Table of contents
3. Further comments
2. Graphical illustration of the water abstraction by source and sector at the European, regional and country level
-
-
The point has been taken. However, the calculation method should be the same across all sectors. Otherwise, that would have methodological implication on the outcomes of the indicator. On the other hand, European dataset holds large gaps in time series which would create another uncertainity in performing the use of average value as baseline.
For Figure 2, where baseline years are used. Have you though about using 10-year averages in stead. It will give more representative values for agriculture, which can fluctuate greatly depending on whether the weather conditions are wet or dry for the chosen years.
-
-
I agree with the previous comment (10 years averages)
-
I have rapidly compared the France figures to my databases. The orders of magnitude are good, but I can't unterstand why I don't get exactly the same results and trends in my Eurostat tables, based on same breakdowns.
There are significant discrepancies unfortunately I lack the time for a more in-depth comparison.
I would be interested in receiving the detailed data used for France and how it was obtained. I will try to retrieve it from the elements provided-
Dear Manuel, can you please specify in which dataset you identified the inconsistency for France? Because we use compiled dataset from [env_wat_abs] and WISE SoE. We also performed data gap filling where we have gap on any variable. Either we can omit those data you did not reported to Eurostat or WISE, or you may provide your data to be integrated into the database. Please let us know the next step for French data.
I have rapidly compared the France figures to my databases. The orders of magnitude are good, but I can't unterstand why I don't get exactly the same results and trends in my Eurostat tables, based on same breakdowns.
There are significant discrepancies unfortunately I lack the time for a more in-depth comparison.
I would be interested in receiving the detailed data used for France and how it was obtained. I will try to retrieve it from the elements provided
-
3. Gap filling in the dataset
-
Have you considered adding trends to the gap filling routine?
-
No, we did not perform that. We took into account drivers and their potential impact on water demand per sector.
Have you considered adding trends to the gap filling routine?
-
-
Comment from AUSTRIA
Agriculture 1990–2018 (demand for irrigation? Demand for animal husbandry is not included): from 100 Mio to about 14.3 Mio. M³. Data 2010 depend on Agricultural Structure Survey (ASS) 2010, from there on a decline is estimated.
In Austria only a small proportion of the agricultural area is irrigated. Water demand for irrigation mainly depends on the yearly weather conditions. 2010 (the reporting year of ASS) was a year with more than average precipitation therefore the need for irrigation water was very small. In the following years Austria faced different weather conditions including several dry periods. On the contrary to the stipulated decline of irrigation demand irrigable areas have increased in Austria. The extent of irrigated areas and the irrigation volume are not monitored on a yearly basis. Data from the ASS 2020 will hopefully provide more information and also will show the use of surface waters for irrigation.Public water supply 1990–2018 (including supply of households, industry and services): from 608 Mio m³ from GW and 4,4 SW to 611 GW in 2019. According to Wasserschatz this would be between 705 Mio. m³ in 2014 and 744 Mio. m³ in 2018 for the public water supply (excluding 27,6 Mio. m³ for private households with self supply – 126 l/day for 600.000 inhabitants). In 2016 we reported around 660 Mio. m³.
-
Dear Andreas, thanks for this valuable feedback. I will check with the data and try to best accomodate the values you mentioned.
Comment from AUSTRIA
Agriculture 1990–2018 (demand for irrigation? Demand for animal husbandry is not included): from 100 Mio to about 14.3 Mio. M³. Data 2010 depend on Agricultural Structure Survey (ASS) 2010, from there on a decline is estimated.
In Austria only a small proportion of the agricultural area is irrigated. Water demand for irrigation mainly depends on the yearly weather conditions. 2010 (the reporting year of ASS) was a year with more than average precipitation therefore the need for irrigation water was very small. In the following years Austria faced different weather conditions including several dry periods. On the contrary to the stipulated decline of irrigation demand irrigable areas have increased in Austria. The extent of irrigated areas and the irrigation volume are not monitored on a yearly basis. Data from the ASS 2020 will hopefully provide more information and also will show the use of surface waters for irrigation.Public water supply 1990–2018 (including supply of households, industry and services): from 608 Mio m³ from GW and 4,4 SW to 611 GW in 2019. According to Wasserschatz this would be between 705 Mio. m³ in 2014 and 744 Mio. m³ in 2018 for the public water supply (excluding 27,6 Mio. m³ for private households with self supply – 126 l/day for 600.000 inhabitants). In 2016 we reported around 660 Mio. m³.
-
4. Any other comment
-
The attached Excel file does not give an indication about the unit of the figures. Would be good to include the unit into the Readme sheet.
-
Thanks for this feedback. The unit is million m3. We will add it to the ReadMe sheet
The attached Excel file does not give an indication about the unit of the figures. Would be good to include the unit into the Readme sheet.
-
-
Thank you for this consultation in which I was interested and willed to participate. However, I was surprised that it tooks place at the same period as the reportings on water abstraction statistics (for Eurostat and the EEA). Indeed, we were very busy at the moment and until the end of January, unfortunately I lacked of time to deeply analyze data tables of the new indicator.
-
Dear Manuel,
data reporting, processing and computing take a bit time against the work plan. But we will consider your remark in the next update by planing the next update between Q1-Q2 of the respective year.
Thank you for this consultation in which I was interested and willed to participate. However, I was surprised that it tooks place at the same period as the reportings on water abstraction statistics (for Eurostat and the EEA). Indeed, we were very busy at the moment and until the end of January, unfortunately I lacked of time to deeply analyze data tables of the new indicator.
-
For Figure 2, where baseline years are used. Have you though about using 10-year averages in stead. It will give more representative values for agriculture, which can fluctuate greatly depending on whether the weather conditions are wet or dry for the chosen years.