5. Groundwater quantitative status and pressures

5. Groundwater quantitative status and pressures

  • In the second RBMPs, around 90 % of the area of groundwater bodies is in good quantitative status. However, in the southern Member States of the EU, in particular Cyprus, Malta and Spain there are significant problems with the quantitative status of groundwater bodies.

comments (0)

  •  The main pressures causing failure of good quantitative status are water abstraction for public water supply, agriculture and industry.

comments (1)

  •  Groundwater quantitative status has improved by about 5 % since the first RBMP was reported.

comments (2)

5.1 Introduction

Groundwater is the water below the Earth’s surface in the fractures of rock formations and in soil pore spaces. Groundwater aquifers are embedded in geological layers and the groundwater body is a distinct volume of groundwater within an aquifer(s).

Groundwater bodies are characterized by their geology and their productivity. More than half are porous aquifers, followed by fissured aquifers and are generally highly to moderately productive. Fractured aquifers including karst and local and limited aquifers are less common. Groundwater provides the steady, base flow of rivers and wetlands.

In overall of European water balance, groundwater aquifers receive around 11 % of total precipitation as deep percolation, but provides around 42 % of total water abstraction in Europe mainly for public water supply and agricultural activities. In Europe, about 50 % of drinking water is taken from groundwater (EEA, 2016). Many large cities are depending on water supply from groundwater resources.

The WFD requires good quantitative status to be achieved by ensuring available groundwater resource is not exceeded by the long-term annual average rate of abstraction. Accordingly, the groundwater level may not be subject to

  • any diminution in ecological status of surface water linked with groundwater
  • significant damage to groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems, nor
  • any flow reversals that lead to saline or other intrusions do not impact groundwater quantitative status.

Groundwater bodies are classified in good, poor and unknown quantitative status. Change in status by area per country between the first and second RBMPs has been used to analyse the improvements in groundwater quantitative status. For groundwater bodies failing to achieve good quantitative status the reasons for failure, significant pressures and impacts are described.

Further and detailed information on improvements in groundwater quantitative status assessment is available in WISE

·         Monitoring of groundwater quantitative status – number of monitoring sites (missing)

·         Change in proportion unknowns: unknown quantitative status Table (EU & MS);

·         Confidence in GW quantitative status assessment Table and Graph*

comments (4)

5.2 Groundwater quantitative status

Status in second RBMPs

Almost 90 % of the area of groundwater bodies have good quantitative status, 9 % of total area of groundwater bodies has failed to achieve good quantitative status, while around 1 % of the groundwater area have unknown status (Figure 5.1).

Figure 5.1 Groundwater quantitative status by area between the first and second RBMPs.

Note: The numbers in parenthesis show total area (in million km2) of groundwater bodies.

Source: WISE-SoW database data from 25 Member States (except Greece, Ireland and Lithuania)

comments (1)

Six Member States have reported all groundwater bodies at good quantitative status, while Cyprus and Malta have reported the highest proportion of groundwater bodies failing to achieve good quantitative status (Table 5.1). Cyprus and Malta have 57 % and 80 % of their groundwater in poor quantitative status, while both countries are heavily depending on abstracting water from groundwater resources.  For instance, Malta abstracts around 60% of total water needs from groundwater resources and similarly almost half of total water abstraction is from groundwater resources in Cyprus[1].

Around 14 Member States reported that between 75 % and 99 % of the total area of groundwater bodies are in good quantitative status, while this ratio was between 50 to 75 % in three Member States.

comments (3)

In around 70 RBDs, all groundwater bodies are in good quantitative status. Only one RBD reported all its groundwater bodies failing to achieve good quantitative status (Map 5.2).

Map 5.2 Percentage of the area of groundwater bodies not in good quantitative status in Europe’s river basin districts in the second RBMP

Note: the map presents the results based on the data reported from 136 RBDs of 23 Member States (missing Denmark and Austria, - Greece, Ireland and Lithuania).Results for the map see Link

comments (4)

Change in status between the first and second RBMPs

Overall, more than 80 % of all groundwater bodies in Europe had good quantitative status in the first RBMPs. Around 5 % of improvement regarding good quantitative status has been observed between the first and second RBMPs, while failing to achieve good quantitative status has decreased from 13 % to 9 %. Knowledge on groundwater quantitative status has been substantially increased and now only around 1 % of groundwater bodies are in unknown status, and in total four Member States have groundwater bodies in unknown status. Around 70 % of quantitative status assessments have been marked as high or medium-level confidence.

Further and detailed information on groundwater quantitative status results is available in WISE

·         Groundwater quantitative status Table (EU & MS); Table2 ; Graph*, Graph2 (MS comparison); MemberStates

·         Comparison of groundwater quantitative status Graph; GraphMS; MemberStates

·         Groundwater at risk failing quantitative status Table

comments (1)

5.3 Pressure and impacts on quantitative status

In 10 % of the groundwater area which fails to achieve good quantitative status, the main reasons are lowered water table (75 %), deterioration of associated surface waters (24 %) and dependent terrestrial ecosystems (20 %) and saline intrusion (9 %). A groundwater body may have more than one reason for failure of good status.

The main pressures affecting groundwater bodies are abstraction and change in groundwater level (Figure 5.3). Over-abstraction is affecting 16 % of the total groundwater area. The main significant pressures causing failure of good quantitative status are water abstraction for public water supply, agriculture and industry.  

Figure 5.3 Significant pressures causing failure to achieve good quantitative status.

Note: Data from 25 Member States of which 19 Member States have groundwater bodies failing good quantitative status

Source: WISE-SoW database data from 25 Member States (except Greece, Ireland and Lithuania)– September 2017.

comments (6)

The area of groundwater bodies affected by water abstraction for public water supply has decreased 7 % since the first RBMPs. On the other hand, water abstraction for industry and agriculture has increased 9 % and 8 % respectively (Table 5.2). The changes in pressures may be due to better understanding of the abstraction pressures during preparation of the second RBMPs, or due to actual changes in abstraction.

 

 

comments (3)

A comparison of change in status indicates that almost all European groundwater bodies would achieve good quantitative status by 2027 based on the assessment of predicted status in the following RBMPs (Table 5.3).  

 

comments (2)


Further and detailed information on groundwater quantitative status results is available in WISE

·         Groundwater quantitative status reason for failure Table

·         Groundwater quantitative status main pressures Table

·         Groundwater quantitative status detailed abstraction pressures Table

·         Groundwater quantitative status main impacts Table

·         Groundwater expected to be in good quantitative status Table

[1] Zal, N., Bariamis, G., Zachos, A., Baltas, E., Mimikou, M., 2017, Use of Freshwater Resources in Europe – An assessment based on water quantity accounts, ed. Künitzer, A.. ETC/ICM Technical Report 1/2017, Magdeburg: European Topic Centre on inland, coastal and marine waters, 75 pp.

comments (0)