COST Office
160th CSO Meeting 1st-2nd December 2004
Proposal for a new COST Action
COST 729
"ASSESSING AND MANAGING NITROGEN FLUXES IN
THE ATMOSPHERE-BIOSPHERE SYSTEM IN EUROPE"
Proposer: Mr. Jan Willem Erisman
ECN
P.O.Box 1
1755 ZG Petten
The Netherlands
Tel.: +31 224 564155
Fax.: +31 224 568489
Mail: erisman@ecn.nl
COST National Coordinator: Ms Winifred DE GROOT
Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
De Hoftoren - Rijnstraat 50
2515 XP Den Haag
NETHERLANDS
Tl:+31 70 4123572
Fax:+31 70 4122080
w.degroot@minocw.nl
TC Rapporteur: Not yet appointed.
DRAFT
Memorandum of Understanding
For the implementation of a European Concerted Research Action
designated as
COST 729
"ASSESSING
AND MANAGING NITROGEN FLUXES IN
THE ATMOSPHERE-BIOSPHERE SYSTEM IN EUROPE"
The signatories to this Memorandum of Understanding declaring their common intention to
participate in the concerted Action referred to above and described in the Technical Annex
to the Memorandum, have reached the following understanding:
1. The Action will be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the document
COST 400/01 "Rules and Procedures for Implementing COST Actions", the
contents of which the Signatories are fully aware of.
2. The main objective of the Action is to advance the understanding and
quantification of atmosphere-biosphere nitrogen fluxes in Europe in relation to the
main economic sectors, interactions with the natural environment and current
policies, in order to establish a sound scientific basis for strategies to reduce the
environmental impacts of nitrogen.
3. The overall cost of the activities carried out under the Action has been estimated on
the basis of information available during the planning of the Action as EUR
12,000,000 at 2004 prices, over the period 2005 to 2009 inclusive.
4. The Memorandum of Understanding will take effect on being signed by at least five
Signatories.
5. The Memorandum of Understanding will remain in force for a period of five years,
calculated from the date of the first meeting of the Management Committee, unless
the duration of the Action is modified according to the provisions of Chapter 6 of
the document referred to in Point 1 above.
Technical Annex
ACTION 729
"ASSESSING AND MANAGING NITROGEN FLUXES IN
THE ATMOSPHERE-BIOSPHERE SYSTEM IN EUROPE"
A. BACKGROUND
Once emitted into the atmosphere pollutants can travel long distances before they are
deposited in dry or wet form to the earth’s surface, depending on their residence time in the
atmosphere. The atmospheric lifetime of the pollutant depends on the type and
characteristics of the pollutant and chemical conversions in the atmosphere, since these
affect the pathway for deposition on the surface. While highly soluble gases are deposited
rather quickly and limit the atmospheric lifetime and the transport distance to a few hours or
100 km, respectively, slow reacting gases and small particles (<1 μm) can travel up to 1000
km or more. This means that ecosystems can be disrupted by pollution from sources located
several hundreds of km away. Furthermore, the complex interactions between pollutants in
the atmosphere cause non-linear relationships between emissions of different components
and pollution inputs to ecosystems.
In Europe, atmospheric deposition of reactive nitrogen species is one of the major threats to
ecosystems. Increased deposition has led to soil acidification, eutrophication, nutrient
imbalances, losses of biodiversity, altered forest growth and soil water pollution. Following
the atmospheric deposition of nitrogen compounds to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems,
reactive nitrogen accumulates and can lead to a cascade of effects. Quantifying the nitrogen
cascade is one of the most challenging environmental issues at the moment. However, this
quantification of the different fluxes and their interactions is essential to provide the basis
for assessment tools to combat nitrogen accumulation in the environment. Much knowledge
is available, but is currently widely dispersed between different disciplines and
environmental compartments, as well as between scientists, policy analysts and regulators.
These different aspects need to be brought together so that the current and future effects of
the linked nitrogen cascaded can be assessed effectively. This is the core of the Action.
A1. Nitrogen issues
In the form of atmospheric N2, nitrogen presents no environmental issues since it is
unreactive. Once nitrogen is in a reactive form (Nr1), however, either as reduced nitrogen
(gaseous NH3, or NH4 in rain or particles) or as oxidized nitrogen (gaseous NO, NO2, HNO3
or NO3 in rain or particles, it has a very different role. Such differences also apply for
atmospheric nitrogen in a wide range of organic forms, about which even less is known. It is
recognized that the multiplicity of atmospheric nitrogen species can lead to confusion, and
Box 1 therefore summarises the names of the most important components. In the different
reactive oxidized and reduced forms nitrogen is essential for life on earth. Proteins need
1
The term reactive nitrogen (Nr) as used in this proposal includes all biologically active, photochemically
reactive, and radiatively active N compounds in the atmosphere and biosphere of the Earth. Thus Nr includes
inorganic reduced forms of N (e.g., NH3, NH4+), inorganic oxidized forms (e.g., NOx, HNO3, N2O, NO3-), and
organic compounds (e.g., urea, amines, proteins).
Technical Annex COST 729
1
nitrogen and therefore a certain amount of reactive nitrogen in the biogeochemical cycles is
vital. Nitrogen is therefore essential to the survival of all forms of life. In practice, however,
the natural abundance of useable nitrogen is so low that massive human alteration of the
nitrogen cycle has been required to sustain the feeding of the world’s population. The
alteration has been made even greater by the release of nitrogen oxides to the atmosphere
during fossil fuel combustion.
These changes in the nitrogen cycle have exacerbated a number of environmental issues,
most of them through and/or linked to atmospheric pathways, including photochemical
smog, acid deposition, terrestrial, aquatic and coastal eutrophication, climate change and
stratospheric ozone depletion, all of which have impacts on people and ecosystems on a
regional or global basis. The global nitrogen cycle is being perturbed in many ways. Fossil
fuel combustion, wastewater, mineral fertilisers and livestock manure's all provide major
sources of fixed reactive nitrogen. This leads to a cascade of effects as Nr is transported and
transformed through the environment. The other abundant atmospheric oxide of nitrogen is
nitrous oxide, N2O, which, although important as a greenhouse gas, does not participate
actively in atmospheric chemical processes in the lower atmosphere. Because of this, it is
often considered separately from the list of reactive oxidised nitrogen species noted above.
Emissions of reactive oxidised and reduced nitrogen to the atmosphere result in impacts on
human health through particle and ozone (nitrogen oxides) formation, visibility, crop loss,
regional acidification and eutrophication, as well as global warming, while releases on land
result in eutrophication of both fresh and coastal waters.
Box 1: Major forms of nitrogen in the atmosphere
NH4+
NH3
NHx
N2
N2O
NO
NO2
HNO2
HNO3
NOx
NO3NOy
DON
VON
PON
Nr
ammonium in aerosol and precipitation
gaseous ammonia
reduced nitrogen, the sum of NH3 and NH4+
dinitrogen
nitrous oxide
nitric oxide
nitrogen dioxide
nitrous acid
nitric acid
nitrogen oxides, the sum of NO and NO2
nitrate in aerosol and precipitation
the sum of (reactive) oxidized nitrogen, excluding N2O
dissolved organic nitrogen
volatile organic nitrogen
particulate organic nitrogen
Reactive nitrogen forms (inc or excluding N2O?)
Atmospheric dispersion and transport are particularly important because they transform
local environmental problems into regional and global ones. The environmental impacts
associated with the present food, natural resources and energy requirements have caused
conflicts between different objectives in society. Cost-effective solutions for these conflicts
and policy development must be based on high quality data and information,
multidisciplinary scientific research and holistic assessments. Nitrogen is an important
cross-cutting theme that links most of the important environmental problems in Europe:
Technical Annex COST 729
2
climate change, biodiversity, ecosystem health, human health, ground water pollution, etc.
