International
Treaty signed to clean up Mediterranean Protocol aims at reducing and controlling pollution that originates on land, which makes up about 85% of all pollutants entering sea Dermot A. O'Sullivan C&EN, London
In the next few weeks, the first wave of the annual migration of tourists will head toward the Mediterranean Sea. Their destination will be the sunand fun-spots that abound on its coastline. Before summer ends, more than 100 million people will have visited there. If the pattern of past years is repeated, many will suffer an intestinal ailment, or a skin or eye infection, during their stay. Some luckless ones will contract viral hepatitis, dysentery, typhoid, or poliomyelitis. These and other debilitating diseases are endemic to the region. And there might be an outbreak of cholera. Pollution of one form or another provides the grim backdrop to an otherwise lovely area. Now, however, the countries that rim the Mediterranean have taken a positive step to reverse the trend. In Athens last month, representatives of these countries adopted a protocol that pledges them to "take all appropriate measures to prevent, abate, and control pollution of the Mediterranean Sea caused by discharges from rivers, coastal establishments or outfalls, or emanating from any other land-based sources within their territories" (C&EN, May 26, page 12). The treaty is significant. It is the first to deal directly with pollution of the Mediterranean that originates on land. Such pollution constitutes about 85% of all pollutants entering the sea and comprises industrial wastes, municipal sewage, and fertilizers and pesticides from agricultural operations. Some of the harmful chemicals originate at sources hundreds of miles inland. In a few cases, they come from countries not directly associated with the Mediterranean, such as Bulgaria and Switzerland. 10 C&EN June 2, 1980
people who live along the sea. So they have to do it." There are three annexes to the treaty in its present form. The first lists materials that will be prohibited from entering the sea because of their inherent toxicity, persistence in the environment, or accumulation in the food chain. Included in this so-called "black list" are organic chemicals containing halogens, phosphorus, or tin; mercury, cadmium, and their compounds; waste lubricating oils; nondegradable synthetic products; substances that are carcinogenic, teratogenic, or mutagenic; and radioactive isotopes. The second annex comprises a wide assortment of substances generally accepted as being less noxious than the first, or that are rendered harmless more readily by natural processes. Cited in this "grey list" are 21 elements, ranging from antimony and arsenic to vanadium and zinc, as well as compounds made from them; cyanides and fluorides; biologically harmful organosilicones; hydrocarbons and crude oil; nonbiodegradable surfactants; and pathogens. The second annex also includes thermal discharges, substances that affect the taste and smell of seafood, chemicals that can cause eutrophication, acids and alkalies "of such composition and in such quantity that they may impair the quality of the seawater," and products that "though nontoxic, may become harmful to the marine environment owing to the quantities in which they are discharged." Although the grey list materials are deemed less critical than those of the black list, their release into the Mediterranean from land-based sources will be strictly limited. Parties to the treaty have pledged to "elaborate and implement suitable programs and measures" to check the discharges, which will be subject to a licensing procedure. An outline of the considerations to be taken into account is spelled out in the third annex. Factors that will be evaluated are a waste's composition Chemist identifies heavy metals in marineand characteristics, its potential environmental samples using atomic ab-harmfulness, and the physical state of sorption spectroscopy at chemistry de-the discharge site and of the receiving partment of International Laboratory of marine environment. Marine Radioactivity in Monaco There is provision for including an
The cleanup will not come cheap. It could cost as much as $15 billion over the next 10 to 15 years. Nevertheless, so critical do the governments of the Mediterranean states view the problem that representatives of 11 of the 15 countries who attended the conference in Athens (Albania, Egypt, and Syria didn't show up), together with those of the European Communities, put their signatures to the treaty immediately following the meeting. Those of the other four of the 18 countries in the region promised to follow suit. "They didn't undertake to do this for any altruistic reason," admits Stjepan Keckes, director of the regional seas program of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) at his office in Geneva. "They felt that pollution coming from land-based sources is hitting them first and foremost. Each country is generating it. And no country escapes from it because the Mediterranean is shared by all of them. The main issue was to adopt a joint approach to control this pollution. "The decision by the countries to clean up the Mediterranean springs from very selfish reasons. If they don't do it, they will ruin their tourist industry and the health of their own
