Green Car Congress  
Go to GCC Discussions forum About GCC Contact  RSS Subscribe Twitter headlines

« Lincoln unveils MKC Concept at Detroit Show, targeting fast growing small luxury utility segment | Main | China to join International Renewable Energy Agency »

Print this post

Final session on international mercury convention this week expected to culminate in agreement; UNEP Global Mercury Assessment 2013 finds industrial source Hg emissions may be rising

13 January 2013

Unep-hg
Comparison of Hg emissions in 2005 and 2010, by selected sector and region. Unintentional emission sectors: Coal burning, ferrous- and non-ferrous (Au, Cu, Hg, Pb, Zn) metal production, cement production. Intentional-use sectors: Disposal and incineration of product waste, cremation emissions, chlor-alkali industry. Source: UNEP. Click to enlarge.

The fifth and final session of negotiations on the establishment of an international mercury convention—International Negotiating Committee on Mercury (INC5)—is taking place this coming week in Geneva. The session is expected to culminate in the adoption of a new convention by the 147 states attending the session to reduce mercury emissions and releases to the air, water and land.

Mercury (Hg)—the only metal that is liquid at standard conditions for temperature and pressure—is very volatile and highly toxic to humans and animals when inhaled or ingested. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates that 1,960 tonnes of mercury arising from human activities are currently emitted annually into the atmosphere, generated mainly by artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM)—the largest single anthropogenic source globally—and coal- or lignite-fired power plants. This heavy metal is persistent and is dispersed throughout the world by atmospheric transport. Apart from contaminated sites, the mercury pollution detected today is often found in locations very far away from its original source.

INC5 comes several days after UNEP released a new assessment showing that communities in developing countries are facing increasing health and environmental risks linked to exposure to mercury.

UNEP produced its first Global Mercury Assessment in 2002 and a subsequent study in 2007. The 2013 assessment is the most comprehensive to date, and includes information on the release and impacts of mercury in aquatic environments for the first time. Key findings of the report include:

  • Total anthropogenic emissions of mercury to the atmosphere in 2010 are estimated at 1,960 tonnes. Despite recent progress in improving the available knowledge base, the report notes, the emissions estimate still has large associated uncertainties, giving a range of 1,010-4,070 tonnes. The work also identifies potentially important sectors that are not yet quantified, including use of mercury in vinyl-chloride monomer production; secondary metals production and ferro-alloys; oil and gas extraction and transport; and industrial and some hazardous waste incineration.

  • Present day anthropogenic emissions contribute to both current and future emissions to the air. Current anthropogenic sources are responsible for about 30% of annual emissions of mercury to air. Another 10% comes from natural geological sources, and the rest (60%) is from ‘re-emissions’ of previously released mercury that has built up over decades and centuries in surface soils and oceans. Although the original source of this re-emitted mercury cannot be determined with certainty, the fact that anthropogenic emissions have been larger than natural emissions since the start of the industrial age about 200 years ago implies that most re-emitted mercury was originally from anthropogenic sources, the report says. Reducing current anthropogenic sources is therefore vital to reduce the amount of mercury that is cycling in the environment.

  • Artisanal and small-scale gold mining and coal burning are the major sources of anthropogenic mercury emissions to air. The 2013 assessment inventory confirms the role of artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM) and coal burning as the largest sources of anthropogenic emissions, followed by the production of ferrous and non-ferrous metals, and cement production.

    ASGM mercury emissions are estimated at 727 tonnes, making this the largest sector accounting for more than 35% of total anthropogenic emissions. This is more than twice the figure from this sector in 2005, however, most of the increase is attributed to some new and better information. For example, West Africa was thought in 2005 to have minimal ASGM activity but is now recognized as an important source region. It is thus difficult to determine whether actual emissions from this sector have changed because their estimation involves a great deal of uncertainty. Much of the activity is unregulated or even illegal, and thus reliable official data are still hard to obtain, according to the report.

    Coal burning emitted some 475 tonnes of mercury in 2010, the majority of which is from power generation and industrial use. The estimate of emissions from other coal burning (including domestic and residential burning) is lower than that reported in the previous global assessment, due to differences in estimates of the amounts and mercury content of coal burned in these uses.