While addressing nitrogen issues separately within these themes will bring partial
remediation, a necessary step towards integration of these issues within the concept of Earth
System Science should be made now. Realistically, a completely integrated assessment in
Europe of all of the issues linking nitrogen must be considered as a long-term ambition. To
reach this goal, however, requires a series of stepwise synthesis activities that address the
primary interactions between major issues. The atmosphere-biosphere system provides an
important starting point for achieving a realistic degree of integration that is achievable over
the next 5 years. Significant progress has already been made in linking different ecosystem
and human health effects of nitrogen oxides and ammonia emissions, such as under the
Gothenburg Protocol and the EU National Emissions Ceilings directive. There are now
clear challenges to link these issues to other atmospheric nitrogen forms, for example
nitrous oxide and organic nitrogen species, as well as to investigate the interactions that
occur between N forms and with other atmospheric fluxes (e.g. CH4, CO2, O3), while
considering the interactions between different spatial scales (field, landscape, regional,
national, Europe).
Sources of reactive N
The range of important nitrogen forms released to the environment from anthropogenic
activity is broad but clearly defined. Man is influencing the natural N cycle through
essentially four sources:
- NOx emissions to the atmosphere from combustion processes, including stationary and
mobile sources;
- Ammonia emissions to the atmosphere from agriculture;
- Nitrate and other reactive nitrogen emissions to soils and waters from agriculture;
- Nitrate and other reactive nitrogen emissions in wastewater.
The last two are not important for atmospheric transport and are therefore not the focus of
the present Action. However, bearing in mind the long-term ambition noted above,
emerging studies that include both atmosphere-biosphere interactions and losses to water
will be of significant interest as they become available. Furthermore, atmospheric transport
influencing the marine biosphere is an important issue in this Action.
Atmospheric emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO and NO2) arise from combustion processes,
where fuel N and atmospheric N from the combustion air are oxidised into NO, which
subsequently reacts with ozone to form NO2. Major source categories are therefore
transport, industry and energy production. Other sources of NOx include soils, in which
microbial processes in soil release NO during nitrification and denitrification, particularly
where N inputs are high. This can be either by fertilisation of fields with manure or
chemical fertilisers, or from the atmospheric deposition of atmospheric Nr onto natural
ecosystems. Ammonia, NH3, is emitted to the atmosphere from oceans, from the excreta of
wild animals and senescing or decomposing plants and is therefore a natural process.
However, most of the NH3 emission on a European scale is of anthropogenic origin. The
largest source of NH3 is emission from animal manure in housing systems, during manure
storage, after application of manure in the field or by animals in pastures. Other sources
include fertiliser use, vehicles equipped with a three-way catalysts to reduce NOx, fertiliser
production, coal combustion, landfills, households, pets and humans.
Nitrous oxide, N2O, emissions are primarily derived from soils, especially as a result of
mineral fertiliser, manure and atmospheric nitrogen inputs. Other major biogenic sources are
rivers and coastal zones, as a result of high nitrogen loadings either through the water input
Technical Annex COST 729
3
or though atmospheric inputs. There is a wide range of other anthropogenic sources, and
these include emissions from industrial activities, such as nitric acid production, and
vehicles fitted with three-way catalysts
Annual emissions of NOx and NH3 are reported by parties to the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air
Pollution, CLRTAP, and are summarised by EMEP (the Co-operative programme for
monitoring and evaluation of the long range transmission of air pollutants in Europe). By
contrast, parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) report annual national inventories of N2O emissions from all anthropogenic
sources including soils are reported separately by parties to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). NOx emissions are highest in cities and
industrialised areas, while NH3 emissions are highest in intensive livestock areas. In and
close to these areas the environmental effects are most problematic, especially where
sensitive receptors are located directly in the source regions. By contrast, some of the most
ecologically sensitive areas are located far from source areas, and for these areas the extent
of deposition from long-range transboundary pollutant transport is critical. If the emissions
of NH3 and NOx were distributed equally over the whole of Europe, the critical limits for
different effects would not be exceeded anywhere. This, however, does not hold for N2O,
because it contributes to accumulated concentration in the atmosphere, which has a long
lifetime. Therefore, if the total emission exceeds the atmospheric destruction of N2O, it
contributes directly to climate change.
Atmospheric transport and multiple effects of atmospheric nitrogen
Oxidised and reduced nitrogen compounds are responsible for both acidification and
eutrophication of terrestrial ecosystems and are the main source of aerosols over
industrialised regions of the world. Once emitted, the pollutant gases are transported and
dispersed, leading to long-range transport over several hundreds of kilometres. Almost all of
the short-lived air pollution, with residence times of less than 10 days, which includes all the
sulphur and most of the nitrogen compounds are emitted at or near the surface of the earth.
Transport, transformation and removal are therefore mainly confined to a shallow layer (the
troposphere) of ca. 2-3 km above the surface of the earth. Thus the atmosphere would clean
itself quite rapidly, in a period of a few weeks, of the acidifying and eutrophying pollutants,
if the sources were controlled. The longer lived pollutants including the main greenhouse
gases (CO2, N2O, CH4 ) have much longer atmospheric lifetimes, and would take
substantially longer (decades to centuries) to be removed from the atmosphere.
There are strong indications that N emissions and N deposition may influence the global
climate system and any management strategies to limit nitrogen emissions and impacts
should also consider the potential links with climate change. Examples include the
enhancement of forest growth and carbon immobilisation in forest soils related to nitrogen
deposition. There is increasing evidence that there is a strong link between immobilisation
of C and N in forest soils. This is just one of many interactions between the sources and
sinks of nitrogen gases and greenhouse gases that need further exploration and
quantification. In view of the complexity of processes underlying the N-trace gas exchange
between soils and the atmosphere, it is not surprising that on a regional and global scale,
estimates of the source strength of N2O and CH4 from soils are highly uncertain. However,
quantifying such source strengths is unavoidable for the signatory states UNFCCC.
Atmospheric nitrogen deposition (and riverine transport) to marine areas causes
eutrophication in the coastal zones and hypoxia. The effects on marine life and chemical
Technical Annex COST 729
4
composition have a knock-on effect on the carbon uptake from the atmosphere.
Furthermore, an accelerated N cycle stimulates the eutrophication of coastal and marine
eco-systems. In marine ecosystems, atmospheric deposition and excess nitrogen run-off
from farm fertilisers, sewage and industrial pollutants do cause blooms of microscopic algae
known or phytoplankton, which sink to the seabed and decompose, using oxygen, thereby
suffocating other marine life.
Nitrogen oxides form ozone decrease forest growth and affect the degree to which forests
can act as a sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide. The overall increase in ozone over the
northern hemisphere has led to increased exposure of humans and vegetation inducing longterm effects. For ecosystems, there are therefore both direct effects on biodiversity of
atmospheric nitrogen deposition and indirect effects from NOx derived tropospheric ozone.
The resulting changes in species composition represent one of the hardest challenges for
maintaining Natura 2000 sites in “favourable condition” under the EU Habitats directive.
These few examples demonstrate the multiplicity of linkages between different forms of
atmospheric nitrogen and their interactions with the terrestrial [and marine] biosphere.
Key challenges of this Action
Even though there is a lot of knowledge on the causal chain and interactions with other
cycles, the tools to assess the whole picture taking all the interactions into account is still
lacking. Integrated Assessment Models are currently addressing only part of the problems
and interactions. Much more development of IAMs is necessary to be able to do a complete
assessment and full policy support. This Action, therefore, will conduct scientific and
technical investigations that will allow the computerised calculation by an (upgraded)
Integrated Assessment Model that is capable of assessing and managing nitrogen fluxes in
the atmosphere–biosphere system in Europe on the relevant scales, including both terrestrial
and marine contexts, under conditions of changing emissions, policy and
climate/meteorology. The Action should therefore,
 focus on the reviewing and synthesis that is needed to develop the modelling approach.
 focus on the evaluation of existing model components according to recent scientific
results.
 focus on comparing different model systems with regard to developing consensus to
better tools.
 focus on better understanding the scientific flux interactions to allow scenario
development, use of the tool and interpretation of resulting scenarios to further inform
the science – policy dialogue.
