European marine protection agreement aims for zero discharges An agreement signed in July by ministers of 15 European countries in Sintra, Portugal, was hailed by the U.K. deputy prime minister as a historic move to reduce marine pollution in the northeast Atlantic Ocean. However, a spokesperson for British Nuclear Fuels (BNF), which operates England's Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant, conceded that some operations would have to end if the treaty demands zero emissions and that new technologies would be required to achieve more substantial emissions reductions. Following intensive negotiations, parties to the convention of the Oslo and Paris Commissions (OSPAR), which combines 1992 agreements made in Oslo and Paris on marine protection, agreed to aim for "close to zero" concentrations of man-made hazardous substances and artificial radioactive substances in the marine environment. The countries will work to cease "discharges, emissions, and losses" of these substances to the marine environment by 2020. Under a third major agreement, marine disposal of virtually all steel parts of offshore oil installations will be banned The agreements represent a victory for environmental ministers from countries such as Denmark and Sweden, who have been pushing Europe's two main oil producers, the United Kingdom and Norway, and two main nuclear reprocessors, the United Kingdom and France, to sign on to tight new environmental controls. The environmental group Greenpeace welcomed the decisions as a "vindication of decades of campaigning." Greenpeace representatives called the ministerial deal on radioactive discharges the "beginning of the end for nuclear reprocessing." The vast majority of Europe's radioactive discharges to the sea come from the Sellafield plant and units at Dounreay in Scotland and La Hague in France. However, representatives from both BNF and Cogema, which operates the La Hague plant, stressed that ministers had agreed that achieving the objective of close to zero levels of radioactive pollution
should take into account technical feasibility" and "radiological impacts." Both companies said that the agreement sets demanding, but achievable new challenges. Ministers also agreed to a virtually complete ban on the dumping of steel, oil, and gas installations in the North Sea. The only potential exceptions will be footings, the bottom 30 meters of the largest platforms weighing over 10,000 tons. Only 41 of 475 platform footings in the North Sea could be affected by this provision. The agreement follows a policy shift by the United Kingdom, which had been pushing for wider exceptions. U.K. oil and gas industry officials said they are "concerned" by the deal, which seemed to have been based on "political expediency." The U.K. Offshore Operators Association estimates a cost of about $20 billion to remove all structures from the North Sea. Other parts of the Sintra agreement were less controversial but also will have far-reaching, longterm implications for European industries and consumers. The agreement to effectively end discharges of all synthetic hazardous
substances by 2020 will step up pressure for substitution of dangerous chemicals. Under the deal, OSPAR countries will draw up programs and measures by 2002 to control the release of chemicals on a priority list. Ministers also agreed that consumers should be given more information on hazardous substances via product labels. A new annex to the convention lays out a strategy for ecosystem protection and conservation. OSPAR signatories agreed to develop programs and measures to achieve the strategy's aims by 2003. Finally, ministers agreed to "eliminate" eutrophication from anthropogenic nutrient inputs to the marine environment and to "prevent future occurrences." Complementing European Union directives on nitrate pollution and urban wastewater treatment, the agreement requires the identification of eutrophic waters and their status throughout the northeast Atlantic by 2003. —Reprinted with permission from ENDS Environment Daily, Environmental Data Services, Ltd., London (http://www.ends.co.uk, e-mail
[email protected])
"No exceptions" for cleanup in former eastern block Countries in central and eastern Europe applying for membership in the European Union (EU) will be given no special favors on environmental policy, EU environment ministers said at a meeting in Graz, Austria, in July. Applicant countries must do more than just adopt EU laws and regulations. They must make concrete improvements in environmental standards, the ministers warned. The 10 countries seeking membership were told that transition periods would be as short as possible. Martin Bartenstein, the Austrian environment minister, said that while former eastern block countries are now "part of us," it is important that accession countries adapt national standards to EU levels. EU ministers estimated that environmental improvements would cost around $130 billion in the five applicant countries—namely, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, and Slovenia—involved in the first wave of EU expansion. According to Bartenstein, the EU will contribute nearly $1.2 billion annually after 2000 to help applicant countries bring their environmental practices up to EU standards. These funds are in addition to more than $5.8 million allotted for environmentally related improvements in agriculture. However, Slovenian environment minister Pavel Ganter said he estimated his country would need nearly $3 billion to implement all EU environmental directives. "And we are better off than the other countries wanting to join the Union," he said. "There has to be a transition period . . . . It is by no means certain that all the directives can be fulfilled to the letter." —Reprinted with permission from ENDS Environment Daily, Environmental Data Services, Ltd., London (http://www.ends.co.uk, e-mail
[email protected])
4 4 8 A • OCT. 1, 1998 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
