Hydro-economic assessment of the potential of PV-RO desalinated seawater supply in the Mediterranean region: Modelling concept and analysis of water transport costs

Seawater desalination, although a traditional source of water in arid and water-scarce regions, is receiving attention worldwide due to the growing concern on dwindling traditional water resources. Desalination entails significant energy consumption, which may be unsustainable when the latter is provided by fossil fuels. However, when fed with energy from renewable sources, desalination may become more attractive. Until now, desalination has been regarded as a local source of freshwater for coastal areas or islands, but the mapping of regions suitable to be supplied with desalinated seawater has been seldom addressed systematically. Caldera et al., 2016, present a global scale analysis based on a simplified representation of water demand and energy requirements for desalinated water production and transport, suggesting that desalinated seawater could be supplied in water-stressed regions of the world by 2030, using renewable energy only, at a cost between 0.59 and 2.81 Euro/m3. While their analysis provides general indications at global scale, the specificity of regions arising from topography, the distribution of population and land use may warrant a more detailed inspection. Appraising the potential of renewable energy seawater desalination as a water resource requires quantifying its costs of production (construction, operation and maintenance of desalination plants), as well as the costs of transporting desalinated water from the coastal production sites to potential users inland. In this contribution, we describe the cost elements concurring to the total cost of desalinated seawater, and we quantify the component of costs associated to water transport from a coastal production site to the final users inland. We limit our analysis to the case of using renewable energy, and specifically photovoltaic (PV) energy, to feed plants based on reverse osmosis (RO) technology, currently representing the most common choice by desalination engineers. We develop our cost analysis assuming PV to contribute 100% of energy used in both production and transport of desalinated water. Finally, we outline the envisaged steps towards a prioritization of investments in desalination in the Mediterranean.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Transitional waters North East Atlantic geographic intercalibration group: Benthic invertebrate fauna ecological assessment methods

This report gives a technical description on the intercalibration (IC) process of the different benthic assessment approaches for soft sediment habitats (muds to sands) in transitional waters in the North East Atlantic Geographical Intercalibration Group (NEA-GIG) for type NEA 11 (Transitional Waters). Eight member states are involved: Belgium (BE), France (FR), Germany (DE), Ireland (RoI), the Netherlands (NL), Portugal (PT), Spain (SP), and United Kingdom (UK). In Spain, the competent authorities for the WFD application are the regions, as such, for the benthic macroinvertebrates assessment methods three regions have been considered: Andalusia (SP-An), Basque Country (SP-BC) and Cantabria (SP-C). Those member states proposed 7 approaches for IC: AeTV (DE), BAT (PT), BEQI (BE), BEQI2 (NL), IQI (RoI and UK), M-AMBI (DE and SP-BC), QSB (SP-C) and TAsBeM (SP-An). However, AeTV and BEQI are not intercalibrated as they assess benthic invertebrates at water body and ecosystem level, respectively, whereas the rest of methods assess the benthic status at sample level.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Coastal and transitional waters North East Atlantic geographic intercalibration group: Opportunistic macroalgae ecological assessment methods

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the national classifications of good ecological status to be harmonised through an intercalibration exercise. In this exercise, significant differences in status classification among Member States are harmonized by comparing and, if necessary, adjusting the good status boundaries of the national assessment methods. Intercalibration is performed for rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters, focusing on selected types of water bodies (intercalibration types), anthropogenic pressures and Biological Quality Elements. Intercalibration exercises are carried out in Geographical Intercalibration Groups - larger geographical units including Member States with similar water body types - and followed the procedure described in the WFD Common Implementation Strategy Guidance document on the intercalibration process (European Commission, 2011). The Technical report on the Water Framework Directive intercalibration describes in detail how the intercalibration exercise has been carried out for the water categories and biological quality elements. The Technical report is organized in volumes according to the water category (rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters), Biological Quality Element and Geographical Intercalibration group. This volume addresses the intercalibration of the Coastal and Transitional Waters-North East Atlantic Opportunistic macroalgae ecological assessment methods.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Best practice for establishing nutrient concentrations to support good ecological status