The major challenge of the calculation is the prediction of complex “source-receptor
relations” in the nitrogen cascade for scenarios where both emissions/policies and climate
are changing. Source-receptor relations are used by the Integrated Assessment Models for
calculating the contribution by each emission-source region to N-deposition at each selected
receptor regions (vulnerable ecosystems region). The use of source-receptor relationships in
IAM that can address the nitrogen cascade is a specific major challenge.
On the other hand, current approaches represent source-receptor relations as fixed, that is,
independent from both emissions levels and future climate change. The implication is that
deposition rates respond linearly on emission rates; for example, a halving of deposition
rates is achieved by halving all emissions. The actual source-receptor relations are however
non-linear due to the following factors:
Technical Annex COST 729
5
(a)
N may affect climate. Some N species are greenhouse gases. Ammonium and
nitrate containing aerosols block some solar radiation and reduce warming.
(b)
Climate change may in turn lead to long-term as well as seasonal changes in
regional patterns of wind, temperature and precipitation, producing modified
patterns of acid deposition; and it may influence atmospheric chemical
transformations and residence time (through altered radiative fluxes, photochemistry and aqueous-phase chemistry).
(c)
Different chemical forms of N in the atmosphere differ in their deposition rates
and atmospheric lifetimes. Chemical transformation rates (e.g., acid formation,
aerosol formation, gas/aerosol phase partitioning) and deposition rates often
depend on the air concentration of one or more other compounds.
(d)
Surface uptake affinities for the different forms of nitrogen may change when
climate and/or the deposition of other trace gases and aerosols change.
The effect on future policies resulting from this Action might be the identification that the
current degree of ecosystem protection may possibly be achieved at lower cost (that is, the
current emission targets set may not be optimal) if current Integrated Assessment Models,
are relaxed from the linearity-properties and include the quantification of the nitrogen
cascade.
A2. Policy development
Disturbances in the biogeochemical cycling of nitrogen have effects on a wide range of
scientific and socio-economical issues. Consequently, the environmental policy responses
to-date has been equally diverse. Atmospheric emissions of NOx and their impacts on
acidification, eutrophication and ground-level O3 are being addressed under the Gothenburg
Protocol of the UNECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
(CLRTAP), as well as under the EU National Emissions Ceilings (NEC) Directive. Much of
the computations have been performed for the CLRTAP with the EMEP-model at the
Norwegian Meteorological Institute. The agreements now also include the first tentative
steps to reduce European NH3 emissions to the atmosphere, mainly from agriculture, and are
also beginning to address the abatement of atmospheric aerosol concentrations. These issues
are, however, being treated separately from the impact of N on greenhouse gas fluxes, either
as N2O emissions to the atmosphere, or the interactions of N with CO2 and CH4 fluxes
between the atmosphere and the earth surface. The Kyoto Protocol of the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change provides the focus for abatement of these impacts, although
the emphasis is very strongly on carbon. The impact of N on eutrophication of marine areas
is from a European perspective handled under a series of regional marine conventions for
the Black Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, the North-East Atlantic (including the North Sea) and
for the Baltic Sea. In relation to water quality, the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD)
links to wider issues of land-use management. However, at present, the links to atmospheric
N fluxes and impacts are not fully made and would deserve further attention. Furthermore,
policies on food production and subsidiaries are not linked to the environmental issues and
are still separated from targets on energy production and use.
Acidification has already substantially decreased between 1980 and 2000 and will be further
reduced after full implementation of the Gothenburg protocol in 2010. On the contrary,
eutrophication will not diminish greatly. Nitrogen is difficult to abate, because although
Technical Annex COST 729
6
some technical measures can be implemented relatively cheaply, many are expensive. The
most difficult sources to abate emissions are parts of the traffic emissions, small combustion
sources and agricultural sources. Large industrial point sources are much easier to abate,
because technology is well developed, even though it is rather expensive. The expected
growth in food production and energy use is also of importance . The global population is
expected to grow continuously while the agricultural area used for food production cannot
increase indefinitely. Therefore, the use of fertilisers is expected to grow exponentially.
Furthermore, the standards of living are expected to increase in developing countries, also
leading to the demand for more intensive agriculture regions. Even though the focus is on
Europe, the global developments are relevant for Europe because it is involved in
international trades and food supplies. The intimate links between its various forms makes
abatement difficult: this applies equally to agriculture, where reducing NH3 emissions may
increase N2O and nitrate, as to transport emissions, where reducing NOx emissions is
leading to increased NH3 and N2O emissions.
The prospects for emission reduction are therefore limited in the absence of major changes
to agricultural production and transport systems. A further problem, which is of particular
relevance for reduced nitrogen, is that the emissions and deposition budgets even at a
country scale are highly uncertain. In one of the most intensively studied countries, the
Netherlands, there is still an ‘ammonia gap’ reflecting a difference between the estimated
emissions based on activities and emission factors, and emissions derived from
measurements.
Nitrogen components form a central role in this system with many interrelations, as shown
in Figure 1. The interrelations between sources, issues and effects where nitrogen plays a
role are given in grey in Figure 1. This figure shows that it is likely to be more effective to
couple and adjust abatement strategies resulting in a reduction of more than one effect.
Because nitrogen is a central element, a first step into integration is the development of a
nitrogen management strategy to prevent systems from negative (cascade) effects. The
cascade effects will continue until nitrogen either:
 is diluted into harmless concentrations.
 is immobilised in the ecosystems in a way that it only will be available in a very long
term.
 is denitrified to molecular di-nitrogen (N2).
The consequence of this is that an integrated approach for nitrogen is necessary. While some
progress to integration has been made, notably within the CLRTAP (Convention on LongRange Transboundary Air Pollution), the NEC Directive and currently in the Clean Air For
Europe (CAFE) program, the linked nature of the N cycle demonstrates the limitations of
such separation, both in the research and policy development. The cascade effect of nitrogen
has so far not been addressed either in research or in environmental policy.
Technical Annex COST 729
7
SOURCES
TRACE GASES
ISSUES
EFFECTS
(receptors or targets)
SO2
Acidification
Energy
NH3
Groundwater
Eutrophication
CO2
Lakes
Agriculture
and forestry
Industry
N2O
Carbon
balance
NOx
Climate
Terrestrial ecosystems
and soils
VOC
Regional O3
Marine
environment
Traffic
CO
(semi-)natural
ecosystems
CH4
CFC, HFC,
SF6….
Free tropospheric
O3
Agriculture crops
and forests
Toxicity
Humans and
animals
Toxic substances
HM, POP’s
Figure 1. The interrelations between sources, compounds, environmental issues and
receptors, with a focus on the atmospheric components. Ellipses shown in grey indicate
problems directly linked to the nitrogen cycle.
The result of the establishment of these disparate policy frameworks is that measures to
abate one form of nitrogen may lead to negative consequences for other forms of nitrogen.
For example, measures to reduce agricultural NO3-leaching have resulted in an increase of
NH3 emissions, and measures to reduce NH3 emissions have caused growing N2O
emissions. Excess N is on the other hand beneficial as it increases C sequestration, but
detrimental where eutrophication leads to loss of vulnerable habitats or increases the
emission of NO and N2O from soils to the atmosphere. In principle, there is some progress
towards developing integrated responses that analyse the trade-offs in fluxes and impacts.
The EU Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) provides a
framework in which all emissions from certain industrial plants and intensive livestock
farms should be addressed. However, taking such a wide scope is a major challenge, with
the result that, so far, the trade-offs for nitrogen have received little attention. There is also a
strong need to link Kyoto and Transboundary pollution policies, resulting into common
frameworks and approaches.