    (These global percentages will, of course, vary on a regional basis. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for example, notes that coal-burning power plants are the largest human-caused source of mercury emissions to the air in the United States, accounting for more 50% of all US domestic human-caused mercury emissions.)

    Use of coal for power generation and industry is increasing, especially in Asia. However, wider use of air pollution controls and more stringent regulations in several countries, together with improved combustion efficiency, have reduced emissions from coal-burning power plants, helping to offset most of the increase arising from higher coal consumption, the report found.

  • Other highlighted sources of mercury include: consumer products such as electronic devices, switches, batteries, energy-efficient light bulbs and cosmetics such as skin-lightening creams and mascara; around 340 tonnes of mercury are used annually to make fillings and other dental products, of which up to 100 tonnes are likely to enter the waste stream; plastic production, particularly the manufacture of poly vinyl chloride (PVC; chlor-alkali industry (production of chlorine and caustic soda from salt); and primary mining—although the practice is now limited to a handful of countries with only one (Kyrgyzstan) still exporting.

  • Global anthropogenic mercury emissions from industrial sources may be rising. Emissions to air are thought to have peaked in the 1970s, declined over the following two decades, and have been relatively stable between 1990 and 2005, despite some indications of slight increases in emissions between 2000 and 2005.

    A preliminary re-calculation, using the improved methodology, of global anthropogenic emissions in 2005 indicates that emissions from fossil fuel combustion, metal and cement production increased between 2005 and 2010, but continue to decline in other sectors such as the chlor-alkali industry. Overall, indications are that emissions from industrial sectors have increased again since 2005.

  • Comparing emissions estimates reported under different reporting systems is not straightforward. The 2010 global inventory results were generally consistent with nationally reported emissions estimates for 2010, providing a degree of confidence in the methods used. However, comparing estimates for individual countries and sectors is complicated by differences in reporting methods, in particular the specification and categorization of sectors used in different national and international reporting systems.

  • Asia contributes almost half of global anthropogenic mercury emissions. Increasing industrialization has made Asia the main source region of mercury emissions to air, with East and Southeast Asia accounting for about 40% of the global total, and South Asia for a further 8%.

    The new data on ASGM and the related increase in emission estimates from this sector have increased South America and sub-Saharan Africa’s share of global emissions. However, modeling results continue to indicate that East Asia is the dominant source region for long-range airborne mercury transport worldwide.

  • Anthropogenic releases of mercury to water total 1000 tonnes at a minimum. Previous UNEP global mercury assessments considered only atmospheric emissions. Three types of sources of aquatic releases were considered. Point sources are industrial sites such as power plants or factories, and they release an estimated 185 tonnes of mercury per year. Contaminated sites, including old mines, landfills, and waste disposal locations, release 8 - 33 tonnes per year. Artisanal and small-scale gold mining was evaluated separately, with total releases to water and land totaling more than 800 tonnes per year.

    Deforestation mobilizes another 260 tonnes of mercury into rivers and lakes. Other sources remain to be quantified, and so these estimates comprise only a partial total. Thus, anthropogenic releases to waters are likely to be at least 1000 tonnes per year.

  • Mercury concentrations in the oceans and in marine animals have risen due to anthropogenic emissions. Anthropogenic emissions and releases have doubled the amount of mercury in the top 100 meters of the world’s oceans in the last 100 years. Concentrations in deeper waters have increased by only 10-25%, because of the slow transfer of mercury from surface waters into the deep oceans.

    In some species of Arctic marine animals, mercury content has increased by 12 times on average since the pre-industrial period. This increase implies that, on average, over 90% of the mercury in these marine animals today comes from anthropogenic sources.

  • Monitoring capability continues to improve, but whether this can be sustained is uncertain. Existing mercury monitoring networks such as the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP), the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), the North American Mercury Deposition Network (NAMDN), and others in the northern hemisphere have been complemented by new monitoring sites in the southern hemisphere, in particular, some sites established under the Global Mercury Observing System (GMOS) initiative. The longer-term status of many of the newly established sites however depends on availability of sustained funding to continue operations.

  • Anthropogenic emissions and releases over time have increased mercury loads in the environment, so the effects of reductions in emissions will often take time to become apparent.