The EU Member States, Norway and the European Commission in 2000 have jointly developed a common implementation strategy (CIS) for implementing Directive 2000/60/EC, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) to ensure consistent implementation. The focus is on developing a common understanding of the technical and scientific implications of the WFD. One of the objectives is the development of non-legally binding and practical Guidance Documents on various technical issues of the Directive. These are targeted at experts who are directly or indirectly implementing the WFD in river basins. The structure, presentation and terminology are therefore adapted to their needs and formal, legalistic language is avoided wherever possible. In 2009 CIS Guidance on Eutrophication Assessment (Guidance Document No. 23) was published, providing guidance for evaluating the impacts of nutrient enrichment, a major cause of failure to achieve good status under the WFD. However, an apparently wide range of nutrient boundary values to support good ecological status had been established by the Member States. Water Directors requested that the CIS Working Group ECOSTAT investigate this issue, and the subsequent work has been led by the UK (Freshwaters), Germany (Saline waters) and JRC. The aim of the work was to establish the reasons for differences between Member States in the development and application of nutrient boundaries, leading to the production of this guidance on best practice. This work is an addition to, and not a replacement for, the earlier guidance on eutrophication assessment. In developing this guidance, a number of tasks have been undertaken. The range of nitrogen and phosphorus boundary values in use by Member States, and the methods used to derive those values has been reported separately, for both fresh and saline waters. Further work was undertaken to investigate nutrient pressure-biological response relationships in the different surface water categories. This work was then used to inform the development of this guide and the associated statistical toolkit. During the project a series of workshops were held involving nutrient experts nominated by Member States. These experts contributed to the development and testing of the guidance and toolkit, and provided details of alternative methods of boundary setting in use in some Member States. The purpose of this report is to provide technical guidance to enable Member States to establish new, or review existing, boundaries for phosphorus and nitrogen to support good ecological status. This should facilitate the establishment of comparable and consistent boundaries across all Member States. However it is recognised that alternative methods of arriving at boundary values may be valid, and use of this guidance and the associated statistical toolkit is ultimately a decision for the Member State. The responses of biological elements to nutrient availability are complex, and vary between water categories. This guidance is not therefore a substitute for the application of ecological knowledge and understanding at a local level. Furthermore, responses to nutrients may be confounded by the impact of other pressures acting on a water body, and our understanding of how to account for multiple stressors is still developing. The guidance does not specifically address how the nutrient boundaries are used to derive an overall classification, or to drive action to control nutrients, both of which may be relevant to the level at which the boundaries are set.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Physico-chemical supporting elements in coastal waters: Links between Water and Marine Framework Directives and Regional Sea Conventions

A comparison between the information reported by Member States to WIISE on the standards for general physic chemical parameters, and the information available on the methodologies used to assess eutrophication in coastal waters, in accordance to MSFD and Regional Sea Conventions.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Coastal and transitional waters North East Atlantic geographic intercalibration group: Seagrasses ecological assessment methods

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the national classifications of good ecological status to be harmonised through an intercalibration exercise. In this exercise, significant differences in status classification among Member States are harmonized by comparing and, if necessary, adjusting the good status boundaries of the national assessment methods. Intercalibration is performed for rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters, focusing on selected types of water bodies (intercalibration types), anthropogenic pressures and Biological Quality Elements. Intercalibration exercises are carried out in Geographical Intercalibration Groups - larger geographical units including Member States with similar water body types - and followed the procedure described in the WFD Common Implementation Strategy Guidance document on the intercalibration process (European Commission, 2011). The Technical report on the Water Framework Directive intercalibration describes in detail how the intercalibration exercise has been carried out for the water categories and biological quality elements. The Technical report is organized in volumes according to the water category (rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters), Biological Quality Element and Geographical Intercalibration group. This volume addresses the intercalibration of the Coastal and Transitional Waters-North East Atlantic GIG seagrasses ecological assessment methods.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Coastal and transitional waters North East Atlantic geographic intercalibration group: Saltmarshes ecological assessment methods