The need to develop responses that deal with the conflicts between different sectors,
different environmental systems and different forms of nitrogen is one of the major
challenges that European environmental policy makers are facing. In the absence of a
scientifically-sound consideration of these linkages, European abatement of N is often
implemented depending on the order in which individual agreements are signed, rather than
as a result of an informed analysis balancing the different concerns. Starting with the central
issue of the atmosphere-biosphere interactions, talking into account the different links to the
whole nitrogen cycle, would enable us to start the development towards an integrated more
Technical Annex COST 729
8
holistic approach. This Action should be limited to the atmosphere-biosphere interactions
because the knowledge level at this moment is far too limited to aim for a holistic approach.
The nitrogen problems could be approached using a framework for integrated environmental
assessment, such as DPSIR: a feedback mechanism based on a chain of causal links from
Driving forces, to Pressures, changes in the State of the environment, leading to Impacts on
ecosystems and society and finally prompting political Responses (NERI, 1995)). The
different economic sectors acting as the driving forces (e.g., agriculture, energy production,
transport) should be considered in conjunction. They can be considered as the major sources
of the various emissions to the atmosphere, and at the same time lead to losses to soil and
water. The pressures and impacts can be described using collected data and/or models. In
order to enable an overall assessment focused on the atmosphere-biosphere interactions, all
different pathways and forms of nitrogen need to be considered separately as well as jointly,
while not neglecting the major interactions with water quality issues. The atmosphere and
various parts of the biosphere are the receptors and the impacts are related to human health
and ecosystem health (habitats, biodiversity).
Europe has been the world’s leader in nitrogen research as shown by the number of projects
funded by the member states and at the EU level under the different frameworks (see section
A.3 below). From this research, for example, it has been possible to derive emission ceilings
for ammonia and nitrogen oxides within the Gothenburg Protocol and the NEC Directive.
This is based on studies of the causal chain of nitrogen. There is a growing interest in
nitrogen, especially in the US and Asia. Europe can hold its position as leader within this
area of research and further expand it through strengthening interdisciplinary research in the
area in order to develop an integrated approach to nitrogen management. This will enable
abatement measures for different environmental impacts to be targeted.
A3. Relevant COST ACTIONS and European projects
There are several activities in Europe that address different parts of the nitrogen issue.
Several EU funded research projects and COST actions are currently being executed An
example is: COST 856: Ecological aspects of denitrification with emphasis on agriculture.
The new COST Action 728 will provide improved modelling tools to assess the transport,
deposition and emissions of N-compounds to, within and from the atmosphere. The ESF
programs that are related to some extent include VOCBAS (Volatile Organic Compounds in
the Biosphere-Atmosphere System, and INTROP (Interdisciplinary Tropospheric Research).
Under Scope and IGBP the International Nitrogen Initiative (INI) is funded. For Europe a
Regional Centre will be established under INI. Cooperation will be sought with INI and the
Regional European Centre.
The current proposal fits in well with the other initiatives, contributing to the European
perspective within the global assessment, such as:
- the initiative for a new FP6 Integrated Project on nitrogen and its interactions with the
carbon cycle, primarily in relation to Kyoto issues (NitroEurope IP currently under
development).
- the ESF-proposal: Nitrogen in Europe, assessment of current problems and future
solutions.
Technical Annex COST 729
9
- UNEP annually presents their global environmental assessments. Currently GEO-3 is
starting to be prepared. Nitrogen is anticipated to be included as an important issue.
Under the Framework Programs of the EU (FP5 and FP6) several projects have and are
being executed that address parts of the nitrogen issue. These include: GREENGRASS,
MIDAIR, NOFROTETE, GRAMINAE, MIDAIR, MINNOX, MERLIN, NITROCAT,
RECOVER and MULTI-ASSESS. (Further details of these projects are described at the end
of Part II of this Action proposal)
Through the members of this Action there are also links to the various Working Groups and
Task Forces of the UNECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution and
the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, including the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change.
Since 1998, when the First International Nitrogen Conference was organised in the
Netherlands, researchers and decision-makers have cooperated in developing integrated
approaches to understanding nitrogen-related problems. The Second International Nitrogen
Conference, held in 2001 in Maryland, further strengthened the scientific findings and saw
the exploration of balanced strategies to ”increase food and energy production while
decreasing environmental impacts”. The International Nitrogen Initiative (INI), currently a
project of the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) and the
International Geosphere/Biosphere program (IGBP), was established to continue this work.
The objectives of INI are to assess the state of knowledge on N sources, fluxes, and
dynamics in ecosystems on a regional and global basis, and to identify areas where
problems have developed or have the potential to develop. The hope is that this will lead to
cost-effective, region-specific solutions. Within INI, 5 regional centres of the world were
established, amongst others the European Regional Centre.
A4. Scope of this COST ACTION
The proposed Action aims at combining the knowledge from various research areas
throughout Europe in order to provide a scientific base for an integrated approach to
nitrogen management with a focus on the atmosphere – biosphere interactions. Basically,
this requires knowledge on:
-
The formation of reactive nitrogen and the resulting emissions to the
atmosphere. Currently emissions are estimated through EMEP and EEA under the
CLRTAP and FCCC. However, there is particular uncertainty about the indirect
emissions of N2O. Furthermore, the research on ammonia emissions has shown that
there is a huge uncertainty in NH3 and NOx emissions from diffuse sources and its
spatial and temporal variations.. Also the spatial resolution of emissions estimates is
an important factor to be considered, as most effects occur close to sources or source
areas, and current estimates are frequently of limited resolution.
-
Transport , transformation and deposition. Current knowledge and modelling
about atmospheric transport and transformation is reasonably well covered for the
regional scale by EMEP. Although the new EMEP model is considered suitable for
policy support, further attention needs to be given to spatial resolution and nesting
approaches. Key new developments, especially in relation to nitrogen, should be the
modelling of feedbacks, e.g. through climate change, the interactions with both the
Technical Annex COST 729
10
local and global scales and the cascade effect of nitrogen. A major focus should be
on the modelling of chemical and biological interactions and feedbacks in the
atmosphere – biosphere system, including terrestrial and marine areas.
-
Integrated Assessment Modelling. The RAINS model of IIASA has been well
developed over the years and forms a key tool in supporting international
negotiations for acidification effects. Nitrogen and eutrophication has, however, not
been a main focus. Source – receptor matrixes are used that are not suitable to
address the complex nature of nitrogen. Furthermore, the local scale emissions and
effects close to sources and source areas cannot be taken into account. Finally, the
feedback mechanisms and the relation with climate change are not well addressed.
-
Policy analysis and support. Based on the synthesis of information in each of the
above areas, there are important opportunities to link the transboundary atmospheric
pollution and greenhouse gas strategies for nitrogen control. The synergies need to
be developed and presented in a clear way to the relevant international conventions
and national parties to allow more coherent responses to excess nitrogen to be
developed.
The Action will not develop new databases or modelling tools, where current tools fulfil the
needs within the required accuracy and scales. The Action will therefore focus on the new
items as described in the scientific descriptions.
The collaboration between research groups from different parts of Europe, as established
within the COST-framework, will ensure the development of a holistic approach.
Atmospheric processes and pathways are highly important in the nitrogen cycle. Since these
cannot be tackled directly through management practices, there is a need to identify
processes in various economic sectors that can be most effectively targeted in order to
reduce various nitrogen emissions. When considering the impacts, the interaction between
the atmosphere and the biosphere is important. The Action will focus on defining common
indicators for assessing the effectiveness of various policies, both in terms of nitrogen
efficiency and in terms of socio-economic and environmental sustainability.
We recognise that the disturbance of the nitrogen cycle on the different scales is much
broader than the atmosphere–biosphere interactions of terrestrial and marine systems.
However, the knowledge of the whole nitrogen cycle is far from complete and this provides
the appropriate starting point for developing the processes of fully integrated assessment.
We therefore chose to restrict this Action to the atmosphere – biosphere interaction. While
this provides the necessary focus, there will however be room within the Action to explore
the other interacting parts of the nitrogen cycle (e.g. with water quality) to start the process
of developing an integrated assessment of the whole nitrogen cycle.
