Beijing and other Chinese institutions at province level
aimed to assess spatial and temporal distributions of atmospheric mercury in the City of Suzhou,
China and possibly the source-receptor relationships. The project includes tasks on measurements
and modeling. Training activities will be carried out to interested parties.
c. Reinforced the cooperation with the Task Force on Hemispheric Transport on Air Pollutants (TF
HTAP) of the UNECE-LRTAP convention for win-win joint activity. This cooperation produced a
joint international workshop held in Rome in April 2008 to review the MFTP Report with financial
contribution provided by all partnership area members, European Commission, USEPA, EPRI and
Italian Ministry of Environment. Report is available at: http://www.cs.iia.cnr.it/UNEPMFTP/index.htm
d. Initiated cooperation with Group on Earth Observation (GEO) in order to assure a major
effectiveness of the MFTP in building initiatives for enhancing research on different aspects of
atmospheric mercury fate and transport issues. The GEO Sub-Task for Global Monitoring Plan for
Atmospheric Mercury aims to develop a global monitoring network for mercury by harmonizing
standard operating procedures for monitoring mercury and its compounds in air, atmospheric
deposition, water, soil, sediments, vegetation and biota. The sharing of data from this network,
allowing access to comparable and long-term data from a wide array of locations, will help
understand temporal and spatial patterns of mercury transport and deposition to, and evasion from,
terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
e. Contributing to the workshop on Assessing the Uncertainty in Mercury Measurements and the need
to develop Upper Air Tropospheric studies to better understand the fate of mercury in the global
atmosphere, held in Seattle in October 2008 by providing a key note lecture on mercury chemistry
in the MBL and highlighting current work in the UNEP-MFTP. A report summarizing the major
outcomes of the workshop has been submitted to NSF.
3. ASSESSING EFFECTIVENESS
(measuring the impact of partnership activities on target beneficiaries)
3.1 What are the partnership area indicators of progress? If no indicators, please specify why.
Indicators of progress are under development. The indicators will be discussed among partners during
the next partnership area meeting, the date and venue of the meeting will be established soon.
4
3.2 Please report on progress in terms of each of the partnership area indicators outlined within the
partnership area business plan.
As above.
3.3 Please summarize the key results achieved to date by the partnership area in terms of the
following areas (as applicable):
i) Sharing and exchanging information:
The MFTP partnership area has exchanged information with various organizations and country
representatives in various international conferences and meetings. Further activities are planned in
order to promote a further coordination and liaison with various organizations and programs (such as
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme,
UNEP Regional Seas).
ii) Strengthening capacity:
The MFTP partnership area has strengthen its capacity in interacting with a wide range of scientific
and non-scientific institutions in order to better achieve its goals and objectives. Activities are carried
out in the Mediterranean region, in China and in Polar regions as well.
iii) Other results you may wish to highlight:
The partnership has produced a major scientific report at low cost, leveraging the efforts of top
scientists from around the world in service to this effort. It is also organizing cooperative research
efforts.
3.4 What are the strengths of the partnership area?
This partnership has demonstrated the ability both in organizing top expertise globally (in developing a
global assessment and in cooperating research) and in communicating effectively with policymakers.
3.5 What are the weaknesses and/or major challenges for this the partnership area?
This partnership faces the challenge of involving emerging countries, such as China and India, in its
activities. It also faces the challenge of ensuring policymakers understand the need for all the various
types of scientific information. Within a joint project with SEPA in Beijing and other Chinese
institutions at province level, training activities will be carried out to interested parties.
3.6 Can the weaknesses or major challenges be addressed through the partnership? If yes, what is
the best strategy to address such weaknesses / major challenges in moving forward?
Yes. The Partnership will continue to work with UNEP and individual country representatives in
pushing forward in all relevant areas. This will build on the current work developed in the TF HTAP
and GEO Task (HE-0902d) and by developing joint research proposal to be submitted to EC and other
funding agencies.
3.7 In view of above, how should the partnership area be modifying its approach in the coming two
year cycle? Should the objective and indicators of the partnership area be revised in moving
5
forward?
On the basis of the experience and activities of the past 3 years, the Partnership area will focus on
developing indicators over the coming year. The partnership area could play a role in overall
monitoring performance of the partnership and will explore this possibility in moving forward.
3.8 Please specify whether the promotion of non-mercury technologies (where suitable economically
feasible alternatives do not exist) is relevant to the partnership area, and if it is, how the partnership
area is addressing this aspect.
The use of these technologies would result in fewer emissions with the consequence of less mercury to
be monitored and modeled, and, thus, potentially alter the long-term strategies to be developed with
regard to transport of emissions. The Partnership intends to keep informed as to major changes in
technology that can affect emissions and their long range transport, e.g., any new controls on power
plants in Asia that affect mercury.
3.9 Please outline how this report was drafted and who was consulted with in doing so?
This report was draft by the partnership lead, Prof. Nicola Pirrone, CNR-IIA, Italy, with input from Mr.
Stanley Durkee, USEPA and consultation with various partners.
4.0 This section is intended for other relevant comments.
6