Search

The MONITOOL project (2017-2023) was carried out to describe the relationships between total dissolved and labile metal concentrations measured in spot water samples and in concurrently deployed Diffusive Gradients in Thin-films (DGTs) passive samplers, respectively. The ultimate aim was to adapt existing marine metal Environmental Quality Standards (EQS ) for DGTs, enabling their use in the context of the European Directives (the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)). Time-integrated metal concentrations provided by DGTs, representing several days, are an advantage compared to conventional spot sampling, especially in highly dynamic systems, such as transitional waters. Hence, the MONITOOL project aimed to provide a robust database of dissolved and labile metal concentrations in transitional and coastal waters, based upon co-deployments of DGTs and collection of spot water samples at several sampling sites (England, France, Ireland, Italy, Northern Ireland, Portugal, Scotland and Spain), followed subsequently by DGT and water metal analysis. Samplings were carried out in 2018 and 2022, following agreed protocols developed in the framework of the project. The MONITOOL dataset includes metal concentrations from DGTs, measured with Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS: Cd, Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, Zn) and in concurrently collected spot water samples by ICP-MS (Al, Cd, Co, Cu, Mn, Ni, Pb, Zn) and Anodic/Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry (ASV/CSV: Cd, Pb, Ni). Moreover, data on seawater physical-chemical parameters (salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity, total suspended solids, dissolved organic carbon, and total organic carbon) is provided. This database presents the results obtained using, concurrently, different forms of sampling and analytical techniques, enabling the comparison of the results obtained by these strategies and allowing the adaptation of EQS in marine water (EQS to DGTs (EQS )

Perfluorinated compounds are ubiquitous. Approximately 4,700 PFAS have been identified to date. Some examples of these products include carpets, glass, paper, clothing, and other textiles, cookware, food packaging, electronics, and personal care products. PFAS have been used in industrial and consumer products since the 1950s due to their physical and chemical properties. PFAS molecules can include oxygen, hydrogen, sulphur, and/or nitrogen atoms, whereas perfluorocarbon molecules contain only carbon and fluorine atoms. Perfluorinated compounds (PFAS) contain a fully fluorinated hydrophobic linear carbon chain attached to one or more hydrophilic head groups. The carbon-fluorine bond is so strong that these chemicals do not degrade in the environment. They are often referred to as ‘forever chemicals’. Some PFAS have been linked to an increased risk of cancer, high cholesterol, reproductive disorders, hormonal disruption or endocrine disruption, and weakening of the immune system. Currently, two PFAS are restricted under the international Stockholm Convention on POPs and the EU POPs Regulation. PFOS (perfluoroctanesulfonic acid) and its derivatives have been restricted since 2009/2010. PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid), its salts, and related compounds are also regulated as of 4th July 2020. Over the past decades, global manufacturers have started to substitute long-chain PFAS with shorter-chain PFAS or with non-fluorinated substances. This trend has been driven by the fact that the undesired effects of long-chain PFAS on human health and the environment were assessed and recognised first by scientists and authorities around the globe. However short-chain PFAS are now thought to have similar or other properties of concern such as fluorinated compounds like Gen X and ADONA. The combined effects of PFAS are not widely studied and relatively unknown. There is also little biological assessment currently done for drinking water and especially marine water. These are both resea

Little is known about pollutant concentrations in marine remote areas such as the Porcupine Bank in the NE Atlantic Ocean. Remote locations are much less studied than the more readily accessible coastal areas, nevertheless, are of great importance both to unveil how far human influence has reached and, are more challenging, to infer background concentrations (BCs) of naturally occurring and/or anthropogenic pollutants. Knowledge of contaminant background levels are critical for establishing remediation and management strategies; in addition, background assessment is heavily emphasised in legislative monitoring requirements. Obtaining suitable sampling locations to assess background concentrations can be challenging, as samples should match characteristics to the target area and not be impacted by historical or current inputs of the chemical substances of study. Anthropogenic impacts generally deem local-based sampling to be unsuitable to infer background pollution values. Sampling in remote areas such as the Porcupine Bank better fulfils low impact and pressure requirements making them more suitable for the derivation of background concentration estimates for organic compounds and metals. The total concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and metal(loid)s in deep sea sediments were evaluated and both an environmental status and a set of concentration data were adequate to derive BCs concentrations is presented. Concentration data indicated, in comparison with previous published data, trace level presence of PAHs and metal(loids) in sediments from the Porcupine Bank. These values will provide a valuable tool to identify the natural presence of organic and inorganic compounds and be the basis to perform a sound environmental assessment.

Poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are a group of synthetic organic surfactants that have become a global concern because of their toxicity and widespread presence in the aquatic environment and organisms globally. In this study, a new analytical method has been developed and validated for the analysis of 15 perfluorinated compounds in different water matrices: river water, drinking water and seawater. Water extraction was performed in anion exchange solid phase extraction cartridges, and extracts were analysed by liquid chromatography in tandem with mass spectrometry. Recoveries for target analytes were between 35 and 120%, depending on the water matrix. Method detection limits were in the range of 0.5–17 ng L-1. The validated method was applied to the determination of perfluorinated compounds in water samples around Ireland. Eight compounds out of fifteen were detected at least in one sample. Measured concentrations were higher in river water than seawater, and drinking water had the lowest levels, although still detectable for a considerable amount of compounds. The most prevalent compounds were PFPeA, PFOA and PFHxA, present in all types of water, and they had the highest concentrations.

Le présent document fournit des instructions pour les meilleures pratiques relatives à l’utilisation des échantillonneurs passifs à Gradient de Diffusion en couche mince (DGT) pour l’échantillonnage des eaux de transition et côtières à des fins de surveillance de la qualité de l’eau. La méthodologie définie dans ce guide a été développée par le consortium du projet Interreg MONITOOL de l’Union européenne afin d’assurer la comparabilité et la reproductibilité des données obtenues par chaque partenaire du projet dans les différentes régions. Le guide fournit des informations pratiques et détaillées sur tous les aspects à prendre en considération avant le déploiement de ces dispositifs et lors des étapes essentielles après leur déploiement, extraction et trai - tement ultérieur des échantillons pour l’analyse des métaux traces. Bien qu’il ne s’agisse pas d’un protocole standard, ces lignes directrices abordent la nécessité d’une approche commune et l’intention de promouvoir les meilleures pratiques.

This document provides guidance on best practice for the use of Diffusive Gradient in Thin films (DGT) passive samplers devices in sampling of transitional and coastal waters for water quality monitoring. The methodology1 to be addressed in this guide was developed by the consortium of the European Union’s Interreg MONITOOL Project in order to ensure comparability and reproducibility of the data obtained from each project Partner in different regions. The guide provides practical and detailed information on all the aspects to be considered before the deployment of these devices and the essential steps for their deployment, retrieval and subsequent sample processing for the analysis of trace metals. Although it is not aimed as a standard protocol, these guidelines address the need for a common approach and the intention to promote best practice.

According to Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848 under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), EU Member States (MS) shall consider, in their Descriptor 8 primary criterion (D8C1) assessments, the WFD Priority Substances (PS) and River Basin Specific Pollutants (RBSP) within coastal and territorial waters and also beyond territorial waters if these still may give rise to pollution effects. Some WFD PS might not be relevant for the marine environment in the open sea and, consequently, might be excluded from MSFD monitoring beyond the territorial waters. MS have expressed the need for a framework for the deselection of WFD PS from monitoring under the MSFD, in order to save resources. The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC), collaborating within the MSFD Expert Network on Contaminants, has developed a pragmatic approach to identify the WFD PS that can be excluded from MSFD monitoring in the open sea beyond territorial waters without reducing protection of European Seas. This should preempt the need for individual MS to provide rationales for such exclusions, support comparable monitoring and assessments across national boundaries, and enable MS to focus their monitoring efforts on other (including emerging) substances that require attention.

According to Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848 under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), EU Member States (MS) shall consider, in their Descriptor 8 primary criterion (D8C1) assessments, the WFD Priority Substances (PS) and River Basin Specific Pollutants (RBSP) within coastal and territorial waters and also beyond territorial waters if these still may give rise to pollution effects. Some WFD PS might not be relevant for the marine environment in the open sea and, consequently, might be excluded from MSFD monitoring beyond the territorial waters. MS have expressed the need for a framework for the deselection of WFD PS from monitoring under the MSFD, in order to save resources. The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC), collaborating within the MSFD Expert Network on Contaminants, has developed a pragmatic approach to identify the WFD PS that can be excluded from MSFD monitoring in the open sea beyond territorial waters without reducing protection of European Seas. This should preempt the need for individual MS to provide rationales for such exclusions, support comparable monitoring and assessments across national boundaries, and enable MS to focus their monitoring efforts on other (including emerging) substances that require attention.

The Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC) investigates the biological effects of contaminants in the marine environment. The group provides research and increases the understanding of contaminant interactions and effects, including the development of inte-grated biological effects monitoring strategies, which are used to support international research and monitoring. The WGBEC has contributed significantly to the implementation and harmonization of tech-niques that can be used to evaluate the biological effects of pollutants in national monitoring programmes. An overview of national effect-based monitoring programmes of Member States is provided with the aim to support European countries and Regional Seas Conventions on their implementation. A summary of the national effects-based monitoring programmes has been pro-vided by twelve European countries represented at the WGBEC meetings. The adoption of bio-logical effects monitoring can differ widely and comparisons between approaches and the choice of biological effects methods used acts as an important tool. A summary of the main findings is presented. Furthermore, OSPAR's Hazardous Substances and Eutrophication Committee (HASEC) has en-couraged contracting parties to perform targeted biological effects monitoring to enhance the assessment of contaminants in sediment and biota towards the OSPAR QSR2023. WGBEC mem-bers contributed to the integrated biological effects approach assessment by providing data from their national monitoring activities to produce maps and figures to enable interpretations. Revision of the biological effects methods, including new techniques and developments, and the quality assurance of existing methods are core activities for the WGBEC, which require continu-ous discussion and evaluation by the group. Activities include the production of new ICES TIMES documents as well as intercalibration exercises to ensure Member States are providing comparable data for national mon

The Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC) investigates the biological effects of contaminants in the marine environment. The group provides research and increases the understanding of contaminant interactions and effects, including the development of inte- grated biological effects monitoring strategies, which are used to support international research and monitoring. The WGBEC has contributed significantly to the implementation and harmonization of tech- niques that can be used to evaluate the biological effects of pollutants in national monitoring programmes. An overview of national effect-based monitoring programmes of Member States is provided with the aim to support European countries and Regional Seas Conventions on their implementation. A summary of the national effects-based monitoring programmes has been pro- vided by twelve European countries represented at the WGBEC meetings. The adoption of bio- logical effects monitoring can differ widely and comparisons between approaches and the choice of biological effects methods used acts as an important tool. A summary of the main findings is presented. Furthermore, OSPAR's Hazardous Substances and Eutrophication Committee (HASEC) has en- couraged contracting parties to perform targeted biological effects monitoring to enhance the assessment of contaminants in sediment and biota towards the OSPAR QSR2023. WGBEC mem- bers contributed to the integrated biological effects approach assessment by providing data from their national monitoring activities to produce maps and figures to enable interpretations. Revision of the biological effects methods, including new techniques and developments, and the quality assurance of existing methods are core activities for the WGBEC, which require continu- ous discussion and evaluation by the group. Activities include the production of new ICES TIMES documents as well as intercalibration exercises to ensure Member States are providing comparable data for natio

The Partnership for Chemicals Risk Assessment (PARC) is currently under development as a joint research and innovation programme to strengthen the scientific basis for chemical risk assessment in the EU. The plan is to bring chemical risk assessors and managers together with scientists to accelerate method development and the production of necessary data and knowledge, and to facilitate the transition to next-generation evidence-based risk assessment, a non-toxic environment and the European Green Deal. The NORMAN Network is an independent, well-established and competent network of more than 80 organisations in the field of emerging substances and has enormous potential to contribute to the implementation of the PARC partnership. NORMAN stands ready to provide expert advice to PARC, drawing on its long experience in the development, harmonisation and testing of advanced tools in relation to chemicals of emerging concern and in support of a European Early Warning System to unravel the risks of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) and close the gap between research and innovation and regulatory processes. In this commentary we highlight the tools developed by NORMAN that we consider most relevant to supporting the PARC initiative: (i) joint data space and cutting-edge research tools for risk assessment of contaminants of emerging concern; (ii) collaborative European framework to improve data quality and comparability; (iii) advanced data analysis tools for a European early warning system and (iv) support to national and European chemical risk assessment thanks to harnessing, combining and sharing evidence and expertise on CECs. By combining the extensive knowledge and experience of the NORMAN network with the financial and policy-related strengths of the PARC initiative, a large step towards the goal of a non-toxic environment can be taken.

The Partnership for Chemicals Risk Assessment (PARC) is currently under development as a joint research and innovation programme to strengthen the scientific basis for chemical risk assessment in the EU. The plan is to bring chemical risk assessors and managers together with scientists to accelerate method development and the production of necessary data and knowledge, and to facilitate the transition to next-generation evidence-based risk assessment, a non-toxic environment and the European Green Deal. The NORMAN Network is an independent, well-established and competent network of more than 80 organisations in the field of emerging substances and has enormous potential to contribute to the implementation of the PARC partnership. NORMAN stands ready to provide expert advice to PARC, drawing on its long experience in the development, harmonisation and testing of advanced tools in relation to chemicals of emerging concern and in support of a European Early Warning System to unravel the risks of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) and close the gap between research and innovation and regulatory processes. In this commentary we highlight the tools developed by NORMAN that we consider most relevant to supporting the PARC initiative: (i) joint data space and cutting-edge research tools for risk assessment of contaminants of emerging concern; (ii) collaborative European framework to improve data quality and comparability; (iii) advanced data analysis tools for a European early warning system and (iv) support to national and European chemical risk assessment thanks to harnessing, combining and sharing evidence and expertise on CECs. By combining the extensive knowledge and experience of the NORMAN network with the financial and policy-related strengths of the PARC initiative, a large step towards the goal of a non-toxic environment can be taken.