The breadth and ambition of this COST Action will require collaboration between research
groups from different parts of Europe, and across different disciplines but where
atmospheric scientists will have a central place. The COST-framework thus is very suitable
for such an endeavour, due to its flexibility and ability to accommodate various groups and
expertise in an effective manner. This will ensure the development of a holistic approach.
Technical Annex COST 729
11
B. OBJECTIVES AND BENEFITS
B1. Objectives
The main objective of the Action is to advance the understanding and quantification of
atmosphere-biosphere nitrogen fluxes in Europe in relation to the main economic sectors,
interactions with the natural environment and current policies, in order to establish a sound
scientific basis for strategies to reduce the environmental impacts of nitrogen. This overall
objective will be achieved through the following secondary objectives:
1. To evaluate and provide the basis for improving existing databases and models in
relation to their - combined - coverage of the nitrogen fluxes in and between the main
economic sectors and the atmospheric and biospheric environment at multiple-spatial
scales in Europe (field, farm/landscape, regional/national and Europe);
2. To evaluate the effectiveness of current integrated assessment models and their
capabilities of addressing different interactions and feedbacks and to determine the
uncertainty.
3. To improve existing databases and model parameterisations using the current knowledge
and scientific developments from within different ongoing and emerging research
projects. This is especially related to the emissions at different scales, the atmosphere –
biosphere interactions, the chemical and climate feedbacks, the cascade of nitrogen and
the development of source-receptor matrixes.
4. To feed the results of review and evaluation back to the appropriate ongoing national
and European research projects to allow improvements to be made to the component
models and combined integrated assessment models.
5. To test the improved component models and integrated assessment models with
experimental applications for past and future scenarios and to investigate the
uncertainty.
6. To evaluate the socio-economic and policy benefits, and the degree of cost-effective
ecosystem protection, of the improved integrated assessment models relative to current
versions, with emphasis on key "focus areas" (selected locations in Europe related to
key areas of concern).
7. To conduct a comprehensive compilation of European and national policies affecting
nitrogen fluxes, including an evaluation of the efficiency of the policy measures in
reducing the negative impacts of nitrogen;
8. To develop a holistic approach for assessing the efficiency of policy measures in terms
of both environmental (in relation to atmosphere and biosphere) and socio-economic
impacts. This will result in a proposal for a monitoring of emissions and environmental
quality and policy effectiveness evaluation strategy.
9. To disseminate the expertise and the outcomes of the Action to a wide range of users,
scientists and the general public in Europe.
Technical Annex COST 729
12
To achieve these objectives, the Action will bring together specialists in the fields of:
-
nitrogen compounds formation
nitrogen transfer processes (emission to and deposition from the atmosphere)
environmental impacts on different media (atmospheric, terrestrial, aquatic and
marine ecosystems, health)
environmental policy analysis and interactions with source sector policies (e.g.
agriculture, energy, transport etc).
B2. Benefits
This COST Action will facilitate integrated assessment of the environmental impacts of
nitrogen and stimulate the discussion on options for nitrogen management among
researchers from various disciplines. The results of the Action will be beneficial to the
research community and also to policy makers.
Achieving the specified objectives will result in the following benefits for countries in
Europe and countries elsewhere, having to deal with similar problems:
-
An integrated home for relevant data (e.g., emissions factors and distribution fields,
deposition velocity and fields, source-receptor matrices of N-transport in the atmosphere
over Europe under various policy scenarios).
-
A set of improved (benchmarked) models to determine the range of outcomes and to
derive at a modelling approach that will be able to assess the nitrogen fluxes accurately
at the different spatial scales and to evaluate the past changes in emissions, based on the
current state of knowledge.
-
A generic approach for evaluating the efficiency of nitrogen in a specific area (country,
catchment, region…) leading to improved management of multiple nitrogen fluxes with
the atmosphere, while considering the links to other media.
-
A developing framework for targeting policies to reduce the negative environmental
impacts of nitrogen that focuses primarily on the atmosphere-biosphere interactions,
while making the connections for eventual full integrated assessment for the full range
of nitrogen effects.
Technical Annex COST 729
13
C. SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMME
C1. Approach
In this Action nitrogen management will be studied from the perspective of sustainable
development. This requires a cross-sectoral and integrated approach for structuring the
relevant information on cause-effect relationships and related indicators. The European
Environment Agency (EEA) uses the DPSIR framework (see Fig.2) which assumes a chain
of causality from Driving forces of Pressures to environmental State and Impacts on human
and ecological welfare, finally leading to political Responses. The driving forces are
primarily related to the main economic sectors: industry, energy, agriculture, transport and
households. A range of policies, mainly related to these sectors individually, influences the
losses of nitrogen to the atmosphere (emissions) and to soil and water (leaching). These
losses put the natural environment (atmosphere and biosphere) under pressure, resulting in
negative impacts on human health and ecosystem health (habitats, marine environment,
biodiversity).
Finding the optimal set of emission targets is the task of "Integrated Assessment Models",
which are computerised models that simulate the behaviour of both the environment and the
economy. These models, first used in the second Sulphur Protocol (signed 1994 in Oslo),
have been extended to include multiple pollutants (S, N and volatile organic compounds)
and multiple effects of these pollutants (acidification, eutrophication, and elevated groundlevel ozone) and were used in the 1999 "Multi-Effects Multi-Pollutants" CLRTAP Protocol.
It was recognised that, because these pollutants share effects and causes, and influence eachother in the atmosphere, their joint rather than separate assessment allows for least costly
sets of emission targets.
Similarly, it is recognised, at present, that the regional climate and the N cycles are
inseparable from both the physical and economic viewpoints. They influence each other, are
affected by some of the same activities (such as energy production and transportation), and
impact some of the same economic sectors (such as transport, forestry and agriculture).
Additionally, ecosystem vulnerability to acidifying and eutrophying N deposition depends
on climate.
An important step towards the integrated assessment of air N-pollution and climate change
should combine Integrated Assessment Models currently used to support policy-making in
the fields of air pollution and climate change (such as RAINS and IMAGE), and develop
new components that supplement and allow interfacing of these models. Yet, a crucial and
major challenge remains unsolved: the prediction of complex "source-receptor relations" for
scenarios where both emissions and climate are changing.
Technical Annex COST 729
14
Driving forces:
-economic sectors
-policies
Pressures
State of
the environment
-atmosphere
-biosphere
Responses
Impacts
-humans
-ecosystems
Figure 2. The DPSIR framework
Environmental problems such as climate change and air pollution play a role at a local,
regional, national, continental and even global scale. The DPSIR framework for integrated
assessment can be applied at a range of scales. The required data and models for the
assessments will however differ between scales. It is imperative that the spatial and
temporal aspects considered in a model must fit its objectives. In practice, however, an ideal
fit is difficult to achieve, because model input data (e.g. initial conditions and parameters)
are often limited or even unknown at the relevant scale. Consequently, there is a trade-off
between scale and model complexity. For the nitrogen cascade the issue of scale and the
understanding, parameterisation and modelling (generalisation) of processes is the main
challenge. The DPSIR framework can only be implemented when the scale issue is
addressed in the right way. This COST Action will therefore focus on the collection of
data and models to fill the DPSIR framework at the different scales, through the
drawing together of relevant ongoing research activities in Europe. A very important
first step is to collect all running and finalised project results (in and outside Europe) in all
areas that are relevant for this Action, including source characterisation, meteorological
aspects, atmospheric chemistry, aerosols, deposition processes and re-emission processes.
Based on such an assessment the key scientific areas will be identified where further
development is needed in order to derive at a well-balanced IAM with sub models
addressing the science at the right scale with the right accuracy.
The Action will be structured according to:
1. Data assessment and development of common database.
2. Integrating existing European-scale models to deal with multiple N
components.
3. Evaluation and comparison of bottom up ecosystem models to assess N and
GHG at EU scale.
4. Policy and scenario analyses.
The synthesis work under the different items of the Action will complement the research
activities of ongoing national and European projects to refine integrated assessment models
for nitrogen, or ‘nitrogen frameworks’. The different items will be described as different
working groups in the next sections.