    Large amounts of mainly inorganic mercury have accumulated in the environment, in particular in surface soils and in the oceans, as a result of past emissions and releases. Owing to their larger volumes, intermediate and deep ocean waters below 100 metres actually store much larger tonnages of anthropogenic mercury than surface waters. There are also relatively large tonnages of natural mercury circulating in the intermediate and deep waters. A significant fraction of the mercury in intermediate waters is recycled back to the surface each year by upwellings.

    Today’s anthropogenic emissions continue to load the oceans, and the catchments and sediments of lakes and rivers, with inorganic mercury. This mercury, which is the “feed-stock” for toxic methylmercury production, is stored and re-cycled in the bioavailable part of the environment for decades or centuries before it eventually is removed by natural processes. One consequence is that there will likely be a time-lag of years or decades, depending on the part of the water column, before emissions reductions begin to have a demonstrable effect on mercury levels throughout the environment and in the fish and marine mammals which are part of the human food-chain.

    At the same time, mercury levels in parts of the Atlantic Ocean are decreasing, likely due to reduced emissions in past decades in North America and Europe, indicating that emissions reductions can eventually lead to decreases in mercury levels in surface oceans.

Global climate change may also complicate the response of global ecosystems to mercury emission reductions, through its profound effects on many aspects of the movement and chemical transformations of mercury in the environment. For example, warmer temperatures may increase rates of organic productivity in freshwater and marine ecosystems, and rates of bacterial activity, possibly leading to faster conversion of inorganic mercury to methylmercury. Thawing of the enormous areas of northern frozen peatlands may release globally-significant amounts of long-stored mercury and organic matter into Arctic lakes, rivers and ocean.

—Global Mercury Assessment 2013

Along with a parallel UNEP publication Mercury: Time to Act, the new assessment will be formally presented at INC5.

Mercury, which exists in various forms, remains a major global, regional and national challenge in terms of threats to human health and the environment. In 2009 at the UNEP Governing Council, nations agreed to launch negotiations for a legally binding treaty aimed at bringing down releases from sources such as industry and mining, address mercury-containing products, and tackle historical pollution sites-the final negotiations begin in just a few days' time.

Mercury has been known as a toxin and a hazard for centuries-but today we have many of the alternative technologies and processes needed to reduce the risks for tens of millions of people, including pregnant mothers and their babies. A good outcome can also assist in a more sustainable future for generations to come.

—United Nations Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner

The agreement. The draft convention regulates in particular:

  • the supply of and trade in mercury;

  • the use of mercury in products and industrial processes;

  • the measures to be taken to reduce emissions from artisanal and small-scale gold mining;

  • the measures to be taken to reduce emissions from power plants and metals production facilities;

  • the storage and treatment of waste containing mercury and the management of contaminated sites;

  • financial and technical support for the implementation of the convention; and

  • the resolution of disputes.

Resources

January 13, 2013 in Emissions, Policy | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef017d3fdf138f970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Final session on international mercury convention this week expected to culminate in agreement; UNEP Global Mercury Assessment 2013 finds industrial source Hg emissions may be rising:

Comments

Mercury is one of those environmental problems that has been solved for 30 years but the bureaucracy does not declare victory and move on to the next problem.

“This would reduce cases of neurological and behavioral disorders, and other health problems linked to mercury,”

Does the UN have any actual cases of mercury poisoning? Mercury poisoning is easy to detect based on hair or blood samples. There are no actual cases of environmental mercury being a general problem if it ever was.

The Twit:

There are no actual cases of environmental mercury being a general problem if it ever was.
Reality:
Fish Consumption Notice - Mercury in Fish
1. Felsenthal Wildlife Refuge -
including the Saline River up to Stillions Bridge (Union, Bradley, Ashley Counties)

Pregnant or breastfeeding women, Women Planning to be Pregnant, and Children Under 7 Years of Age
Should not eat largemouth bass (13 inches or longer), flathead or blue catfish, pickerel, gar, bowfin or drum from this refuge.

General Public
Should not eat flathead catfish, bowfin, drum, pickerel or largemouth bass (16 inches in length or longer). No more than 2 meals per month of blue catfish and largemouth bass (13-16 inches in length) should be eaten from this refuge.
You can find these advisories for every state.  If you think mercury isn't a problem, why don't you volunteer to eat top predator fish a couple of times a day for a month?  We can judge your posting style before and after as a measure of how safe it is... or not.

E-P is being more than a little dishonest. We have had this debate before. Yes, there are legacy sources of mercury mostly from mining and metal smelting. Those practices have stopped or are controlled by regulations.

