JEM News

Legislation

Europe plans the road to Rio

The international Rio+20 summit in June next year is an opportunity to revitalise the concept of sustainable development and produce a roadmap to help chart progress towards a green economy, according to the European Commission. The EU executive was unveiling its proposal for a common EU negotiating position to be agreed by its member governments.

The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio launched UN conventions on biodiversity and climate change, the Commission notes. But since then many environmental problems have become more pressing and efforts to tackle them fragmented, resulting in uncertainty over where the follow-up meeting should focus. It suggests the green economy roadmap be used as a framework to pull together tangible environmental actions planned at national, regional and international level. Parties should develop indicators to monitor progress and globally-agreed systems for environmental and social accounting, it says.

Suggestions for achieving this include the launch of coordinated action on environmentally harmful subsidies, international partnerships on water and energy, and an international regime to manage chemical risks. The right market and regulatory conditions to stimulate green growth and private sector investment also have to be established, the Commission argues. Some governments, particularly in developing countries, have criticised the concept of a green economy, fearing it might threaten sustainable development.¹

In a document as part of its preparations for Rio, the OECD says that to be successful green economy strategies must be mainstreamed into national policies. The Paris-based organisation lists policy options to address barriers to green growth such as regulatory uncertainty and low R&D returns. Recommendations are quite general, the aim being to help governments devise country-specific strategies, it says. The strategy is intended as the starting point for the OECD's long-term objective of supporting national and international efforts to achieve green growth. It contains indicators in four main categories: environmental and resource productivity; economic and environmental assets; environmental quality of life; and economic opportunities and policy responses. These will be elaborated further as more data become available. Sectoral reports are also planned.

European Commission: http://europa.eu/rapid (reference: IP/11/754); OECD: http://www.oecd.org

Europe seeks binding deal on forests

A Europe-wide agreement on the protection and management of forests could be on the cards following a decision by governments to start negotiations.

Representatives from 46 countries, including EU member states, Russia, Turkey and Norway, backed the proposal at a recent ministerial meeting in Oslo. Negotiations will begin by the end of the year with a view to a legally-binding deal by June 2013. A ministerial conference will convene six months later to consider and possibly adopt its proposal. Norwegian Agriculture Minister Lars Peder Brekk, an organiser of the meeting, said the decision was “a major step towards creating the necessary structure for a coherent approach to the continent's forests”.

Ministers also agreed goals and targets for 2020 under the so-called Forest Europe initiative. All European countries should develop and implement national forests programmes. Wood supply from sustainably managed forests must increase “substantially”. Countries will also have to take measures to reduce forest degradation. Environmental NGOs, such as forestry group FERN, believe the planned agreement will bring no additional benefits, however. In a statement last year the group claimed the Forest Europe initiative had underestimated the “dire” state of Europe's forests.

The European initiative came in the wake of a UN report which claimed that halving the rate of global deforestation by 2030 would only require an extra $40bn each year, which is a fraction of the world's GDP (0.034%). The report, prepared ahead of next year's Rio+20 summit, sets out a roadmap for greening the forest sector. The extra investment would also lead to a 140% increase in reforestation and afforestation by 2050 compared with business as usual, and bring major employment benefits, according to UNEP. Policy measures, such as payment for ecosystem services (PES), could be used to create the necessary investment incentives, UNEP says.

Forest Europe: http://www.foresteurope.org; UNEP: http://www.unep.org

Court delivers NEC ruling as NO_x breaches confirmed

Air quality campaigners have been left reeling after losing a landmark case in the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The court ruled that compliance with national air emission caps under the national emissions ceilings (NEC) directive is not a condition for authorising the construction of new industrial installations.

EU judges had been asked to interpret the 2001 directive and a related law on industrial pollution (IPPC) in a case brought by several environmental groups against decisions to approve the construction of three coal-fired power plants in the Netherlands. The groups argued that the construction of these plants should not have been authorised given that, according to estimates at the time, the Netherlands was likely to exceed its emission caps for SO₂ and NO_x in 2010 without additional measures. According to figures presented to the Court, one of the Dutch plants will emit 1454 tonnes of SO₂ annually, which represents about 2.9% of the country's emission cap for this pollutant.