Technical Annex COST 729
15
C2. Working group descriptions
This Action is structured according to the following Working Groups:
WG1: Data assessment and development of a common database.
WG2: Integrated European-scale multi component models and its sub modules.
WG3: Evaluation and comparison of bottom up ecosystem models to assess N and GHG
fluxes at EU scale.
WG4: Policy and scenario analyses.
These are described below.
WG1: Data assessment and development of a common database.
Every model needs input data on the relevant scales. Environmental data covers biophysical
and other data in relation to nature and environment. The biggest challenge in relation to
this data is to set up a common framework to ensure spatial integration of data coming from
a wide range of sources and, for most of the data, in different spatial formats. Currently the
EMEP data on emissions, topography, meteorology and land use are up to date for the
regional scale. The emission databases for different economic sectors are well developed.
The diffuse emissions from, e.g., traffic and agriculture, both relevant for nitrogen are
problematic. Here the focus will be to extend the current databases. The main body of data
needed on farming systems will be available from FADN, though data from FSS and
LUCAS can be used to supplement this. The agricultural data may be organised in a farm
typology, to avoid disclosure and data protection problems with individual farm data, and to
allow for disaggregating of the data. Finally, the socio-economic data will be collected in a
specific task dealing mainly with data at administrative levels. Essential in this Action is the
connection of farm management scale with European-wide estimates of ammonia and GHG
emissions. Available EUROSTAT data about agricultural statistics (SPEL and REGIO
databases, partly compiled and evaluated in CAPRI1) and CAP STRAT2 and INSEA3) will
be compiled.
Aim of this working group
The aim of this working group is to evaluate and improve existing databases and models in
relation to their - combined - coverage of the nitrogen fluxes in and between the main
economic sectors and the atmospheric and biospheric environment at different scales in
Europe.
Activities within this working group
To achieve the aim of this working group, the following activities are essential:
1. Provide an overview of existing databases on driving forces and environmental
emissions of N components.
2. Definition of a common model framework necessary for integrated nitrogen flux
modelling.
3. Improvement of models describing the emission of diffuse sources, especially
focussing on the spatial and temporal variations and the translation into
parameterisations for generic emission databases.
4. Extension of the model database during the Action including the improvement in
scale and temporal resolution and an improved parameterization of diffuse emissions
from agriculture, industry and traffic.
5. Development of a system to calculate future emissions for scenarios based on the
developments in WP4.
Technical Annex COST 729
16
Deliverables
Key deliverables of this working group are:
1. Overview of the current databases on driving forces and emissions and a definition
of a model database needed for the nitrogen framework.
2. Establishment of a database available for nitrogen framework modelling, including
parameterisations to calculate emissions of complex and diffuse sources in the
different sectors.
3. Refinement of models to calculate emissions based on different scenarios.
4. Identification of gaps in knowledge and further research and development needed to
provide the basis for a holistic nitrogen approach.
WG2: Integrated European-scale multi component models and its sub modules.
The most up to date integrated assessment model is currently the RAINS model developed
by IIASA. This model forms a good starting point for the development of integrated
assessment models for nitrogen. There is a need for improvement on the local scale
modelling in relation to the nitrogen emissions of diffuse sources, especially in agriculture
and to the modelling of atmosphere–biosphere interactions and feedback mechanisms.
Furthermore, improvements should be made in the coupling to climate change issues, both
in terms of policy options and feedbacks, and to the nitrogen cascade, including reemissions and indirect emissions of nitrogen. In the Netherlands, the INITIATOR model
and NitroGenius (www.nitrogenius.com) have been developed that include already many of
these aspects and are available to apply at the European scale. Furthermore, other IAM
models will be benchmarked in order to come to integrated assessment approach for the
assessment of the nitrogen fluxes on the different scales with a required accuracy.
Aim of this working group
The aim of this working group is to evaluate the past effectiveness of current Integrated
Assessment Models in protecting vulnerable ecosystems from acidification/eutrophication,
under the current assumptions of linear and climate-independent source-receptor relations
and to improve the different sub modules of the IAMs in order to develop the nitrogen
frameworks necessary to support policy.
Activities within this working group
To achieve the aim of this working group, the following activities are essential:
1. Evaluate the past effectiveness of current Integrated Assessment Models in
protecting vulnerable ecosystems from acidification/eutrophication.
2. Improvement and development of sub modules, such as local dispersion of diffuse
sources, homogeneous and heterogeneous atmospheric chemistry, aerosol physics
and chemistry, wet and dry deposition process and re-emissions.
3. Comparison and improvement of transport models, nesting approaches, surfaceexchange modules, feedback mechanisms, etc.
4. Development of new Source Receptor Matrices including accurate parameterisation
ofEvaluate the influence of climate and chemical interactions on the source-receptor
relations of N.
5. Inform the development of new approaches in the light of the findings of previous
activities, for accurately predicting source-receptor relations, and to upgrade current
Integrated Assessment Models for operational use.
6. Test the upgraded integrated assessment models with experimental applications for
past and future scenarios.
Technical Annex COST 729
17
7. Evaluate the socio-economic or policy benefits, and degree of cost-effective
ecosystem and human health protection of the nitrogen framework (new IAM)
Deliverables
Key deliverables of this working group are:
1. Overview of current IAMs suitable for addressing (part of) the nitrogen cycle, their
limitations and the necessary improvements and extensions necessary for the
nitrogen framework.
2. Overview of current source-receptor approaches and their limitations; identifications
of the most important processes and feedbacks to be included in the sourcereceptors.
3. Improved transport models, nesting approaches, surface-exchange modules,
feedback mechanisms, etc.
4. New approaches to be used in nitrogen frameworks, based on existing IAMs and
source-receptor matrixes and model improvements.
5. Estimation of the accuracy, applicability and limitations of the new nitrogen
frameworks.
6. Improved documentation and catalogues of the existing and refined models.
WG3: Evaluation and comparison of bottom up ecosystem models to assess N and
GHG at the EU scale.
There are different approaches to determine the nitrogen fluxes. The different methods,
including the improved integrated assessment modelling, will be compared in order to
determine the uncertainties in our understanding and quantifications. Furthermore, past
developments in policies and resulting emissions will be assessed within the nitrogen
cascade. This would provide the assessment of our gaps in knowledge and also the
possibilities to develop new more effective policies. Within this topic there the relations of
the atmosphere – biosphere nitrogen cycle which will be explored within the whole nitrogen
cycle to form the basis of a holistic approach.
Aim of this working group
The aim of this working group is to apply and compare different approaches on different
spatial scales in Europe to test the applicability and to determine the limitations of the
different approaches compared to the nitrogen framework.
Activities within this working group
To achieve the aim of this working group, following activities are essential:
1. Assessment of model parameters for detailed ecosystem models and multicomponent
models.
2. Application of plot scale level models, such as DNDC with a daily time-scale, using
the European database on land use, vegetation, climate, (deposition EMEP), soil
types etc for the present situation.
3. Application of the multi-component European scale models for the present situation
with a yearly time-scale, using the same European database on land use, vegetation,
climate, (deposition EMEP), soil types etc for the present situation.
4. Application of the IPCC methodology, using the standard approach and an updated
approach with an improved parameterisation of emission factors based on results
obtained with DNDC and/or the multi-component European scale models
Technical Annex COST 729
18
5. Application of the different models on the landscape and regional scale and inter
comparison of the results. Comparison of models with a selected dataset. This set
will be available from present measurement campaigns in different areas of Europe.
Deliverables
Key deliverables of this working group are:
1. Application of different instruments at the local and regional scale to provide
demonstration the applicability of these tools for addressing the nitrogen cycle
2. Overview of applicability and limitations of the tools resulting in an overview of
research needs and usefulness for policy support.
WG4 Policy and scenario analyses.
