Post a comment on the text below

4.4 Pressures on groundwater chemical status

Most countries report diffuse sources of pollution as being a pressure for groundwater (24 out of 25 Member States), while 20 reported point sources as a pressure. Diffuse sources affect 22 % of the groundwater bodies by area (Figure 4.7). Diffuse pollution from agriculture is the major pressure causing failure of good chemical status affecting 20 % of groundwater bodies (by area). Other pressures are of less significance (Fig. 4.7).

Fig 4.7 Main pressures identified in relation to groundwater chemical status

Note: Proportion of groundwater area affected by the main pressure groups and by detailed pressures for diffuse sources and point source pressures. Some Member States have reported groundwater bodies in good chemical status with diffuse or point source pressures, the proportion of these are indicated by light blue in the diagrams. Remark differences in the scale of the X-axis.

Source: Preliminary results based on WISE-SoW database including data from 25 Member States (EU28 except Greece, Ireland and Lithuania). Latvia reported all groundwater bodies in good chemical status.

The main impacts were chemical (22 % of groundwater bodies by area) and nutrient pollution (19 %).

Further and detailed information on pressures and impacts in relation to chemical status is available in WISE

·         Groundwater chemical status, main pressure groups table

·         Groundwater chemical status, detailed pressures point pollution sources, diffuse pollution sources,

·         Groundwater chemical status, significant impacts - table

[1] Note, some Member States set more stringent nitrate standards (below 50 mg/l).

[2] Specific criteria are set out in Annex II of the Groundwater Directive REF

Previous comments

  • reckinann (Anne-Marie Reckinger) 26 Feb 2018 11:25:31

    Parts of the text in figure 4.7 are missing and ”failing to achieve good” should be replaced by ”poor”. The colour code for good status is green and for poor status red.

  • Denmark - Ministry of Environment and Food (invited by Peter Kristensen) 26 Feb 2018 13:47:09

    The language of the section should be improved as it is difficult to understand. The last sentence "The main impacts were chemical (22 % of groundwater bodies by area) and nutrient pollution (19%) should be integrated with the section above.

  • Denmark - Ministry of Environment and Food (invited by Peter Kristensen) 26 Feb 2018 13:47:21

    The language of the section should be improved as it is difficult to understand. The last sentence "The main impacts were chemical (22 % of groundwater bodies by area) and nutrient pollution (19%) should be integrated with the section above.

  • voet (Jan Hendrik Voet) 26 Feb 2018 15:11:42

    BE-FLA (RV): p. 49 §1 Most countries report diffuse sources of pollution as being a pressure for groundwater (24 out of 25 Member States), while 20 reported point sources as a pressure.

     

    Sounds as there is only one choice. Proposal:

    • 20 countries reported both point and diffuse source pressures
    • 4 countries reported only diffuse source pressures

    # countries reported only point source pressures

  • voet (Jan Hendrik Voet) 26 Feb 2018 15:13:01

    BE-FLA (RV): p. 49, fig 4.7

    Compare Atmospheric deposition on GWBs 1% with impact Atmospheric deposition on SWBs 38% (p. 32) and with precipitation 11% (p. 50)

  • voet (Jan Hendrik Voet) 26 Feb 2018 18:46:02

    BE-FLA (WV): p. 49 §1 Other pressures are of less significance

    “of less significance” in terms of the total area of GWB or is some other reference used?

  • scheidand (Andreas Scheidleder) 27 Feb 2018 18:48:02

    (AT) Note: Proportion of groundwater body area... 

  • bamfodeb (Debbie Bamford) 28 Feb 2018 10:32:03

    Environment Ageny: In checking the values reported for Diffuse and Point pressures there seems to be some disparity between the figures in the table and the figures reported in the RBMPs. Can there be some clarity please on the categories?. Also, when looking at the totals displayed at the bottom of the list of pressures I don't get the same total as displayed. This could be from my mis-interpretation of the calculation.

  • groforen (Renata Grofova) 28 Feb 2018 11:23:58

    SK: Page 44, Footnote 25: REF (reference) is missing.

You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.