I am talking about real problems that can be measured by hair and blood sample of real people. E-P points to politically driven 'warnings'.

E-P is being more than a little dishonest.
Coming from a paid propagandist, this is rich.  Here's the fiction:
Yes, there are legacy sources of mercury mostly from mining and metal smelting. Those practices have stopped or are controlled by regulations.
Here's the reality:
Scientists are reporting that mercury levels in a popular species of game fish in Lake Erie are increasing after two decades of steady decline.
The fraction of lakes with fish containing unsafe levels of mercury (300 ppb) is roughly 50%.

Mercury emissions are one of the concerns behind the move to shut down the SS Badger, the last coal-fired ferry plying Lake Michigan.

I checked E-P's first link a magazine article:

“The mercury increases in Lake Erie walleye are likely caused by a combination of factors, including modifications in Lake Erie's foodweb due to invasions of dreissenid mussels and round goby, the scientists suggest. ”

The second link is a lesson in how to fear monger with statistics.

“It is important that women of child-bearing age and children continue to follow the advice of EPA and the Food and Drug Administration on fish consumption as it relates to mercury. ”

Actually it is not and if it was it would be an example of the EPA failing to do their job.

CDC monitoring found no cases of people with levels of mercury above the threshold of harm.
“Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals”

The important statistic is not the number of lakes where they found a fish but the possibility of randomly catching fish on a regular basis that would result in mercury building up it people.

Kit P,

Thank You for stating the obvious. The professional green beaucracy cannot ever admit that they have succeeded. If they did, who or why would anyone continue to pay them?

The similar situation exists for Lead. Lead was removed from gasoline and paints over thirty years ago, and lead levels have plunged to tiny, near unmeasureable levels in North America. But the bureaucrats cannot ever declare Victory, and redeploy resources and move on to other problems.

On a broader scale, for that matter, the time is drawing close when the Air and Waters throughout North America will be purer and cleaner than ever before. By the standards in place on the First Earth Day, we have already won, and cleaned up all the Waters and all the Air in North America.

By the tougher standards of today, metro Houston and Metro Los Angeles have a little further to go, before Clean Air is achieved there too. But to all intents and purposes, there is no body of Water or River in North America that doesn't meet compliance, today.

The days of "Burning Rivers" are long gone; but the Urban legends remain, at least in the minds of unreconstructed green hotheads.

We should be glorying in the fact that the most heavily industrialized continent can and has succeeded in producing a clean environment, while maintaining its advanced civilization. We should be preparing a great national celebration, instead of allowing begrudging bureaucrats to stand in the way, merely protecting their sinecures.

That forty plus year War for the Environment, has resulted in a great Victory. Presidents Lincoln and Reagan have called us the "City on a Hill" to emulate. Once more we have shown the way for the rest of the World to follow.

@D

“The similar situation exists for Lead. ”

The CDC is still finding children with lead above the threshold of harm but the numbers are trending down because we have eliminated the main inputs to the environment.

“The days of "Burning Rivers" are long gone ”

That was the river my father swam in as a boy until eminent domain was used to turn his grandfather farm into a sewage treatment plant. One year he comes to visit his grandchildren after a trip to Ohio. He was excited to tell me the area had been resorted and was now a national recreation area.

Fifty five years ago, I could not swim in Lake Erie but 30 years ago my kids could. Hoever from western Lake Erie there were 5 nitrous oxide plumes visible from coal plants. Just a few years ago, the old plants were shut down or had pollution control. There was no air pollution from Toledo to Chicago.

Fifty five years ago, my parents worried about polio. The reason we do not celebrate restoring the environment is because it is kind of trivial to the bigger problems we faced.

The great eastern blackout of 2003 caused a lot of powerplants to shut down.  Scientists measured a huge increase in visibility because of reduced haze.  I suspect that most of the powerplants responsible for that haze are still operating.

Haze, really! E-P must be trying prove D's point about how silly the 'professional green bureaucracy' can be. Of course visibility lot to do with humidity with daily variability. Not ever living where 'great eastern blackout' occurred E-P would not know that.

I am also skeptical of statements like 'Scientists measured' when scientist do not measure such things.

