Navigation
Notifications
Post a comment on the text below
Please provide your comments on the draft document on Floods which can be found at http://forum.eionet.europa.eu/nrc-eionet-water-interest-group/library/public-section/2012-state-water-thematic-assessments/thematic-assessment-vulnerability/background-document-water-scarcity-and-droughts
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
The more important problem for France is the map presented page 10. This map is wrong for France because illustrates in fact the problems caused by the WEI. From French point of view, it is quite problematic that this map, in this way, can be published, even if the problems caused by WEI are precisely exposed in the same document. This map shows an extrem stress in district Rhine but no stress in district Adour. It is all the contrary in reality. For district Rhine, the WEI is important because the water abstracted for cooling nuclear power plant is taken into account whereas all the water or almost is returned. Moreover, this district is a little district, consequently the resources (precipitations) are not important. We also doubt whether the external inputs are taken into account. For district Adour, there are recurrent problems of water availibility but at a little scale. Moreover, in 2007, the abstractions of a big nuclear power plant in this district are not taken into account. They will be counted after 2008 included. The WEI have to be calculated at a more little scale to be interesting.
Page 13, as answer to clarify uncertainties, we confirm that France calculates real evapotranspiration and not potential.
Page 16, the fact that "population growth impacts water demand either directly (drinking water consumption)" is not correct in France. Between 2006 and 2009, the population in France increases of 2% whereas the water abstractions for drinking water decrease of 6%.
Page 23, there is a problem between the dates proposed for France related to restrictions. A communication in June 2011 is quoted to confirm restrictions decided in August. In June, 21st, there were 60 departments with restrictions, 73, in mid-July. Over the year 2011, there were 78 departments concerned by restrictions. The restrictions are not decided by the ministry but by local stakeholders (prefect of department).
Page 74, a lot of difference is pointed out between the figures transmitted to Eurostat and Wise SoE for water abstractions at RBD scale. We check our reports and in fact, the problems comes from that the figures reported here for Eurostat is only the total gross abstractions in Fresh surface water. The figures reported here for WISE SoE are correct and correspond to the total gross abstractions, from fresh groundwater and surface water. For France, we confirm that the abstractions reported to Eurostat and WISE are the same, the reports have been made at the same time with the same raw data. In the Eurostat regional questionnaire, the abstractions had to be reported separately from surface water and groundwater but there was no line for the total hence the problem, from our point of view.
Page 83-84, there are some differences in the water availibility but it is not the same year (2007 and 2008).
Do not hesitate to contact us for any question, since the comments are a bit long.
Links to articles (in Slovenian with English abstracts):
http://www.sos112.si/slo/tdocs/ujma/2004/susa_2003.pdf
http://www.sos112.si/slo/tdocs/ujma/2005/susa_2004.pdf
http://www.sos112.si/slo/tdocs/ujma/2008/037.pdf
http://meteo.arso.gov.si/uploads/probase/www/agromet/product/document/sl/IZZIVI_Slovenije_na_podrocju_sus_in_degradacije_tal.pdf
http://www.arso.gov.si/o%20agenciji/knji%c5%benica/publikacije/Okolje_se%20spreminja.pdf
http://agromet-cost.bo.ibimet.cnr.it/fileadmin/cost718/repository/andrejas.pdf
p 94 – table Historic drought events in from 1970-2010
For last 15-20 years some severe drought events in are not shown - 1992, 1993, 2000, 2006, partly in 2007. All necessary information are in the articles accessible on the links above.
Data on damage by extreme events, including draughts in Slovenia:
http://pxweb.stat.si/pxweb/Database/Environment/27_environment/05_disasters/27089_estimated_damage/27089_estimated_damage.asp
Drought Management Centre for - DMCSEE
The mission of the DMCSEE is to coordinate and facilitate the development, assessment, and application of drought risk management tools and policies in South-Eastern Europe with the goal of improving drought preparedness and reducing drought impacts. Therefore DMCSEE focuses its work on monitoring and assessing drought and assessing risks and vulnerability connected to drought.
For more information on work of the centre:
http://www.dmcsee.eu/ project TCP DMCSEE
http://www.dmcsee.org/
Andreja Sušnik, Gregor Gregorič, Slovenian Environment Agency
andreja.susnik@gov.si; gregor.gregoric@gov.si
On page 8 (text and Map 3.1) , countries with drought ocurence are mentionned. In 2003, Switzerland also experienced a very dry and hot year. See report (german, with english abstract): http://www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen/publikation/00533/index.html?lang=de.
This information should also be added to Figure 3.1
Chapter 6: Switzerland has recently published its Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, in which Water is one of the key issues dealt with.
Information online: http://www.bafu.admin.ch/klimaanpassung/11529/index.html?lang=de (german and french only).
It would be very welcomed if parts of this work could be presented here (Chapter 6 or 4) as a case-study. Details (also text/translations in english) can be provided if needed: please contact monika.schaffner@bafu.admin.ch
Switzerland has also elaborated flood risk management plants: http://www.bafu.admin.ch/naturgefahren/01916/06598/index.html?lang=en
Comments to the background document Thematic Assessment on Vulnerability to water scarcity and droughts
page 7, headline chapter 3
The term „water stress“ need to be defined, because often water stress is used for agriculture/ crops. Very helpful would be a glossary with definition of the most important terms of the report.
page 8, map 3.1, figure 3.1
The simple number of drought events is not significant enough. Droughts caused often by a combination of different reasons. Therefore the analysis of precipitation should be preferred, for example the SPI is used for the characterization of drought situations. To evaluate a change of meteorological parameters is typically used the normal period (1961 - 1990) defined by WMO. The comparison of 10 –years-period is less representative, for instance in the Seventies no droughts in the Balkan regions, Greece or Italy are reported. Please check the link to the maps 3.1, it doesn´t work.
page 20, bullet point "Energy"
This example is not be suitable for water scarcity, because regarding the definition of WEI the duration of water imbalances over a longer time period is crucial. This situation is not given by a single, time limited, summer drought or low water event.
page 25, figure 1 in the box
The figure 1 should describe more in detail. What is the meaning of number 0 – 6? For the comparison of 2 river basins should be used the same scale.
page 35, chapter 4.2.8
This is not an example for droughts or water scarcity. This example shows the effects and ecological problems caused by to less residual water. This problem was already mentioned at the CIS hydropower Workshop. We recommend to delete it here.
p15, fig. 3.5:The precipitation trend 1998-2008 is not representative any more. If one adds the last years after 2008, the trend is actually the opposite as the one shown in the figure, i.e. increasing. Please correct the figure or make a respective note on this fact. I can provide recent rainfall figures if needed.
p25, Figure 2 - vulnerability index map for Cyprus: On the map, the highest values of the vulnerability index (red color) are shown on the (more rainy) mountain villages while the dry areas in the lowland is shown the least vulnerable. This seems a bit odd, and further explanantion (e.g. specify what indicators were used exactly not only the names of the sub-indicators) on how the index was calculated needs to be added to make the meaning of the index (and the map) understandable.
p35, last paragraph on page: reference to "Southern Cyprus" is incorrect. Please use either "Cyprus" or "Republic of Cyprus".