The judges ruled that national authorities have some flexibility as to how they decide to meet their emission caps. A single measure such as the construction of a plant is unlikely to jeopardise their efforts. However, they must make sure that all the measures in place form a coherent policy aimed at complying with the law.

The Netherlands is one of ten countries still predicted to miss their 2010 national emission ceilings for NO_x, according to the latest data published by the European Environment Agency (EEA). Others include France, Germany, Greece and Austria. Total NO_x emissions will be 17% above the stricter indicative EU-wide target of 8.2 million tonnes, the EEA said. All countries are predicted to meet their national ceiling for SO₂. The Netherlands and Germany are likely to miss their target for ammonia. Only four countries – Denmark, Germany, Portugal and Spain – will miss their ceilings for non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), according to the EEA.

The failure to meet the 2010 NO_x target had already been predicted last year and is blamed mainly on emissions from cars and lorries. The EU is currently reviewing its approach to air quality and plans to make it a particular focus in 2013. The EEA, in collaboration with the EU's Joint Research Centre, has also published a series of maps showing pollution from diffuse sources such as shipping, aviation and agriculture. Air pollutants covered include NO_x, PM₁₀ and methane.

In a related move, a Commission report has concluded that extending the 2004 paints directive to new products would deliver only “modest” reductions in VOC emissions and could pose significant implementation problems. In addition, there is no need to introduce stricter VOC limits for vehicle refinishing products. The Commission said it will keep the issue under review.

European Court of Justice: http://curia.europa.eu (Case reference: C-165/09); EEA: http://www.eea.europa.eu; European Commission: VOCs report, http://eur-lex.europa.eu (reference: COM: 2011:0297)

Commission ponders noise limits

The prospect of Europe-wide noise thresholds has been brought a stage closer, after the European Commission announced it was prepared to consider noise limits in order to create “a level-playing field in Europe”.

The Commission was reporting on the implementation of the 2002 environmental noise directive. This introduced indicators for reporting exposure to noise but left it to member states as to whether to adopt binding limits.

One option could be to propose minimum thresholds, or 'trigger values', above which action would be required. Governments would still be free to set stricter requirements. Brussels is also considering possible penalties. Even in cases where binding limits are in place, noise levels are often exceeded with complete impunity, it notes. Other actions envisaged by the EU executive include possible requirements regarding low-noise road surfaces. It also plans to revise existing requirements for outdoor equipment and tighter noise standards for vehicles.

In addition, the Commission wants new measures to improve the law's implementation. These include streamlining reporting requirements to reduce administrative burden and harmonised methods for assessing noise exposure. Such harmonisation was recommended by a consultancy study last year.² A new project known as CNOSSOS will provide the technical basis for a common approach to noise mapping across the EU member states.

While welcoming the admission of flaws in the directive, green group EEB said there needed to be a clearer timetable for when the shortcomings will be tackled.

European Commission: CNOSSOS, http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/noisedir/library?l=/material_mapping/cnossos-eu&vm=detailed&sb=Title; EEB: http://www.eeb.org

Environmental quality

Oceans need a joined up approach

Declines in marine and coastal ecosystems due to human activities, such as overfishing and pollution, could be reversed if organisations, communities and other stakeholders adopt a more integrated approach to managing coastal environments. Closer partnerships between different marine users – such as fishing communities, the tourism industry and conservationists – can also help coastal communities become better prepared for natural disasters and the impacts of global warming. These are the headline recommendations in a new study by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), which outlines how planners and policy-makers can help ensure sustainable development for marine and coastal environments.

Launched on World Oceans Day 2011, the report explains how sharing knowledge and best practices across different sectors can make marine management more effective. Using over 20 case studies and success stories, ranging from polar ecosystems in Antarctica to atolls in the Indian Ocean, the publication offers guidance to marine managers towards achieving long-term sustainability, from initial planning of how to deal with environmental degradation to on-site implementation of action plans.

