Persistent Organic Pollutants

432 Pages·2003·4.319 MB·English

by  Keith Bull (auth.), H. Fiedler (eds.)

Introduction
Persistent Organic Pollutants are carbon-based chemicals that exhibit character-
istics such as,for example,that they do not break down under environmental
conditions,are semi-volatile,have low solubility in water,and have an inherent
toxicity.The combination of these chemical and physical properties results in
long-range transport and in bioaccumulation of the substances.Consequently,
POPs are found in regions far from where they have been used or released.Due
to their lipophilicity and persistence,they accumulate in the food-chain and high
concentrations have been detected in animals and humans.Acronyms such as
PBTs (persistent bioaccumulative and toxic substances),PTS (persistent toxic
substances) or PEPs (persistent environmental pollutants) have also been used
interchangeably.In a narrower sense,the term “POPs”refers to twelve chemicals
addressed in the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, a
global treaty negotiated under the auspices ofthe United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) in order to eliminate the production and use or release
of POPs. The twelve “Stockholm” POPs are the ten intentionally produced
chemicals aldrin,chlordane,DDT,dieldrin,endrin,heptachlor,mirex,toxaphene,
hexachlorobenzene,and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),and the two uninten-
tionally produced substances polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDD) and
polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDF)1.
The Stockholm Convention has as its objective the protection ofhuman health
and the environment from POPs.The process ofdeveloping the treaty was ini-
tiated in May 1995 by UNEP leading to the adoption of the convention in May
2001 in Stockholm.One year later,151 countries are signatories ofthe Stockholm
Convention.The Convention will come into force after 50 ratifications.
There is a high level ofinterest among governments,international organiza-
tions,environmental and industrial non-governmental organizations,and acad-
emia in addressing POPs issues in a concerted way and searching for solutions
to problems caused by POPs.With a global convention in place,we may move
forward to eliminate POPs,considered by some to be the most toxic man-made
substances.
This volume introduces the history and obligations of the Stockholm Con-
vention as well as its provisions for adding more POPs in the future. It also
covers the POPs Protocol under the Convention on Long-range Transboundary
1The Convention also contains provisions for PCB and HCB as unintentionally produced
substances.
XII Introduction
Air Pollution (LRTAP) ofthe United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.
It addresses the Stockholm POPs and highlights their properties,toxicity,and
occurrence in the environment and provides human data.Chapters are dedicated
to global transport and the fate ofPOPs,inventories,and technical solutions for
the reduction in POPs releases or their destruction.Case studies from three con-
tinents – Asia,Africa,and Central America – provide regional flavor and show
that developing countries have been able to address this class ofchemicals.
The chapters were written by experts highly regarded for their knowledge of
POPs issues; furthermore, they represent different perspectives.As POPs are
global in their impact,this volume also attempts to cover a wider geographical
range and different stages ofindustrial development.
Châtelaine,September 2002 Heidelore Fiedler
CHAPTER 1
Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range
Transboundary Air Pollution on Persistent Organic
Pollutants:The 1998 Agreement for the UNECE Region
Keith Bull
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe,Palais des Nations,1211 Geneva 10,
Switzerland
E-mail:[email protected]
The 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution provides a framework for
detailed agreements on particular substances through Protocols to the Convention.The Pro-
tocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants was adopted by 36Parties in 1998.So far,6countries have
ratified the Protocol,another 10need to do so before it enters into force.The Protocol was the
culmination ofwork under the Convention started in 1989 and led initially by Canada and
Sweden.An ad hoc Working Group under the Convention provided the necessary information
and draft text for the negotiations.The adopted Protocol covers 16substances or groups ofsub-
stances that were selected by a screening procedure followed by negotiations.For most ofthe
substances (aldrin,chlordane,chlordecone,DDT,dieldrin,endrin,heptachlor,hexabromo-
biphenyl,hexachlorobenzene,mirex,PCB,toxaphene) the obligation ofParties is for elimina-
tion ofproduction and use;the substances are mainly pesticides with well-demonstrated per-
sistence and toxicity.For three substances (DDT,HCH,PCB) there are restrictions ofuse,and
for another group of substances (PAHs,dioxins/furans,and hexachlorobenzene) there are
obligations to reduce emissions from specified reference years.A mechanism for selecting sub-
stances to add to the Protocol,through an amendment procedure included in the Protocol,was
agreed separately in a Decision by the Executive Body for the Convention.Amendments are
possible once the Protocol enters into force.Review procedures to ascertain the sufficiency and
effectiveness ofthe obligations are included in the Protocol,the first such review is to be within
three years ofthe Protocol entering into force.