Not ever living where 'great eastern blackout' occurred E-P would not know that.
I happened to be driving in Troy, MI that day when all the traffic lights went dark.  To add insult to injury, my fuel pump gave up the ghost a mile and a half from home.  I got power back the following evening.
I am also skeptical of statements like 'Scientists measured' when scientist do not measure such things.
Twit P should consult a scientist sometime; as little as he wants to hear it, he might find that they were measuring it all along:
Airborne observations over central Pennsylvania on August 15, 2003, 24 h into the blackout, revealed large reductions in SO2 (>90%), O3 (50%), and light scattered by particles (70%) relative to measurements outside the blackout region and over the same location when power plants were operating normally. CO and light absorbing particles were unaffected. Low level O3 decreased by 38 ppbv and the visual range increased by >40 km. This clean air benefit was realized over much of the eastern U.S.
Of course, scientists will also tell him that human-induced climate change is a reality, and he doesn't want to hear that either.

“Twit P should consult a scientist sometime ”

E-P should carefully read the scientific papers he links.

E-P is being very silly. Unable to show that something that used to be a health hazard, mercury, he shifted to something that was never a health hazard, haze. So they EPA may have been addressing real problems 50 years, now the 'professional green bureaucracy' is worried that when they drive from their cesspool city to view nature, they might observe nature on a spectacular day or maybe just a normal day. When I lived in Seattle there were jokes about seeing the sun. I have taken the ferry across Puget Sound just to show visitors the spectacular sunset on Mount Rainier enhanced by the red haze from car around Seattle.

So my problem is with what E-P says and absurd things scientists based on very limited data. The scientist did not measure haze because they could not see any. The measured chemical species and modeled the effect on visibility.

“The single scattering albedo was 0.95 on the normal day, but fell to 0.85 during the blackout.”

Another way of say this is that a trained observer would not be able to detect a 10% differnce.

“were performed over Luray”

Near where I live now.

“Two spirals were performed over Selinsgrove, Pennsylvania”

Used to live a few miles from Selinsgrove.

“been largely organics, the products of vehicle exhaust and home heating and cooking,”

Lots of home heating during the dog days of summer. However, there is a very large coal plant near Selinsgrove.

“CO concentrations were within 0.5s of the 1992 median August and September values over Baltimore, Maryland and vicinity”

What? They are comparing rural Appalachian Mountain region to heavily populated area on the coastal plane.

The primary factor affecting visibility is humidity. Driving along the Blue Ridge Parkway during the dog days of summer will result a less spectacular view than on a crisp fall day when the leaves are changing or in the spring when the azaleas are blooming. We are headed to DC this morning. I will not be checking for visibility because of the snow.

Trigger warning:  persons likely to laugh out loud when stupidity is skewered should put their drinks down and swallow before reading further.

If only we could convince all young women to not drink ethanol
They are also advised not to eat many species of game fish in any quantity.  Interestingly, ethanol inhibits catalase and reduces the conversion of Hg to Hg+2, which reduces bio-accumulation.  Not that young women should be exposing themselves to elemental mercury either.
E-P is that special kind of stupid that say things like plutonium are the most dangerous substance in the world
Twit P wrote this in all apparent seriousness about one of the most pro-nuclear bloggers in the world.  He is the special kind of stupid which believes its own propaganda.

But that was just the opening act:

E-P is a Luddite with anti-coal agenda.
That must be why I suggested that Beijing switch from air combustion of powdered and chunk coal to coal gasification and piping of town gas, and use powdered olivine in the syngas cleanup to capture both H2S and CO2.  Because I'm "anti-coal".

The Twit is an apologist (I suspect, a paid advocate) for the coal-burning industry in the USA.  Anything that raises its costs or forces its business model to change (especially having to clean up its mess) is his target; this includes measures to clean up air in other nations which might create pressure to adopt them here.  Quote a paper showing that visibility increased some 25 miles the day after the 8/2003 blackout shut down many coal plants, and he goes off babbling nonsense like this:

Another way of say this is that a trained observer would not be able to detect a 10% differnce.
You can't make this up, folks.  This is word salad at its crispest, totally 100% logic-free.

Whoops, posted that to the wrong thread.

Great post! I am actually getting ready to across this information, is very helpful my friend. Also great blog here with all of the valuable information you have. Keep up the good work you are doing here. asheville dental

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Green Car Congress © 2014 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group