“The future role of marine and coastal ecosystems in human well-being depends increasingly on developing the capacity of countries to manage human uses and impacts in order to ensure that ecosystem health and self-repairing capacity is not undermined”, said UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner. Central to this “will be moving from sectoral marine and coastal management to a joined approach that marries seemingly competing interests”, Mr Steiner added.

Ecosystem-based management (EBM) looks at marine and coastal ecosystems as units with many ecological and social links. These connections can be numerous and complex, with disruptions to any part of an ecosystem – such as changes to habitats or fluctuations in the population of a species – having many knock-on effects. Agricultural run-off, for example, can pollute rivers or seas, leading to a decline in plants such as seagrasses consumed by fish. This, in turn, can lead to reduced catch for fishing communities and a resulting drop in prosperity and living conditions for coastal populations. EBM uses knowledge of such connections to guide different uses of oceans and coasts, and to determine policies and priorities for managing future development.

The value of the natural services provided by marine and coastal areas is also a key part of EBM. Food security through fisheries as well as climate change adaptation, water purification, storm protection, tourism and recreation are among the many ecosystem services provided by healthy oceans and coasts. UNEP highlights several examples of how determining the value of such services has helped improve marine management.

For instance, the UNEP-administered Mediterranean Action Plan, which brings together 21 developed and developing countries to protect the Mediterranean environment, recently produced an ecosystem services evaluation for the region. Initial results found that the total value of fisheries production, recreation, climate regulation, erosion control and waste treatment was €26 billion annually. The results will have a significant impact on regional policy-making, which is seeking to address, among other things, the decline of seagrass meadows and coastal lagoons.

Meanwhile, a new European project, the Joint Programming Initiative for Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans, has produced a broad overview of the corresponding research landscape and a mapping of public research activities relating to oceans. This covers cross-cutting activities related to the marine environment, interactions with climate, marine resources and activities (in particular fisheries, aquaculture, marine biotechnology, marine energy, and maritime transport). And in the United States, the Obama Administration has launched a series of ‘listening sessions’ in order to develop the work of the National Ocean Council, a policy initiative announced in July 2010 and covering the oceans, coasts and Great Lakes.

UNEP Regional Seas Programme: http://www.unep.org/regionalseas/, and report: “Taking Steps Toward Marine and Coastal Ecosystem-Based Management: An Introductory Guide”; JPI Oceans: http://www.jpi-oceans.eu; National Ocean Council: http://www.whitehouse.gov/oceans

Air pollution key to limiting climate change

Fast action on pollutants such as black carbon, ground level ozone and methane may help limit near-term global temperature rise and significantly increase the chances of keeping temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius, according to a new assessment.

Protecting the near-term climate is central to significantly cutting the risk of “amplified global climate change” linked with rapid and extensive loss of Arctic ice on both the land and at sea. Fast action might also reduce losses of mountain glaciers linked in part with black carbon deposits while reducing projected warming in the Arctic over the coming decades by two-thirds.

The scientists behind the assessment, coordinated by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), also point to numerous public health and food security benefits. Big cuts in emissions of black carbon will improve respiratory health, reduce hospital admissions and days lost at work due to sickness, scientists say. Indeed, close to 2.5 million premature deaths from outdoor air pollution could on average be avoided annually worldwide by 2030, with many of those lives saved being in Asia, it is estimated. Reductions in ground level ozone could also contribute to reduced crop damage equal to between one to four per cent of the annual global maize, rice, soybean and wheat production.

Cutting these so-called ‘short-lived climate forcers' can have immediate climate, health and agricultural benefits, the report concludes. This is because, unlike carbon dioxide (CO₂) which can remain in the atmosphere for centuries, black carbon for example only persists for days or weeks. The researchers also underline, however, that immediate and sustained action to cut back CO₂ is crucial if temperature rises are to be limited over the long term. It is the combination of action on short-lived climate forcers and long-lived greenhouse gases which improves the chances of keeping below the 2 degree target throughout the 21st century.