Keywords: Persistent organic pollutants (POPs),Protocol,Convention on Long-range Trans-
boundary Air Pollution
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe . . . . . . 2
3 The Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution . . 3
4 Steps Towards Development ofa Protocol on Persistent Organic
Pollutants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5 The 1998 Aarhus Protocol on POPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6 The Status ofthe Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7 The Future – Implementation and Revision ofthe Protocol . . . . 10
8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
The Handbook ofEnvironmental Chemistry Vol.3,Part O
Persistent Organic Pollutants
(ed.by H.Fiedler)
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003
2 K.Bull
1
Introduction
The 1998 Protocol on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) [1] was adopted by the
Executive Body for the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution
on 24June 1998 in Aarhus (Denmark).It was a regional agreement reached as a
result ofmuch negotiating effort.However,it was a major step towards a global
agreement and provided the basis for further steps in the regional control of
POPs in the future.
The Convention has been the focus for international air pollution controls for
the UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) area over many
years and has played an important role in the emission decreases observed in
Europe and North America in recent years.This paper describes the Protocol,
its content and obligations,within the perspective of the Convention and the
UNECE.It seeks to describe the history ofthe development ofthe Protocol and
indicate the way it will operate in the future.
2
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
The UNECE is one ofthe five regional commissions ofthe United Nations.It in-
cludes countries ofWestern and Eastern Europe,including the Newly Indepen-
dent States (NIS) extending eastwards to countries such as Kazakhstan and Kyr-
gyzstan.The region also includes,despite its name,the United States ofAmerica
and Canada.
Created in 1947 as a United Nations regional organization it struggled in its
early days to bring together “East”and “West”in a spirit of cooperation.After
a difficult initial period the UNECE played a vital role in providing the forum
for discussions and agreement between countries with very different political
and economic systems.Such a framework provided an important platform for
launching agreements such as the Convention on Long-range Transboundary
Air Pollution (CLRTAP).In turn,the Convention played an important role in
promoting a spirit of collaboration on a specific issue which was recognized
by many as one requiring international cooperation to solve effects at a national
level.
The UNECE secretariat,based in Geneva,provides the secretariat support for
a number of multi-lateral environmental conventions,including that on long-
range transboundary air pollution.Indeed CLRTAP identifies the secretariat role
ofthe Executive Secretary ofUNECE in its text (Article11).Members ofthe sec-
retariat support the work ofthe Executive Body ofthe Convention and its sub-
sidiary bodies primarily through the organization ofmeetings and the prepara-
tion of documents. They also provide the necessary links with international
organizations with common goals and interests.
Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution 3
3
The Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
The history ofCLRTAP dates back to the 1960s when there was increasing con-
cern about the effects ofair pollution and it was suggested that long-range effects
were possible.Links were drawn between emissions in Europe and effects on
Scandinavian lakes.In 1972 a United Nations Conference on the Human Envi-
ronment,held in Stockholm,initiated discussions aimed at international coop-
eration to address the effects of acidification.Throughout the 1970s scientific
studies investigated the effects and their cause and clearly demonstrated that air
pollutants could travel for considerable distances and could cause harmful effects
thousands ofkilometres away from the emission sources.The transboundary na-
ture ofthe problem could only be solved by international agreement.
It has been suggested that CLRTAP arose as the result ofa specific “policy win-
dow”resulting from the convergence ofScandinavian concern for the issue and
the will ofthe Soviet Union to find a more binding platform than that ofthe pos-
itive but less binding OECD [2].
The Convention [3] was adopted in Geneva in 1979 and entered into force in
1983 after ratification by 16Parties.The Convention identifies the general prin-
ciples for international cooperation on air pollution abatement and provides an
institutional framework for bringing together science and policy.It provides no
specific commitment to decrease or limit emissions ofany air pollutant,but of-
fers a binding legal framework within which specific agreements could be agreed.