additional annex. This will deal with pollutants that are borne on the wind from land and deposited in the sea. There still are a number of unknowns surrounding this source of pollution. A working party has been set up to evaluate the situation and to propose some guidelines. The protocol document, in Arabic, English, French, and Spanish, contains 16 articles besides the three annexes. These articles define in legal terms the specifics of the treaty. One calls for scientific and technical cooperation among the countries "related to pollution from land-based sources, particularly research on inputs, pathways, and effects of the pollutants and on development of new methods for their treatment, reduction, or elimination." . Another states that countries "shall inform one another [through UNEP] of measures taken, of results achieved, and, if the case arises, of difficulties encountered in the application" of the protocol. The kind of information to be shared includes statistical and monitoring data, and the quantities of pollutants discharged from each country. "Signing a treaty is one thing. Ratifying and implementing it is quite another," cautions Patricia BlissGuest, who is in charge of UNEP's regional seas legal activities. She was coordinator of the recent Athens meeting, overseeing the day-to-day activities that led up to it and serving as its secretary. "I think it is reasonable to predict that the Athens treaty will enter into force after a few years—two, maybe three," she says. Keckes agrees. "The spirit was terrific at Athens," he remarks. "Even for us it was surprising. Countries that have been hesitant and harbored some doubts about where the agreement would lead were very outspoken in its favor. We had expected that five or six country representatives would sign at the end of the meeting. As it turned out, 12 signed on the spot, 11 countries and EC." This positive approach by countries on matters pertaining to the health of the Mediterranean Sea stems from their experience with ongoing collaborative actions. In 1975, UNEP catalyzed adoption of the Mediterranean Action Plan. This has served as the basic for development of a comprehensive environmental program involving the Mediterranean coastal states together with a number of specialized UN bodies such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). The following year, the Convention
Keckes: selfish reasons for decision
for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution was signed in Barcelona (C&EN, Feb. 23,1976, page 19). Commonly referred to as the Barcelona convention, it set out the legal framework for the cooperative regional program. It also provided for the formulation of protocols relating to specific aspects of Mediterranean pollution. Two such protocols were adopted at Barcelona. One concerns the prevention of pollution by dumping from ships and aircraft. The other relates to combating pollution by oil and other harmful substances in cases of emergency. The most recent protocol dealing with land-based sources was foreshadowed in the convention. The next step will be for the countries involved to ratify the new protocol at the national government level. It becomes legally binding when at least six of the countries do so. "The reason it takes several years to agree on the terms of a protocol is that it takes time to adapt national legislation," Keckes says. "We have been very lucky in connection with the Mediterrarçean treaties. The Barcelona convention was ratified within two years. This was extraordinary. If you look at other international protocols, five or 10 years usually elapse before they enter into force. That's the more normal period. So we hope that the speed Mediterranean governments have shown in ratifying the Barcelona convention and the first two protocols will be the same here. This is why I think it is reasonable to expect it to happen within three years." A considerable amount of effort has gone into laying the groundwork for the new protocol, notes Richard L. Helmer, a water quality expert on assignment to UNEP from WHO. "Government representatives were
saying that, in case of land-based sources of pollution, they didn't know what the protocol would mean in practical terms, what the participating countries would have to do as a followup. We have had a series of meetings. On one side, legal aspects were discussed. We also evaluated technical projects." One of the projects is called MED POL X. It is one of 13 studies within the coordinated Mediterranean Pollution Monitoring & Research Program UNEP undertook as part of the Mediterranean Action Plan. MED POL X's objective was to collect information on the type and quantity of pollution loads entering the sea from major land-based sources, together with the current status of waste disposal and management practices in the region. Six UN agencies collaborated—WHO, FAO, and UNIDO, together with the Economic Commission for Europe, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the UN Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization. "This was a very detailed study to find out which types of pollution sources there are, how much pollution was entering the [Mediterranean] Sea from cities along the coast, from industries, from nuclear power stations, from rivers and agricultural runoffs," explains Helmer, who coordinated the project. "It showed that rivers carry about 80% of all persistent hazardous chemicals into the sea." Then followed a program to develop principles and guidelines for the discharge of wastewaters into the sea and coastal water. And the International Register of Potentially Toxic Chemicals, part of UNEP, drew up a compendium of data profiles for toxic chemicals. It was used to evaluate their potential hazards to Mediterranean ecosystems. Much still remains to be done to get the new protocol to the point where it can work. "Right now, it's only a piece of paper," Helmer points out. "Each item listed in the annexes is just a name. Now we have to work out what the problems are for the black list and grey list products. Then there have to be developed guidelines, model codes of practice, regulations, etc., for the discharges. The technical work ahead is enormous." Nevertheless, Keckes is pleased with the way things are progressing. "The signing of the treaty in Athens marks a turning point in the rising tide of pollution," he says. "By the end of this decade, I believe that we will have reversed the trend of pollution and be in a position to limit and control it. If we can make the Mediterranean a clean and safer place we will have reason to be satisfied." D June 2, 1980 C&EN
11