The findings were compiled by an international team of more than 50 researchers and released at the latest round of climate negotiations in Bonn. Drew Shindell of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who led the study, said the report had: “…brought clarity to the complexity of the heating and cooling effects of a range of pollutants and uses the science to show that there are clear and concrete measures that can be undertaken to help protect the global climate in the short to medium term”.

Addressing the Bonn meeting, UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said the results provided: “… clear, powerful, abundant and compelling reasons to reduce levels of pollutants such as black carbon and tropospheric ozone along with methane”. “The science of short-lived climate forcers has evolved to a level of maturity that now requires and requests a robust policy response by nations”, he added.

UN Climate Change Conference June 2011: http://unfccc.int/2860.php; and “Integrated Assessment of Black Carbon and Tropospheric Ozone”, http://www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/BlackCarbon_SDM.pdf

EU bathing water takes a dip

Water quality at European bathing beaches and other bathing sites is on the decline, according to the latest annual figures released by the European Environment Agency (EAA).

In 2010, about 92% of the EU's coastal bathing waters and 90.2% of inland bathing waters met the minimum quality standards, compared with 95.6% and 89.4% in 2009. However, the Agency says most cases of non-compliance were due to data failings rather than poor water quality.

The worst performing country was Poland where 19% of bathing waters were non-compliant last year. Cyprus and Croatia had the highest compliance rate. The proportion of coastal and inland waters meeting the more stringent but voluntary ‘guide values' dropped by 9.5 and 10.2 percentage points respectively.

EU bathing water rules are currently in a transition period. Six member states measured and reported their bathing water quality in line with the 1976 bathing water directive. The rest used rules from its 2006 revision. The two sets of results have been aligned by the EEA to ensure the results are comparable.

Meanwhile, as JEM went to press EU environment ministers were meeting in Luxembourg to consider the drought affecting many areas of Europe. They were expected to demand a stepping up of efforts to tackle water scarcity but without recommending any specific measures or efficiency standards. Some EU states are resistant to the idea of water efficiency standards, which are currently being proposed in relation to buildings.³

EEA: http://europa.eu/rapid (reference: IP/11/736)

Agency launches fracturing case studies

The EPA has identified seven case studies as part of its assessment of potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources.⁴ The sites identified were selected following extensive input from stakeholders and field work will begin in some of the selected regions this summer.

These case studies are one of a number of inputs in a comprehensive assessment of the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing, a highly controversial means of extracting natural gas from geological deposits.⁵ The information gathered will be used alongside literature reviews, collected data and information, laboratory work and computer modelling.

The case studies were selected from over 40 suggestions based on a rigorous set of criteria. These included proximity of population and drinking water supplies to activities, concerns about impaired water quality and health and environmental impacts, and identified knowledge gaps. Sites were prioritized based on geographic and geologic diversity, population at risk, unique geological or hydrology features, characteristics of water resources, and land use.

EPA: http://www.epa.gov/hydraulicfracturing

Chemical hazards

The EPA rewrites confidentiality rules

The EPA has made public the identities of more than 150 chemicals contained in health and safety studies that had been claimed confidential by industry. Describing the action as “unprecedented”, the Agency said the move was necessary to provide the public with greater access to information on the chemicals manufactured and used in the United States.

The chemicals are covered by 104 health and safety studies where the chemical identity will no longer be redacted. The chemicals involved are used in dispersant formulations and consumer products, such as air fresheners, non-stick and stain-resistant materials, fire-resistant materials, nonylphenol compounds, perfluorinated compounds, and lead. Steve Owens, Assistant Administrator for the EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention said the move was “an important step” in giving people access to critical information about chemicals. “A health and safety study with the chemical name kept secret is completely useless to the public”, he added.

