Needs for reliable analytical methods for monitoring chemical pollutants in surface water under the European Water Framework Directive

Lepom, Peter; Brown, Bruce; Hanke, Georg; Loos, Robert; Quevauviller, Philippe; Jan, Wollgast

doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2008.06.017

Cited by 120 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First of all, chemicals are typically measured in the environment at trace levéis, the collection of sufficiently representative samples may be extremely difficult and, sometimes, analytical procedures are not sufficiently Consolidated, and do not provide sufficient quality assurance (e.g. Lepom et al, 2009;Quevauviller et al, 2007).…”

Section: The Evaluation Of Spatially Explicit Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatially explicit multimedia fate models for pollutants in Europe: State of the art and perspectives

Pistocchi

Sarigiannis

Vizcaino

2010

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keywords:Spatially explicit fate models GIS Data assimilation Analytical solutions Simplifl catión A review by Hollander et al. (in preparation), discusses the relative potentials, advantages and shortcomings of spatial and non spatial models of chemical fate, highlighting that spatially explicit models may be needed for specific purposes. The present paper revie ws the state of the art in spatially explicit chemical fate and transport modeling in Europe. We summarize the three main approaches currently adopted in spatially explicit modeling, namely (1) múltiple box models, (2) numerical solutions of simultaneous advection-dispersion equations (ADE) in air, soil and water, and (3) the development of meta-models. As all three approaches experience lfmitations, we describe in further detail geographic information system (GlS)-based modeling as an alternative approach allowing a simple, yet spatially explicit description of chemical fate. We review the input data needed, and the options available for their retrieval at the European scale. We also discuss the fmportance of, and lfmitations in model evaluation. We observe that the high uncertainty in chemical emissions and physico-chemical behavior in the environment make realistic simulations difficult to obtain. Therefore we envisage a shift in model use from process simulation to hypothesis testing, in which explaining the discrepancies between observed and computed chemical concentrations in the environment takes fmportance over prediction per se. This shift may take advantage of using simple models in GIS with residual uses of complex models for detailed studies. It also calis for tighter joint interpretation of models and spatially disfributed monitoring datase ts, and more refined spatial representation of environmental drivers such as landscape and climate variables, and better emission estimates. In summary, we conclude that the problem is not "how to compute" (i.e. emphasis on numerical methods, spatial/temporal discretization, quantitative uncertainty and sensitivity analysis...) but "what to compute" (i.e. emphasis on spatial disfribution of emissions, and the depiction of appropriate spatial patterns of environmental drivers).

show abstract

Section: The Evaluation Of Spatially Explicit Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatially explicit multimedia fate models for pollutants in Europe: State of the art and perspectives

Pistocchi

Sarigiannis

Vizcaino

2010

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lepom et al [3] concluded that there were no consistent procedures on how to deal with samples containing substantial amounts of SPM (up to 500 mg/L), implying that most methods have not been validated for such kinds of water sample. This part of the study will be done using methods developed in the previous tasks.…”

Section: Development Of Measurement Methods For Pahs In Whole Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…European and International standards have been reviewed by Lepom et al [3] in order to answer the following specific question, among others: ''Are the existing standard methods applicable to the analysis of wholewater samples as required by the WFD?''. Lepom et al [3] concluded that there were no consistent procedures on how to deal with samples containing substantial amounts of SPM (up to 500 mg/L), implying that most methods have not been validated for such kinds of water sample.…”

Section: Development Of Measurement Methods For Pahs In Whole Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For reliable contaminants measurements at the EQS level, the Directive 2009/90/EC (QA/QC Directive) [2] requires analytical methods for laboratory tests which can reach a limit of quantification (LOQ) equal to or lower than 30 % of EQS with measurement uncertainty less than 50 % at EQS. Such methods do not exist for all the priority pollutants [3]. Some European harmonized methods are already available through CEN/TC230 "Water analysis" and ISO/TC147 "Water quality" for a large number of substances but all are not compatible with the WFD in terms of the LOQ and applicability to whole water sample.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Joint Research Project env08 “Traceable measurements for monitoring critical pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC”