This work package focuses on the evaluation of effects that took place in the past regarding
nitrogen management, land use and land management changes and on effects of future
scenarios, focusing on using the nitrogen frameworks. It includes the use of strategies for
nitrogen abatement that will lead to ecosystem and human health improvement and have a
positive direct (N2O) and indirect (links with Greenhouse Gas (GHG) sequestration and
emission) effect on the GHG emissions in Europe to reach the agreed GHG reductions,
making use of information available elsewhere (CAPRI, INSEA). It implies the assessment
of the impacts of a set of potential future European strategies responding to Kyoto, at the
same time as being consistent with commitments in other areas such as CLTRAP, CBD,
CAP reform (reform of European agricultural financing) and future European agriculture. It
may also include an economic and social contribution regarding both the financial viability
of proposals and the perceptions and acceptability of strategies. Not only the derivation of
strategies is taking place in this work package, but also the application of reliable scenarios
regarding past and current nitrogen management, land use change and land management
decisions (e.g. N-fertilisation), climate and rainfall on the total greenhouse gas fluxes and
soil humus content. Land management and land use change scenarios are specifically
important for a European wide assessment. Land management decisions seem to focus on
agricultural land, but one may also think of e.g. forest management (including N fertilisation
of forests). These impacts have thus to be modelled. Most common land use changes are
those from agricultural land to forestland or other types of non-agricultural land.
Aim of this working group
The aim of this working group is to evaluate the effects that took place in the past regarding
nitrogen management, land use and land management changes and on effects of future
atmosphere-biosphere flux scenarios, focusing on using the nitrogen frameworks.
Activities within this working group
To achieve the aim of this working group, following activities are essential:
1. Make an inventory of past and current nitrogen management options, land use
changes and land management decisions and how these may have affected
atmosphere-biosphere exchange of nitrogen compounds, including interactions with
greenhouse gases.
2. Evaluate effects of past and current nitrogen management options, land use change
and land management decisions in terms of N – GHG effects.
3. Make an inventory of relevant EU and national policies (a.o. through stakeholder
workshops).
4. Evaluate different policies in terms of N – GHG effects.
Technical Annex COST 729
19
5. Develop a holistic approach for assessing the efficiency of policy measures in terms
of both environmental (in relation to atmosphere and biosphere) and socio-economic
impacts.
6. Apply a simulation tool in the form of a game for policy makers and the public to aid
the investigation of N abatement strategies in relation to European economic and
social goals.
7. Dissemination of the expertise and the outcome of the Action to a wide range of
users, scientists and the general public in Europe
Deliverables
Key deliverables of this working group will be:
1. Overview of the past and current policies to abate atmospheric nitrogen pollution
and policies on land use and land management, and the effect of these policies on the
environmental pollution.
2. A proposal for a monitoring of emissions and environmental quality and policy
effectiveness evaluation strategy
3. A game for policymakers to develop new, more holistic, nitrogen abatement and test
the effectiveness of the policies.
Technical Annex COST 729
20
D. ORGANISATION AND TIMETABLE
The Action will have a total length of 5 years. The reason for the 5 year period is due to the
broadness and ambitious objectives of the Action with strong multidisciplinary aspects that
will require a dedicated preparation phase and assessing a host of various methodologies,
models and databases. Additionally, it is anticipated to have a strong link with the
NitroEurope proposal that will also run for 5 years. Much of the science developed there
will be of relevance to the COST Action.
During the first year, the Management Committee (MC) will discuss, possibly modify and
finally agree on the implementation of tasks described in the Memorandum of
Understanding. Then, the MC will also supervise the establishment of WGs based on the
analysis of the MoU and the profile of the participants. All the participants will specify
their contribution and goals through the Expression of Commitment scheme developed by
the Technical Committee for Meteorology. Every year a workshop will be organised to
fulfil the scientific tasks where the different WGs are invited. The focus of the workshops
will change during the years. Stakeholders will be invited to be involved through the
duration of the Action, with their main involvement expected in workshops during Years 1,
3 and at the end of the Action (year 5).
During the 5 year period three phases are distinguished as described below.
Phase 1: Inventory and definition (year 1)
- Establish contacts and specify collaboration with running EC-funded projects (all WG's).
- Liaison with key stakeholders, by organising a workshop.
- Inventory of data, models and policies (WG1, WG2, WG3), as described under C2.
- Establishment of a website
Phase 2: Assessment and further development of existing methodologies and models and
specification of efficiency indicators (year2, 3 and 4)
- Main scientific work to be conducted by each WG as described under the different
working groups in C2.
- Scientific workshops
- Stakeholder workshop
Phase 3: Application of integrated (modelling) approaches to assess the impact of policy
measures on the N-cascade (year 4 and 5) (WG4, with input from WG1, WG2 and WG3).
-
Application of the nitrogen framework and assessment of applicability, uncertainty and
future research needs.
-
Stakeholder workshop.
-
Past and future scenario analysis and identification of new, more cost-effective, policy
options to combat nitrogen pollution.
Technical Annex COST 729
21
-
Dissemination (Practical application, final report, publication / Executive summary for
the relevant institutions, publications intended for the general public in Europe
(brochure, webpage, presentation at conferences…), publications in internationally
refereed journals, final publication via website)
The phases within the Action can be represented as follows:
Phases
MC-meetings
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1 1 1 1 2
2 2 2
2 2 2 2 3 3
2
2
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
WG-meetings
X
Workshops
Stakeholder liaison
WG reports
Reports to TC
Final report
WWW-info pages
X
X
X
W
W
X
X
W
X
R
X
X
X
R
R
R
X
R
R
X
X
Year 5
1 2 3 4
3
3 3
3
X
X
X
X
W
X
R
R
X
X
← —— —— — —— — —— — —— — →
—
—
—
—
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Technical Annex COST 729
22
E. ECONOMIC DIMENSION
The following COST countries have actively participated in the preparation of the Action or
otherwise indicated their interest: (A, DK, DE, FIN, I, NL, NO, PL, SW, UK). According
to these involvements and other expressed interests for the Action, it is expected that 20
participant countries would participate in this Action. On the basis of national estimates
provided by the representatives of these countries, the economic dimension of the activities
to be carried out under the Action has been estimated, in 2004 prices, at roughly EUR
12,000,000. This estimate is valid under the assumption that all the countries mentioned
above, but no other countries will participate in the Action. Any departure from this will
change the total cost accordingly.
F. DISSEMINATION
Several methods will be used to disseminate the results of the Action, through establishment
of a website, through organisation and participation in dedicated workshops, participation in
conferences, COST reports, publications in internationally refereed journals and through
liaison with other relevant programs, projects, organisations, committees etc. (see A3.). The
MC will make a dissemination plan in the first year.
This plan will contain following items:
Website and e-mail news letter Establishing communication links with other COST Actions,
EU projects and with ESF projects through a mailing system (newsletter) and through a
website. A Website will be established at the beginning of the COST Action on which all
activities, notice of activities and events will be posted. Links will be established to other
related Sites. A notice board will be provided for comments on activities, job adverts,
techniques, and requests for materials.
E-mail Network Members of the MC are expected to take a pro-active role in the
dissemination of information about Action events and reports. All members of the MC will
be linked by e-mail. It will be the responsibility of the MC members of each country to
maintain and update a list of key laboratories/scientists in that country and ensure that the
list is available to other members of the MC. MC-members will be responsible for ensuring
that those interested in the COST Action are aware of activities and reports.
Meetings Reports Reports from all Meetings organised by the COST Action will be
submitted to the Management Committee for approval and consideration of subsequent
actions. It is anticipated that the Reports will take one of three forms:
a. An analytical review of the subject area
b. An overview of progress made in the area
c. A report with Action points for circulation to both the MC and a wider audience outside
the COST Action.
The preparation of expert documents is considered to be an important component in the
activity of the COST Action. The documents will provide up-to-date information and
critical comments on nitrogen issues that may assist National and International Agencies in
policy decisions.
Technical Annex COST 729
23
Brochure At the end of the COST Action a brochure will be published with the main results
in understandable language.