In 2010, EPA challenged industry to voluntarily declassify unwarranted claims of confidential business information (CBI). It also issued new guidance outlining plans to deny confidentiality claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Based on this guidance, earlier this year the Agency notified a number of companies that it had determined their CBI claim was not eligible for confidential treatment under TSCA and intended to make the information public.⁶ Faced with similar actions under the REACH authorisation procedure, European manufacturers have threatened legal action against the disclosure of confidential information.⁷

In addition, scientists and the public now have access to two additional databases containing chemical toxicity and exposure data. ToxCastDB allows users to search and download data from over 500 rapid chemical tests conducted on more than 300 environmental chemicals. ExpoCastDB consolidates human exposure data from studies that have collected chemical measurements from homes and child care centres. Both databases are connected through EPA's Aggregated Computational Toxicology Resource (ACToR), an online data warehouse.

In a further initiative, EPA has established a National Tribal Toxics Committee (NTTC) to give Native American communities greater input on issues related to chemical safety, toxic chemicals and pollution prevention.

EPA: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/transparency.html; ACToR: http://actor.epa.gov/; NTTC: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/tribal/

REACH lists updated

A further seven substances have been officially added to the REACH candidate list, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has announced. The Agency has also revealed the criteria that will be used to prioritise substances for evaluation under REACH.

The new substances of very high concern (SVHC) were approved by a committee of national representatives recently, following an earlier consultation.⁸ They include: strontium chromate (used as a coating in the automobile and aerospace sectors); hydrazine (a widely used chemical intermediate); and the plasticizer DIHP. Companies using these substances in products will have to inform firms further down the supply chain and, in some cases, customers. They could also be moved to the REACH authorisation list, known as Annex 14, which would require companies to get approval before using them.

ECHA has already opened a consultation about adding another thirteen substances to this Annex 14 list. The consultation, which runs until 14 September, covers seven chromium-based compounds used as intermediates, in surface treatments for metals and in catalysts, including chromium trioxide, potassium chromate and dichromate, and sodium chromate. There are also five cobalt-based compounds used in dyes and surface treatments, adhesive treatments for tyres, and battery manufacturing. The final substance is trichloroethylene, a solvent used among other things as a cleaning agent, heat transfer fluid, and in the textile and adhesive industry. Supporting documents provided by ECHA suggest possible exemptions for some uses of the substances and sunset dates after which authorisation will be needed.

ECHA and EU states have also agreed the selection criteria for substance evaluations to be used during the first Community Rolling Action Plan for 2012–2014. This will be finalised in early 2012 and updated each year. Substances will be prioritised on the basis of their potential hazards, levels of exposure, and the tonnage made and imported each year, ECHA says. The latter will be based partly on tonnage figures collected through the REACH registration process. Member States can also propose additional substances for evaluation at any time.

An ECHA committee has also backed restrictions on three substances on socio-economic grounds: the use of anti-moulding agent dimethylfumarate (DMFu); mercury use in measuring devices; and five phenylmercury compounds used in the production of polyurethane coatings, adhesives and sealants.

Finally, the European Commission has announced it is planning to ban polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in products aimed at children under 14. This follows a proposal by Germany to restrict PAHs from all products.

ECHA: http://echa.europa.eu

F-gas alternatives need more action

Governments and industry need to take a more proactive approach in deploying alternatives to HFCs and other fluorinated greenhouse gases, the German Environment Agency (UBA) says in a recent report.

The report summarises the alternatives to HFCs, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride (SF₆) in various applications and prospects for their uptake. There is a growing market for alternative refrigerant gases, one of the main uses of HFCs, but in some applications HFCs remain more cost effective, the UBA concedes. There are also logistical problems with using alternatives like CO₂ in refrigerated containers and changes would have to be agreed at international level. CO₂ and pentane can be used instead of HFCs for making foam, UBA says. HFCs are unnecessary in most types of spray. But halogens are still required in some fire extinguishers and SF₆ is needed as an insulator in some electrical switches.

The EU's f-gas regulation, deemed ineffective by NGOs, is one of two mechanisms addressing fluorinated gases. The other is the MAC directive on air-conditioning in cars. A review of the regulation is expected shortly.