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the national classifications of good ecological status to be harmonised through an intercalibration exercise. In this exercise, significant differences in status classification among Member States are harmonized by comparing and, if necessary, adjusting the good status boundaries of the national assessment methods. Intercalibration is performed for rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters, focusing on selected types of water bodies (intercalibration types), anthropogenic pressures and Biological Quality Elements. Intercalibration exercises are carried out in Geographical Intercalibration Groups - larger geographical units including Member States with similar water body types - and followed the procedure described in the WFD Common Implementation Strategy Guidance document on the intercalibration process (European Commission, 2011). The Technical report on the Water Framework Directive intercalibration describes in detail how the intercalibration exercise has been carried out for the water categories and biological quality elements. The Technical report is organized in volumes according to the water category (rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters), Biological Quality Element and Geographical Intercalibration group. This volume addresses the intercalibration of the Coastal and Transitional Waters-North East Atlantic GIG saltmarshes ecological assessment methodsJRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Coastal waters North East Atlantic geographic intercalibration group: Benthic invertebrate fauna ecological assessment methods

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the national classifications of good ecological status to be harmonised through an intercalibration exercise. In this exercise, significant differences in status classification among Member States are harmonized by comparing and, if necessary, adjusting the good status boundaries of the national assessment methods. Intercalibration is performed for rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters, focusing on selected types of water bodies (intercalibration types), anthropogenic pressures and Biological Quality Elements. Intercalibration exercises are carried out in Geographical Intercalibration Groups - larger geographical units including Member States with similar water body types - and followed the procedure described in the WFD Common Implementation Strategy Guidance document on the intercalibration process (European Commission, 2011). The Technical report on the Water Framework Directive intercalibration describes in detail how the intercalibration exercise has been carried out for the water categories and biological quality elements. The Technical report is organized in volumes according to the water category (rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters), Biological Quality Element and Geographical Intercalibration group. This report gives a description of the intercalibration of the different benthic assessment approaches for in coastal waters in the North East Atlantic Geographical Intercalibration Group (NEA-GIG) for types NEA 1/26 (Exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow waters), NEA 3/4 (Wadden sea type) and NEA 7 (Deep fjordic and sea loach systems). The benthic assessment approaches of nine European Member States (Belgium, Germany, Denmark, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom) and Norway are intercalibrated. In Spain, the competent authorities for the WFD application are the regions (‘autonomous communities’); therefore for the benthic assessment methods three regions have been considered: Basque Country, Andalusia and Cantabria (no information on Galicia or Asturias). Part D of the report describes the Germany assessment approach for the type NEA 5. This type is not shared with the rest of the Members Stares, and therefore, the Intercalibration is not possibleJRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Hydromorphological assessment and monitoring methodologies in coastal and transitional waters: Summary of European country questionnaires

This report summarizes the information reported on 18 methods for hydromorphological assessment in coastal and transitional waters from 14 European countries. It gives an overview of all methods, indicating which main components are covered by each method, describing their uses for different purposes, the extent to which they are applied, requirements for specific expertise and training as well as some indications on the resource intensity involved. It also summarizes the general characteristics of the methods with specific emphasis on the consideration of different scales and the approach followed with respect to reference conditions and typology.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

A novel approach for deriving nutrient criteria to support good ecological status: Application to coastal and transitional waters and indications for use

A huge variability exists in nutrient concentrations boundaries set for the Water (WFD) and the Marine Strategy (MSFD) Framework Directives, as revealed by a survey to EU Member States. Such wide variation poses challenges when checking policy objectives compliance and for setting coherent management goals across European waters. To help Member States achieve Good Ecological Status (GES) in surface waters, different statistical approaches have been proposed in a Best Practice Guide (CIS Nutrients Standards Guidance) for establishing suitable nutrient boundaries. Here we used the intercalibrated results from the WFD for the biological quality element phytoplankton to test the applicability of this Best Practice Guide for deriving nutrient boundaries in coastal and transitional waters. Overall, the statistical approaches proved adequate for coastal lagoons, but are not always robust to allow deriving nutrient boundaries in other water categories such as estuaries, in transitional waters, or some coastal water types. The datasets available for analysis provided good examples of the most common problems that might be encountered in these water categories. Similar issues have been found in freshwater environments, for which solutions are proposed in the Best Practice Guide and which are demonstrated here for coastal and transitional waters. The different approaches available and problems identified can be useful for supporting the derivation of nutrient concentrations boundaries both for the Water and the Marine Strategy Framework Directives implementation.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource