BIWA-KO (LAKE BIWA) Japan

http://www.ilec.or.jp/database/asi/asi-01.html

BIWA-KO (LAKE BIWA)

EUTROPHICATION

Nuisance caused by eutrophication

unusual algal bloom: Uroglena americana (1977-1985), Peridinium spp. (since 1972), Anabaena spp. (since 1965), etc. Overgrowth of exotic water weeds: Elodea nuttallii (1965-1970, 1980-) and Egeric densa (1971-1975). Disturbed filtration in cleaning beds for city water: Since 1959. Foul smell of tap water: Since 1969; mainly due to the generation of geosmin associated with the bloom of Phormidium, Anabaena, etc.

The Northern Lake remained oligotrophic until around 1955, though the eutrophication had already started in pre-war days as seen in the past trend of transparency in Fig. ASI-1-4. However, it was suddenly accelerated by the post-war industrialization of the lake's catchment area. The first clogging trouble in the sand filter of a city water supply to Kyoto took place as early as in 1959. Between 1960 and 1965, drastic changes in the biomass and species composition of plankters and benthic animals became apparent. The plankton biomass increased almost tenfold since 1950 (Fig. ASI-1-11), while the primary productivity in Northern Lake nearly doubled between 1965 and 1985. Algal blooms, particularly the so-called "freshwater red tide" caused by Uroglena americana, and the resultant unpleasant smell of tap water from the lake became a matter of keen social concern.

The Water Pollution Control Law legislated in 1970 abated the rate of eutrophication to a considerable extent through the regulation of nutrient level in industrial effluents, but the deterioration of lake water quality did not stop at all due to the steady growth of population and industrial activity in the catchment. The construction of an extensive sewerage network started in 1972 within the framework of the Lake Biwa Comprehensive Development Project, though its progress has been slow owing to the financial burden to local communities.

The residents' voluntary movement against the use of phosphate-containing synthetic detergents resulted in the ban of their use in 1980 by the enforcement of a prefectural ordinance for the prevention of eutrophication of L. Biwa. The P content of lake water was thereby somewhat reduced in past several years, but the effect of the ordinance has been only marginal. To prevent further eutrophication, it seems urgent to take new measures at least until the completion of the sewerage network.

Nutrient Trading (Nitrogen and Phosphorus)

http://www.nutrientnet.org/about.cfm

World Resources Institute

About NutrientNet

What is NutrientNet?
Who is building NutrientNet?
Who uses NutrientNet?
Who are the NutrientNet partners?
Can NutrientNet be adapted for use in my watershed?
What is NutrientNet?

NutrientNet is a suite of web-based tools used to facilitate market-based approaches to improving water quality. NutrientNet has been used extensively for water quality trading programs, but it also has been used for other market-based approaches, such as reverse auctions.

Through a series economic analyses, including Fertile Ground: Nutrient Trading's Potential to Cost-Effectively Improve Water Quality., the World Resources Insitute determined that a number of factors affect the adoption of market-based approaches to water quality improvement. These include high transaction costs, the credibility of nonpoint source reductions, and public participation and oversight. By developing a tool that reduces transaction costs, standardizes the calculation of nonpoint source reductions, and allows the public to view market activity, WRI recognized that it encourage the adoption of market-based approaches. NutrientNet was created to achieve these goals.

Reducing Transaction Costs: NutrientNet provides a system for buyers and sellers to trade nutrient credits, as well as an easy way for program administrators to track projects, credits and trades.

Standardized Calculations of Nonpoint Source Reductions: NutrientNet provides an easy-to-use web-based interface for calculating nutrient reductions and credits. Users only need to login to NutrientNet and enter in characteristics of their agricultural operation, such as field size and soil type. NutrientNet's calculation engine uses the latest scientific research to accurately calculate nutrient reductions for best management practices.

Public Participation and Oversight: NutrientNet makes market activity available to the public. For example, in water quality trading programs, the public can average market prices and completed trades. NutrientNet also provides general information about nutrient trading and seeks to share lessons learned across watersheds.

Who is building NutrientNet?
The creation of NutrientNet is led by the World Resources Institute (WRI), a non-profit environmental group that provides information, ideas and solutions to global environmental problems.

Who uses NutrientNet?
NutrientNet has been developed for 4 watersheds in 5 states (plus the District of Columbia).

Potomac and Kalamazoo Watershed Pilot Project: Developed in 2002-2003, this site was a proof-of-concept for water quality trading in the Potomac and Kalamazoo (MI) watersheds.

Conestoga Watershed (PA) Reverse Auction Site: Developed in 2005, this site was used to conduct two reverse auctions that allocated $486,000 to agricultural management practices based on the lowest cost-per-pound of phosphorus reduction. A total of 92,000 pounds of phosphorus was estimated to be reduced over the lifespan of the projects.
» Read the WRI policy note: Paying for Environmental Performance: Using Reverse Auctions to Allocate Funding for Conservation

Kalamazoo Watershed NutrientNet: Starting in 2005, WRI developed a full-featured version of NutrientNet for Michigan's water quality trading program in the Kalamazoo watershed. This version contains phosphorus and sediment calculation tools for over 20 agricultural management practices, and a marketplace is current in development.
» Visit the website: Kalamazoo Watershed NutrientNet

Pennsylvania State Trading Program: Developed for Pennsylvania's state nutrient trading program, this version of NutrientNet contains nitrogen and phosphorus credit calculation tools, a robust marketplace and an extensive administrative system for trading program managers at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. This project involves trading in both the Susquehanna and Potomac watersheds.
» Visit the website: Pennsylvania NutrientNet

West Virginia Potomac Watershed: WRI is working with West Virginia University, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, and watershed stakeholders to develop NutrientNet for the Potomac Watershed in West Virginia. This site is currently under development and is expected to be released in 2008.



Who are the NutrientNet partners?
A number of organizations and agencies are parterning with WRI to develop NutrientNet, including:

Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, United States
EPA Chesapeake Bay Program, United States
Gun Lake Tribe, United States
Keiser and Associates, United States
Lancaster County Conservation District, United States
Michigan State University (MSU), United States
Natsource, United States
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP ), United States
Pennsylvania Environmental Council, United States
Pennsylvania State University, United States
Texas A & M University, United States
University of Arkansas, United States
US Department of Agriculture (USDA), United States
West Virginia University (WVU)
Can NutrientNet be adapted for use in my watershed?

Cost of Nitrogen and Phosphorous pollution

http://www.waterandwastewater.com/www_services/newsletter/november_17_2008.htm

Phosphorous Pollution Costs US $4.3B Annually

MANHATTAN, KS -- Pollution by phosphorous and nitrogen isn't just bad for lakes, streams and other bodies of fresh water. According to researchers at Kansas State University, it's also bad for Americans' pocketbooks.Freshwater pollution impacts individuals on a level as basic as how much they spend on bottled water, said Walter Dodds, professor of biology at K-State. If you worry about what's in the tap water, you might be shelling out more money for the bottled variety, he said.If your municipal water plant has to spend more money to treat the water coming through your tap, your water bills will increase. If you own a house on a lake that is becoming increasingly polluted, your property values likely may drop. If that lake is a recreation destination, your local economy could take a hit, too."Monetary damages put environmental problems in terms that make policymakers and the public take notice," Dodds said.He and the K-State researchers looked at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data on nitrogen and phosphorous levels in bodies of water throughout the country. Nitrogen and phosphorous are nutrients that are applied to plants as nutrients.Dodds said that the majority of this type of pollution is from nonpoint sources --that is it's not flowing into a lake or stream like sewage outflow coming from one pipe. Rather, the nitrogen and phosphorous are reaching the water from various points, such as, for example, runoff from row crop agriculture across the surrounding countryside.The researchers calculated the money lost from that pollution by looking at factors like decreasing lakefront property values, the cost of treating drinking water and the revenue lost when fewer people take part in recreational activities like fishing or boating.The researchers found that freshwater pollution by phosphorous and nitrogen costs government agencies, drinking water facilities and individual Americans at least $4.3 billion annually. Of that, they calculated that $44 million a year is spent just protecting aquatic species from nutrient pollution."We are providing underestimates," Dodds said. "Although our accounting of the degree of nutrient pollution in the nation is fairly accurate, the true costs of pollution are probably much greater than $4.3 billion."Dodds said he anticipates the research being used by policymakers because it documents the extent of the nutrient pollution problem in the United States and one facet of why it matters."Putting environmental problems in terms of dollars allows people to account for the actual costs of pollution," Dodds said.Web site: http://www.k-state.edu/