UBA: http://www.umweltdaten.de; European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/f-gas/index_en.htm on f-gases

Europe gets tougher pesticide regime; US collects nano data

Tougher rules on pesticide approvals now apply across the EU following the entry into force of a new regulation. The new rules implement the 2009 pesticides regulation, specifying which active substances can be placed on the European market. Related regulations transpose rules from the earlier regime on data requirements for active substances, and on the data requirements, evaluation process and labelling of pesticides.

PAN-Europe, an NGO, welcomed the beginning of the new regime but called on the Commission to ensure that the new hazard-based approach is not eroded. In a letter to Health Commissioner John Dalli, it listed recent developments that it views as alarming, including suggestions by the UK and Germany on the definition of an endocrine disruptor and the renewed approval of carbendazim. PAN-Europe recently claimed that Europe ‘allows too many pesticides’.⁹

In the United States, meanwhile, the EPA is linking pesticides with new concerns over nano-scale materials. Under a new initiative, it plans to obtain information on nanoscale materials in all pesticide products to determine whether the registration of a pesticide may cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment and human health. The notice, in the Federal Register, also proposes a new approach for determining whether a nanoscale ingredient is a “new” active or inert ingredient for purposes of scientific evaluation, when an identical, non-nanoscale form of the ingredient is already registered under the pesticide laws (known as FIFRA).

Eur-Lex database: http://eur-lex.europa.eu (reference: L:2011:155); PAN Europe: http://www.pan-europe.info; Federal Register: http://www.regulations.gov (reference number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010-0197).

Public & occupational health

Twelfth report on carcinogens

A widely cited and respected scientific reference on cancer-causing substances has reached its twelfth edition. The US Department of Health and Human Services' Report on Carcinogens (RoC) lists eight additional substances that may put people at increased risk of cancer.

The industrial chemical formaldehyde and a botanical known as aristolochic acids are listed as known human carcinogens. Six other substances – captafol, cobalt-tungsten carbide (in powder or hard metal form), certain inhalable glass wool fibres, o-nitrotoluene, riddelliine, and styrene – are added as substances that are reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens. With these additions, the 12th RoC now includes 240 listings for chemicals and biological agents.

The RoC is a congressionally mandated document that is prepared for the HHS Secretary by the National Toxicology Program (NTP). It identifies agents, substances, mixtures, or exposures in two categories: known to be a human carcinogen and reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen. A listing in the Report does not by itself mean that a substance will cause cancer. Many factors, including the amount and duration of exposure, and an individual's susceptibility to a substance, affect whether a person will develop cancer.

Once a substance is nominated for consideration, it undergoes an extensive evaluation with numerous opportunities for scientific and public input. The NTP used established criteria to evaluate the scientific evidence on each candidate substance under review and drew upon the scientific expertise of other federal agencies. “The strength of this report lies in the rigorous scientific review process,” said Dr Ruth Lunn, lead director at the NTP. “We could not have completed this report without the significant input we received from the public, industry, academia, and other government agencies.”

The new RoC includes a detailed description of each substance listed.

NIEHS: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc12

US targets radon risk

A series of US agencies, including the EPA and the Departments of Energy, and of Defense, have joined forces to combat radon, the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States. Under the Federal Radon Action Plan, agencies will work together to help spur greater action in the marketplace, create jobs in the private sector, and significantly reduce exposure to radon.

The plan aims to demonstrate the importance of radon risk reduction, address finance and incentive issues to drive testing and mitigation, and build demand for services from industry professionals. It includes strategies to reach low-income households, many of whom do not have the resources to make the simple fixes necessary to protect their homes and families. Radon testing and mitigation will be incorporated into federal programmes, and agencies will invest in new standards and codes for measurement and mitigation in schools, day-care facilities, and multi-family housing. Incentives will also be introduced to drive testing and mitigation in the private and public sectors. The plan is expected to directly or indirectly influence an estimated 7.5 million homes, schools and day-care facilities.

Radon is a naturally occurring, invisible and odourless radioactive gas. Approximately one in 15 American homes contains high levels of radon. Millions of Americans are unknowingly exposed, resulting in an estimated 21 000 lung cancer deaths each year.