These agreements have taken the form of protocols to the Convention – en-
shrined in documents that have been separately adopted and ratified by Parties
to CLRTAP.
Thirty-three Parties (including the European Community) signed the Con-
vention in 1979.Most ofthese signatories have now ratified the agreement and
several other countries ofthe UNECE region have acceded to the Convention.As
a result there are currently 48Parties (and two signatories that are not Parties)
to the Convention (listed in Table1),from a total of55UNECE states.Non-Par-
ties generally fall into two categories,namely some countries from Eastern Eu-
rope (e.g.,Uzbekistan) and some ofthe smallest states in Europe (e.g.,Andorra).
Since its entry into force CLRTAP has been extended by eight protocols.Five
ofthese [3] have themselves already entered into force having received at least the
necessary number (16) ofratifications:
– The 1984 Protocol on Long-term Financing ofthe Cooperative Programme for
Monitoring and Evaluation ofthe Long-range Transmission ofAir Pollutants
in Europe (EMEP);
– The 1985 Protocol on the Reduction of Sulphur Emissions on their Trans-
boundary Fluxes by at least 30percent;
– The 1988 Protocol concerning the Control ofNitrogen Oxides or their Trans-
boundary Fluxes;
– The 1991 Protocol concerning the Control of Emissions ofVolatile Organic
Compounds or their Transboundary Fluxes;
– The 1994 Protocol on Further Reduction ofSulphur Emissions.
4 K.Bull
Table1. Status ofthe 1998 Aarhus Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) – June 2002
Signature Ratification
Armenia 18.12.1998
Austria 24.06.1998
Belarus
Belgium 24.06.1998
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria 24.06.1998 05.12.2001
Canada 24.06.1998 18.12.1998
Croatia 24.06.1998
Cyprus 24.06.1998
Czech Republic 24.06.1998
Denmark 24.06.1998 06.07.2001
Estonia
Finland 24.06.1998
France 24.06.1998
Georgia
Germany 24.06.1998 25.04.2002
Greece 24.06.1998
Holy See
Hungary 18.12.1998
Iceland 24.06.1998
Ireland 24.06.1998
Italy 24.06.1998
Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan
Latvia 24.06.1998
Liechtenstein 24.06.1998
Lithuania 24.06.1998
Luxembourg 24.06.1998 01.05.2000
Malta
Monaco
Netherlands 24.06.1998 23.06.2000
Norway 24.06.1998 16.12.1999
Poland 24.06.1998
Portugal 24.06.1998
Republic ofMoldovia 24.06.1998
Romania 24.06.1998
Russian Federation
San Marino
Slovakia 24.06.1998
Slovenia 24.06.1998
Spain 25.06.1998
Sweden 24.06.1998 19.01.2000
Switzerland 24.06.1998 14.11.2000
The former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia
Turkey
Ukraine 24.06.1998
United Kingdom ofGreat Britain and Northern Ireland 24.06.1998
United States ofAmerica 24.06.1998
Yugoslavia
European Community 24.06.1998
Total: 36 9
Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution 5
The remaining three protocols,including the 1994 Protocol on Persistent Organic
Pollutants,still await further ratifications before they enter into force:
– The 1998 Protocol on Heavy Metals;
– The 1998 Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and;
– The 1999 Protocol to Abate Acidification,Eutrophication and Ground-level
Ozone.
Over the years,protocols have become increasingly complex,with increasing
amounts oftechnical information provided (usually in the forms ofannexes to
the protocols) to guide Parties in their implementation of each protocol.Early
protocols,whilst recognizing that environmental and human health effects were
important and needed to be addressed,defined obligations in simple terms;per-
centage emission decreases,or a return to previous emission levels,sought to al-
leviate the effects ofair pollutants,but did not link obligations to environmen-
tal goals.
Through the 1990s,however,more attention has been paid to the effects ofair
pollutants.For two protocols,the 1994 Protocol on Further Reduction ofSulphur
Emissions and the 1999 Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and
Ground-level Ozone,effects-based approaches,using critical loads [4] and inte-
grated assessment models [5] have defined Parties obligations by taking account
ofnational emissions,their effect on the environment,and the costs involved in
achieving certain environmental goals.
