Personal tools

next
previous
items

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Sound and independent information
on the environment

191 items matching your search terms.
Filter the results.
Item type























































































New items since



Sort by relevance · date (newest first) · alphabetically
Indicator Assessment chemical/x-pdb Chemical status (WFD 002) - Assessment DRAFT created Apr 2013
This indicator summarises the results from the Water Framework (WFD) River  Basin Management Plans (RBMP) on chemical status of groundwater and surface waters. The results should be interpreted cautiously, since chemical monitoring as reported in the first RBMPs was incomplete, and information is not always comparable between Member States.  The results from the first showed: Poor chemical status for groundwater, by area, is about 25 % across Europe. A total of 16 Member States have more than 10 % of groundwater bodies in poor chemical status; this figure exceeds 50 % in four Member States. Excessive levels of nitrate are the most frequent cause of poor groundwater status across much of Europe.   Poor chemical status for rivers, lakes, and transitional and coastal waters does not exceed 10 %, aggregated across Europe as a whole. Notably, the chemical status of many of Europe’s surface waters remains unknown, ranging between one third of lakes and more than half of transitional waters. A total of 10 Member States report poor chemical status in more than 20 % of rivers and lakes with known chemical status, whilst this figure rises to above 40 % in five Member States. A total of 10 Member States report poor chemical status in more than 20 % of rivers and lakes with known chemical status, whilst this figure rises to above 40 % in five Member States.   Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are a widespread cause of poor status in rivers. Heavy metals are also a significant contributor to poor status in rivers and lakes, with levels of mercury in Swedish freshwater biota causing 100 % failure to reach good chemical status. Industrial chemicals such as the plasticiser di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and pesticides also constitute widespread causes of poor chemical status in rivers.  Six Member States report poor chemical status in transitional waters to be more than 50 % of the water bodies with known chemical status. PAHs, the antifouling biocide tributyltin (TBT) and heavy metals are the most common culprits.  Six Member States report all their coastal waters as having good chemical status, although in five others, poor chemical status exceeds 90 % of those water bodies with a known chemical status. A variety of pollutant groups contribute to poor status in coastal waters, reflecting a diverse range of sources.
Located in Data and maps Indicators Chemical status
Indicator Assessment chemical/x-pdb Ecological status or potential (WFD 003) - Assessment DRAFT created Apr 2013
More than half of the surface water bodies in Europe are reported to be in less than good ecological status or potential, and will need mitigation and/or restoration measures to meet the WFD objective.  River water bodies and transitional waters are reported to have worse ecological status or potential than water bodies in lakes and coastal waters.
Located in Data and maps Indicators Ecological status or potential
GIS Map Application Biological elements in rivers and lakes
This viewer with 4 maps shows the ecological status (i.e. status or potential) of macroinvertebrates and phytobenthos in European rivers (i.e. rivers and canals) potentially impacted by general degradation and of macrophytes and phytobenthos in European lakes (i.e. lakes and reservoirs) potentially impacted by eutrophication, respectively. The ecological status class of a country's waterbodies (or stations) is assessed by each country according to their national classification system, following the Water Framework Directive. The assessment may be based by one or more samples measured during the year of reporting. The ecological status in rivers or lakes is displayed as classified cartograms in a country-level map: it displays the distribution of status classes per country as one pie chart for each country. This can be used to compare the situation in your country with that in other countries. When the map is zoomed in to a more detailed scale individual station points are visible instead of classified cartograms.
Located in Environmental topics Water Interactive maps and data viewers by category
Figure Potential physical, cultural and social impact of climate change
(Physical) Combined potential impacts of changes in inundation heights of a 100 year river flood event and a sea level rise adjusted 100 year coastal storm surge event and changes in flash flood potential on settlements, major roads, railways, airports, harbours, thermal power stations and refineries. (Social) Combined potential impacts of changes in inundation heights of a 100 year river flood event and a sea level rise adjusted 100 year coastal storm surge event as well as changes in flash flood potential and summer heat on population. (Cultural) Combined potential impacts of changes in inundation heights of a 100 year river flood event and a sea level rise adjusted 100 year coastal storm surge event on registered World Heritage sites and museums.
Located in Data and maps Maps and graphs
Figure Projected change in average annual and seasonal river flow
Projected change in mean annual and seasonal river flow between the climate change scenario (SRES A1B, 2071-2100) and the control period (1961-1990). Simulations with LISFLOOD based on an ensemble of 11 RCMs.
Located in Data and maps Maps and graphs
Figure Water temperature of large European rivers and lakes
Annual average water temperature in River Rhine and River Meuse (1911–2010); River Danube (1901–1998), Lake Võrtsjärv (1947–2011), and average water temperature in August in Lake Saimaa, Finland (1924–2011).
Located in Data and maps Maps and graphs
Figure Projected change in river floods with a return period of 100 years
Projected change in the level of a 100-year maximum level of river discharge between the reference period 1961–1990 and the 2020s (left), 2050s (centre) and 2050s (right) based on an ensemble of 12 RCM simulations with LISFLOOD for the SRES A1B scenario.
Located in Data and maps Maps and graphs
Figure Projected change in minimum river flow with return period of 20 years
Relative change in minimum river flow for a) 2020s, b) 2050s and c) 2080s compared to 1961-1990 for SRES A1B scenario.
Located in Data and maps Maps and graphs
Figure Trend in median total ammonium, total phosphorus and nitrate concentration of river water bodies, grouped by ecological status/potential class
Concentrations are expressed as a median of annual mean concentrations. Up to three-year gaps of missing values have been interpolated or extrapolated. Only complete series with no missing values after this interpolation/extrapolation are included. The number of time series/river stations is shown in parentheses. The trend for 1992 to 2010 for each of the ecological quality classes has been linearly extended to 2027 — or when the concentration level becomes negative.
Located in Data and maps Maps and graphs
Figure D source code Conservation status of river and lake habitat types and species, and conservation status of coastal and transitional waters habitat types of European interest
-
Located in Data and maps Maps and graphs
European Environment Agency (EEA)
Kongens Nytorv 6
1050 Copenhagen K
Denmark
Phone: +45 3336 7100