Federal Radon Action Plan: http://www.epa.gov/radon/action_plan.html

Research activities

Europe looks to eco-innovation

Levels of innovation in the environmental sector are more promising than in the EU as a whole, but businesses still need more support from policy makers, the European Commission says in a recent report.

The Innovation Union report, the first in an annual series, shows the EU spends more public money per capita on environment-related research than anywhere else in the world. It also accounts for 40% of patents for technologies linked to climate change. But continued progress is dependent on demand for green technologies. Policy makers can help through smarter regulation and by greening their own procurement policies. Policy-makers are increasingly looking to eco-innovation as a source of economic growth.¹⁰ The Commission is due to deliver an eco-innovation action plan shortly.¹¹

Spending on all types of R&D increased to 2% of EU GDP in 2009 but is still short of Europe's 3% target. MEPs have warned that EU budget restrictions could jeopardise this goal. The gap with leading competitors is widening due to much lower R&D investment by business than in countries such as Japan and South Korea.

Against this background, the Commission is proceeding with plans for its research, innovation and science programme for the period from 2014. It intends to table formal proposals for the programme – officially known as the ‘Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation’, and recently re-christened Horizon 2020 – by the end of the year. Closing a conference to mark the end of the consultation process, Research Commissioner Máire Geoghegan-Quinn said the new programme would “mark a clear departure from business as usual. We are not simply moving from the 7th to the 8th Framework Programme”.

European Commission: Innovation union, http://ec.europa.eu/iuc2011

Air pollution: the view from space

This summer two NASA research airplanes will fly over the Baltimore–Washington region and northeast Maryland as part of a mission to enhance the capability of satellites to measure ground-level air quality from space. The EPA supported flights will aid in monitoring pollutants that affect people's health.

A fundamental challenge for space-borne instruments monitoring air quality is to distinguish between pollution high in the atmosphere and that near the surface. The new field project, called DISCOVER-AQ, will make measurements from aircraft in combination with ground-based observations to help scientists better understand how to observe ground-level pollution from space in the future. It is one of five Earth Venture investigations selected in 2010 as part of NASA's Earth System Science Pathfinder programme. These targeted science investigations complement NASA's larger research missions.

EPA: http://www.epa.gov/nerl/discover-aq.html and NASA: http://www.nasa.gov/discover-aq

Agency joins the i-generation

The EPA is seeking to tap into the huge interest in mobile applications, or ‘apps’, by encouraging software developers to create solutions that put environmental and public health information at people's fingertips. Its “Apps for the Environment” challenge invites developers – both amateur and professional – to create applications that help people make informed decisions about environmental issues affecting their health. The Agency is engaging students, colleges and universities, and developers across the US to develop and submit an app.

Launching the scheme, the EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said that “harnessing American ingenuity” would “help present useful information in a user-friendly way for our families, neighbours and communities”. Applications must use the EPA's data and be accessible via the web or a mobile device. Submissions are due by September 16, 2011. Experts will select finalists and winning submissions based their usefulness, innovation, and ability to address one or more of the EPA's seven priorities for the future.

The EPA says the challenge is a step towards a longer term objective of engaging developers and raising awareness about the availability and usefulness of its data.

EPA: http://www.epa.gov/appsfortheenvironment/

International agreements portal

A new portal provides a one-stop-shop for information on major international agreements relating to the environment. Covering so-called ‘multilateral agreements’ (MEAs) such as the Stockholm Convention on POPs and the CITES Convention on endangered species, the portal provides governments, researchers and the public at large with information from one central location.

Supported by UNEP, the initiative currently includes 17 MEAs from 12 Secretariats hosted by three UN organisations and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). It is open to observers involved in MEA information and data management.

InforMEA: http://www.informea.org

References

1. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 488.
2. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2010, 12, 1941.
3. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 1123.
4. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 1008.
5. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 489; M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 1861.
6. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 782.
7. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 1862.
8. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 782.
9. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 490.
10. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 1129.
11. M. Sharpe, J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 17.

---