While neither the 1998 Protocols on Heavy Metals nor that on POPs take an ef-
fects-based approach,as is the case for “first Protocols”for other air pollutants,
they both pay careful regard to the effects ofthe pollutants whose controls they
encompass.
4
Steps Towards Development of a Protocol on Persistent Organic
Pollutants
This section outlines the history ofthe development ofthe Protocol on POPs.For
a more comprehensive description ofevents and a discussion ofthe factors im-
portant for the development and final form ofthe protocol see Selin [6].
The Convention’s attention was first drawn to the issue ofPOPs by the Cana-
dian delegation to the Working Group on Effects in 1989.An official ofthe Cana-
dian Department ofIndian and Northern Affairs presented a paper with the ap-
proval ofEnvironment Canada,the body responsible for the Canadian delegation
at CLRTAP meetings.The Swedish government had similar concerns and,in 1990,
the Working Group on Effects received a further paper for its attention from
Canada together with a proposal from Sweden for the creation ofa Task Force on
complex organic compounds.Subsequently,in November 1990,the Executive
Body ofthe Convention agreed to establish an intergovernmental Task Force on
Persistent Organic Pollutants to be jointly led by Canada and Sweden.The Task
Force was to work under the auspices ofthe Working Group on Technology and
in cooperation with the Working Group on Effects.The Task Force first met in
March 1991.
6 K.Bull
The Task Force on POPs was given the job ofassessing the effects ofPOPs and
the possible need for action to control them.The Task Force set about compiling
the necessary scientific information to prepare a substantive report on POPs.The
lead countries were also able to take the opportunity to promote their interests
and concerns to other Parties to the Convention.At the end of1993,the Execu-
tive Body requested the Task Force to prepare a final report for its session at the
end of1994.The draft report was presented for discussion to a joint meeting of
the Working Group on Technologies and the Working Group on Effects.It was re-
ceived enthusiastically and recommended to the Executive Body.A similar re-
port,from a Task Force on Heavy Metals,was treated similarly.
The Executive Body deliberated upon future actions on both POPs and heavy
metals and decided to set up an ad hoc Preparatory Working Group for each of
the groups ofpollutants.In this way the Executive Body did not commit itselfto
future action but provided the opportunity for further discussions and prepara-
tions to aid the decision-making process regarding future action.Further,the
working groups were to report to the Working Group on Strategies which took
the discussions into a more policy-oriented forum.
The mandate ofthe Preparatory Working Group was to consider an initial list
of substances and control options,consider and assess possible elements for a
future protocol,and develop procedures for the future addition ofsubstances to
such a protocol.It was not a negotiating group but it did take steps to prepare
documents for future consideration by the Working Group on Strategies that was
charged with preparing a draft protocol and begin negotiations when there was
a sound basis for doing so.The work-plan of the Preparatory Working Group,
adopted in 1995,required it to prepare an annotated outline ofa protocol and el-
ements for a draft text,identify criteria for selecting an initial list ofsubstances
and developing proposals for adding substances to the list,as well as options for
annexes and for a basic obligations article for a protocol.It was also expected to
prepare,assemble and review information,hold technical workshops and assess
implications ofdraft commitments.
To arrive at a list of substances the Preparatory Working Group adopted a
screening procedure.It considered a number ofsuch procedures used by coun-
tries and by other bodies but also took into consideration the scope ofthe Con-
vention regarding long-range transport.The three stages to the assessment in-
volved:
1. Evidence of persistence (low vapour pressure,half life in the atmosphere of
more than two days,low biodegradability (less than 30% in 28days;OR mon-
itoring evidence in remote regions);
2. Prioritization scoring based on bioconcentration factors or octanol/water par-
tition coefficients andmammalian or aquatic toxicology;
3. Risk assessment.
One hundred and seven POPs were considered and 87remained after the first
stage.For the second stage a scoring system was used to combine information on
toxicity with that on bioaccumulation.For some substances data were not suffi-
cient,but at this stage 36substances were eliminated and 32forwarded to stage3.