Stake holder workshop Stake holders will be briefed at a specific meeting held with the MC
at the end of the Actions. During the Action stake holders (e.g., EEA, UNECE, Fertiliser
institute, CONCAWE, DG Environment, DG Agriculture, DG Tren) will be involved in the
process, amongst others by organising a workshop at the beginning of the Action to secure
their involvement in the whole process.
Scientific publications resulting from the Action A list of scientific publications and reviews
will be maintained on the WebSite, with pdf where available. This will include both (a)
publications of members of the COST Action and (b) publications derived from joint
research projects that have developed from the COST Action and include authors from
different EU laboratories.
The direct involvement of IIASA in this COST Action will enable an effective transfer of
research results to the major end-users, the policy-makers, as IIASA is the reference centre
in Europe for supporting the implementation and evaluation of the NEC Directive and for
supporting the CAFE process. The involvement of scientists from the EMEP Centre will
also strengthen these links. The scientists also take part in the European Nitrogen Centre,
which provides the international dimension and dissemination within Europe.
This Action will also liaise with the COSMOS initiative (Community Earth System Models;
http://cosmos.enes.org/), which covers many of the topics addressed by this Action. Though,
oriented towards climate applications, COSMOS will have an “all-inclusive” approach, so
that its output might be of high use for this COST Action.
Technical Annex COST 729
24
COST 729
“ASSESSING AND MANAGING NITROGEN FLUXES IN THE
ATMOSPHERE-BIOSPHERE SYSTEM IN EUROPE”
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
NOT PART OF THE MOU
Additional Information
PART II: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A proposal for an ESF Programme “Nitrogen in Europe: assessment of current problems
and future solutions) was proposed in April 2004 to the ESF LESC. It was judged there as
being too broad and it was recommended to split it into 2 parts: one from ESF and one as a
COST Action. Following discussions between the LESC Secretariat and COST through the
COST-LESC Synergy Group involving TC representatives from TC-Meteorology,
Environment, Agriculture and Forestry, contacts where established between the authors of
the proposal and the TC-Meteorology. A first draft of the COST proposal was submitted
informally to the core group of TC-Meteorology in June 2004. It was commented and
returned to the initiators in June. In early August, a second draft was submitted informally.
Comments were received directly afterwards, resulting in the current version of the proposal
submitted to the TC-Meteorology.
Thus, following the recommendations of the relevant COST and the ESF LESC committees,
two complementary proposals are therefore submitted. While the present COST Action
proposal focuses on atmosphere-biosphere interactions in the nitrogen cycle, the proposal to
the ESF focuses on the development of science for an integrated nitrogen assessment.
The following scientists have participated in the drafting of the Technical Annex of the
MoU:
- Dr. Ing. Jan Willem Erisman, unit manager Clean Fossil Fuels, ECN, the Netherlands
erisman@ecn.nl
- Dr. Ir. Nelleke Domburg, senior scientist, ECN, the Netherlands
domburg@ecn.nl
- Dr. Mark Sutton, Head of Atmospheric Sciences Section, Centre for Ecology and
Hydrology, United Kingdom
ms@ceh.uk
The following individuals are anticipated to play a leading role in the different work
packages specified in the Action:
Austria:
Denmark:
Germany:
Italy:
the Netherlands:
Norway:
Poland:
Sweden:
Markus Amann, Zig Klimont (IIASA),
amann@iiasa.ac.at
Joergen Olesen, Nick Hutchings (Danish Institute of Agricultural
Sciences, DIAS
jorgene.olesen@agrsci.dk
Till Spranger (UBA)
till.spranger@uba.de
Francesca Cotrufo (University of Naples)
mfrancesca.cotrufo@unina2.it
Jan Willem Erisman, Nelleke Domburg (ECN)
erisman@ecn.nl
Wim de Vries (Alterra)
wimdevries@wur.nl
Oysten Hov (Norwegian Meteorological Institute)
oeh@nilu.no
Janina Fudala (Institute for Ecology of Industrial Areas)
jfudala@ietu.katowice.pl
Peringe Grennfelt (IVL)
Additional Information
United Kingdom:
grennfelt@ivl.se
David Fowler, Mark Sutton (CEH)
dfo@ceh.ac.uk
Bill Collins (Met Office)
Overview of acronyms and projects
Projects and initiatives
MERLIN: Multi-pollutant multi-effect modelling of European air pollution-an integrated
approach,
(http://www.merlin-project.info/)
Lead
Contractor:
UNIVERSITAET
STUTTGART, SCHWARZE, Joachim (Mr)
MINNOX: Minimisation of NOx Emissions. Lead Contractor: AVL LIST GMBH, GRAZ,
WEIBBACHER, Barbara (Engineer)
NITROCAT: Nitrous acid and its influence on the oxidation capacity of the atmosphere,
Lead
Contractor:
BERGISCHE
UNIVERSITAET
GESAMTHOCHSCHULE
WUPPERTAL, PETERS, Klaus (Dr)
Atmospheric processes related to regional and global changes. Lead Contractor: JRC
Institute for Environment and Sustainability (http://www.ei.jrc.it/), RAES, Frank
RECOVER 2010: Predicting recovery in acidified freshwaters by the year 2010 and
beyond (http://www.mluri.sari.ac.uk/recover/) Lead Contractor: MACAULAY LAND USE
RESEARCH INSTITUTE, MAXWELL, Thomas Jefferson (Professor)
EEPNetwork: Enforcing Environmental Policy - European Research Network on the
instruments of Environmental Policy in the Areas of Climate Protection and Air Pollution.
(http://www.eepnetwork.net/presentation.html) Lead Contractor: JOHANN WOLFGANG
GOETHE UNIVERSITAET FRANKFURT, STEINBERG, Rudolf (Professor)
MULTI-ASSESS Model for multi-pollutant impact and assessment of threshold levels for
cultural heritage. Lead Contractor: SWEDISH CORROSION INSTITUTE AB
(http://www.corr-institute.se/), LINDER, Bjoern (Professor)
GREENGRASS: Sources and sinks of greenhous gases from managed European
grasslands and mitigation strategies.
Contractor: Institut Nationale Recherche
Agronomique, INRA (http://www.clermont.inra.fr/greengrass), SOUSSANA, Jean Francois
GRAMINAE: Grassland ammonia interactions across Europe. Lead Contractor: Centre
for Ecology and Hydrology, CEH (http://www.edinburgh.ceh.ac.uk/cara), SUTTON, Mark
MIDAIR Assessment of options for emission reduction and the development of methods
for evaluation of the emission levels and the reductions.
Additional Information
NOFRETETE: Nitrogen oxides emissions from European forest ecosystems. Lead
Contractor: Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, IMK-IFU (http://195.127.136.75/nofretete/),
BUTTERBACH-BAHL, Claus
NEU: Quantification of the nitrogen cycle and its interaction with the carbon cycle as
determinants of net greenhouse gas emissions for Europe. The developing NitroEurope IP
initiative for FP6. Lead Proposer:
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, CEH
(http://www.neu.ceh.ac.uk), SUTTON Mark
Other key acronyms (incomplete)
DPSIR = Driving forces of Pressures to environmental State and Impacts on human and
ecological welfare, finally leading to political Responses
RAINS = Regional Acid
IIASA = International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
DNDC: The Denitrification decomposition model of carbon and nitrogen fluxes in
terrestrial ecosystems including exchange with the atmosphere and losses to waters.
INITIATOR = agricultural module, describing the agricultural nitrogen flows and emissions
to groundwater and surface water
IAM = Integrated Assessment Model
IMAGE = The Integrated Model to Assess the Global Environment
(CAPRI: Common Agricultural Policy Regional Impact Analysis;
CAP STRAT: Common Agricultural Policy Strategy for Regions, Agriculture and Trade;
INSEA: Integrated Sink Enhancement Assessment)
SPEL = Sectoral Production and Environmental Land use model
REGIO = Database on regional statistics (EUROSTAT)
Additional Information