Cabillic

Hein

Lehnik-Habrink

et al. 2013

16th International Congress of Metrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Joint Research Project ENV08 "Traceable measurements for monitoring critical pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC" is a multi-partner trans-national project within the targeted call "Environment" of the European Metrology Research Programme (EMRP). The EMRP represents a metrology-focused European programme of coordinated research and development that facilitates closer integration of national research programmes. ENV08 deals with the grand challenges for multidisciplinary metrology in environment meeting "the most urgent industrial and societal needs" as stated in the EMRP Outline 2008. The project aims to provide reference methods capable of analysing priority hazardous substances specified in the WFD at the proposed low environmental quality standard concentrations in the body of ground, surface and coastal waters. In addition, ENV08 will answer the need for accuracy and comparability of measurements for the end users capabilities assessment by developing concepts for reference materials. ENV08 is coordinated by BAM (Germany) and involves 14 European institutes. Five institutes work on the development of a validated measurement procedure for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) in whole water samples at a concentration level required by the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). BackgroundThe control of water pollution is an important issue with a large impact on human health and the environment. The European Water Framework Directive (WFD), Directive 200/60/EC [1], establishes a legal framework to protect and restore clean water across Europe. It specifies a list of 33 priority water pollutants which present a significant risk to or via the aquatic environment. According to the WFD, "good chemical status" for a water body is obtained when the priority substances concentrations in water, sediments or biota are below the Environmental Quality Standards (EQS). For reliable contaminants measurements at the EQS level, the Directive 2009/90/EC (QA/QC Directive) [2] requires analytical methods for laboratory tests which can reach a limit of quantification (LOQ) equal to or lower than 30 % of EQS with measurement uncertainty less than 50 % at EQS. Such methods do not exist for all the priority pollutants [3]. Some European harmonized methods are already available through CEN/TC230 "Water analysis" and ISO/TC147 "Water quality" for a large number of substances but all are not compatible with the WFD in terms of the LOQ and applicability to whole water sample.The WFD implementation strongly depends on the availability of primary analytical methods and materials for the priority substances specified in the Directive. Both are essential to provide traceability of the test laboratories results and to assure EU-wide comparable measurement results for waters assessments as required in the WFD. It also requires the water quality monitoring to be performed by methods that are in line with the CEN/ISO standards or with other national or international standards. This will ensure ...

show abstract

“…Even though analytical methods for many of the priority pollutants exist, most of them are not validated for the presence of high amounts of suspended particulate matter (SPM) [6]. This can lead to an important underestimation of concentrations in the whole water because the analytes are tenaciously bound to the particles [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaction of 15 priority substances for water monitoring at ng L−1 levels with glass, aluminium and fluorinated polyethylene bottles for the containment of water reference materials

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Certified water reference materials are currently not available for most of the hydrophobic organic pollutants listed in the EU Water Framework Directive. To find the most suitable container type for subsequent reference material productions, feasibility studies for the preparation of waters with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and tributyltin (TBT) close to environmental quality standards in water have been performed. Due to the hydrophobic nature of these compounds and their tendency to adsorb onto container walls, an adequate selection of the most appropriate material for containment, storage and transport of water reference materials is crucial. Three different materials (aluminium, amber glass and fluorinated polyethylene, FPE) and three volumes (500/600 mL, 1000/1200 mL and 2000/3000 mL, depending on commercial availability) were tested at ng L -1 level of the target compounds. FPE shows by far the highest loss of analytes due to adsorption onto the container walls for all compounds studied. Aluminium and glass are equally suited for PAHs and PBDEs, but aluminium is unsuitable as container material for TBT due to acid cleaning requirements. The volume of the containers had no dramatic effect on the adsorption behaviour of target compounds for the different volumes tested.

show abstract

Needs for reliable analytical methods for monitoring chemical pollutants in surface water under the European Water Framework Directive

Cited by 120 publications

References 80 publications

Spatially explicit multimedia fate models for pollutants in Europe: State of the art and perspectives

Spatially explicit multimedia fate models for pollutants in Europe: State of the art and perspectives

Joint Research Project env08 “Traceable measurements for monitoring critical pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC”

Interaction of 15 priority substances for water monitoring at ng L−1 levels with glass, aluminium and fluorinated polyethylene bottles for the containment of water reference materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About