Through consideration ofthe scientific criteria,including properties such as the
Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution 7
Table2. List offourteen substances arrived at through the ad hoc Preparatory Working Group
on POPs screening procedure,and the four borderline substances included for additional con-
sideration (in parentheses)
Pesticides Industrial chemicals Unintentional by-products
Aldrin Hexabromobiphenyl Dioxins
Chlordane PCB Furans
DDT Pentachlorophenol PAHs
Dieldrin (Short-Chain Chlorinated Paraffins)
Endrin
Hexachlorobenzene
Mirex
Toxaphene
(Chlordecone)
(Lindane)
(Heptachlor)
risks from degradation products,together with more socio-economic issues such
as use,production and emissions resulting from these,a risk assessment was
made ofeach substance.The methodology resulted in a list ofjust 14substances
(Table2).
Following subsequent discussions and proposals in the Preparatory Working
Group,the list of14together with another four “border-line”substances (SCCP
– short-chain chlorinated paraffins,heptachlor,chlordecone and lindane) was
put forward for negotiations to the Working Group on Strategies.
In setting the work-plans for the Preparatory Working Group and for the
Working Group on Strategies,the Executive Body stressed the importance of
rapid agreement on a protocol oflimited scope,particularly in view ofthe model
that such a protocol would set for action beyond the region and/or at a global
level.This was with a view to aiding the development ofa global agreement on
POPs that had been started under the auspices ofUNEP.
It was recognized that some mechanism was likely to be required for adding
substances to the lists that would be annexed to the final protocol.For this it was
decided that the Executive Body would make a formal decision on the process
drawing upon the experience gained in the screening and evaluation exercise
used for drawing up the original list.The option for a Decision provided greater
flexibility than incorporating the technical assessment procedures for amend-
ment in the protocol itself,though the formalities for proposing new substances
were considered as an article for the protocol.
Through the subsequent five negotiating meetings in 1997 and 1998,not only
the text,but also the lists ofsubstances to be covered by the protocol were re-con-
sidered and individual substances negotiated for inclusion or exclusion.While
many substances received consensus for inclusion,others were the subject ofne-
gotiations throughout 1997 and into 1998.The final negotiating session took
place in February 1998,and sought to resolve such issues as the formal definition
of PCB,possible DDT and HCB exemptions and the inclusion or exclusion of
pentachlorophenol and SCCP. It agreed on the final list of 16 substances, or
8 K.Bull
Table3. Substances listed in the annexes to the 1998 Protocol on POPs
AnnexI.Substances scheduled for elimination ofproduction and use
Aldrin
Chlordane
Chlordecone
DDT (pp¢-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Hexabromobiphenyl
Hexachlorobenzene
Mirex
PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls)
Toxaphene
AnnexII.Substances scheduled for restrictions on use
DDT
HCH (hexachlorocyclohexane)
PCB
AnnexIII.Substances for which emissions must be reduced
PAH (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons)
Dioxins/furans
Hexachlorobenzene
groups ofsubstances (Table3) comprising eleven pesticides,two industrial chem-
icals and three by-products/contaminants.This session also considered the final
wording of the Executive Body decision on adding substances to the Protocol
once it had entered into force.
At a special meeting ofthe Executive Body in March 1998,Decision 1998/2 was
formally taken on “information to be submitted and procedures for adding sub-
stances into the Protocol”.On 24 June 1998,at the fourth Environment for Europe
Ministerial Conference in Aarhus,Denmark the Executive Body adopted the Pro-
tocol.
5
The 1998 Aarhus Protocol on POPs
The Aarhus Protocol follows the pattern ofmany other such protocols.Follow-
ing a preamble and definitions article,the objective and basic obligations are
spelled out.Article4 then specifies exemptions to the basic obligations.Articles
5 to 9 deal with the operational,technical and scientific issues:exchange ofin-
formation and technology;public awareness;strategies,policies,programmes,
measures and information;research,development and monitoring;and report-
ing.The introduction ofpublic awareness into the Protocol was consistent with
the adoption ofthe Aarhus Convention on Access to Information,Public Partic-
ipation in Decision Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters at the
same Ministerial Conference in 1998.Articles11 and 12 deal with compliance and
settlement of disputes,and Article13 formally identifies the Annexes.Articles