FREE ESSAY ON POLLUTION IN EUROPE

POLLUTION IN EUROPE

Water Pollution in Europe
Table of Contents
Pages
1 Introduction
Pros/Cons
2 European/Citizens
Europe's Proposal For Good waters by 2010
3. Europe's Surface Water
Europe's Ground Water
4. The Water Frame Work Directive
Penalties
Waste Advice
5. Solutions to save Europe Waterways
Conclusion
6. Bibliography
Introduction
Water pollution is a problem that effects all living things. Every living organism on
earth requires water to survive. When the water is polluted, it not only effects the
plants, insects, and animals, it harms people. Taking care of this planet's water is
vital to the short term and long term survival of the living things that inhabit the
earth. The oceans, lakes, and streams are constantly polluted by individuals and many
industries. These waters must be cleaned up before the costs are way beyond money and the
damage way beyond repair. Action to clean up the Earth's precious water supply is long
over due. Governments, as well as the individual, in all countries must begin to take
action. Plans must be made to rid the waters of pollution, and prevent any further
destruction of the one and only source of water that Earth has. Governments need to
develop policies and regulations to stop the passage of pollutants into the water. The
individual must take their own action. Using products that do not cause harm to the
ocean, disposing of harmful products, and pushing the government to take action against
water pollution are not only the rights of the individual, but the obligations of the
individual. The action taken now will not only make the planet safer and cleaner for the
present, but for generations to come.
Pros
The pros to saving the ocean are far greater than any cons someone might come up with.
One of the obvious pros is that cleaning up the ocean means a healthier planet.
Contaminating the oceans also contaminates our food supply. Having healthier seafood
makes for healthier people. Cleaning up and taking care of the oceans gives people a good
place for recreation. The process of cleaning up and monitoring the oceans will provide
many new job opportunities. Action to take clean the ocean may sound expensive, but it
will be cheaper in the long run. If the world waits to long to take action, then the
costs to clean up the ocean could be enormous. Letting the oceans reach dangerous levels
of contamination will for sure cost even more money.
Cons
The biggest con in the struggle to save the ocean is cost. The cost to create action
plans for saving the ocean will most definitely be high. Many people might feel that
there are more important things to take care of right now. The oceans do not appear to be
under immediate threat. The plan to clean up the oceans will also be an inconvenience to
many. Industries will have to hire engineers to develop cleaner methods of use and
disposal of harmful substances. Cleaner methods of disposal are usually more expensive.
Many smaller companies may go out of business due to rising costs of production and
disposal. Farmers will have to resort to other chemicals for pesticides and fertilizers
that may not be as effective. The farmer may lose money in taking action to prevent
runoff. The consumer will probably have to pay more for products that are environmentally
sound. The government will have to hire people to enforce the new legislation. 
1
European Citizens
Europe's citizens are increasingly demanding cleaner water, cleaner water for drinking,
cleaner water for bathing, cleaner water as part of their environment, and their local
and regional heritage. The increasing demand by citizens and environmental organisations
for cleaner rivers and lakes, groundwater and coastal beaches is evident. This demand by
citizens is one of the main reasons why the Commission has made water protection one of
the priorities of its work. A new European Water Policy will have to get polluted waters
clean again, and ensure clean waters are kept clean. In achieving these objectives, the
roles of citizens and citizens' groups will be crucial. This is why a new European Water
Policy has to get citizens more involved. . 
Good Waters by 2010 
There are a number of objectives in respect of which the quality of water is protected.
The key ones at European level are general protection of the aquatic ecology, specific
protection of unique and valuable habitats, protection of drinking water resources, and
protection of bathing water. All these objectives must be integrated for each river
basin. It is clear that the last three - special habitats, drinking water areas and
bathing water - apply only to specific bodies of water (those supporting special
wetlands; those identified for drinking water abstraction; those generally used as
bathing areas). In contrast, ecological protection should apply to all waters: the
central requirement of the Treaty is that the environment be protected to a high level in
its entirety.
2
Europe's Surface Water 
A bill was introduced to cover all surface waters. These are the two elements good
ecological status and good chemical status. As no absolute standards for biological
quality can be set which apply across the Community, because of ecological variability,
the controls are specified as allowing only a slight departure from the biological
community which would be expected in conditions of minimal anthropogenic impact. A set of
procedures for identifying that point for a given body of water, and establishing
particular chemical or hydro morphological standards to achieve it, is provided, together
with a system for ensuring that each member state interprets the bill in a consistent
way. The system is somewhat complicated, but this is will happen given the extent of
ecological variability, and the large number of parameters, which must be dealt with. 
Good chemical status is defined in terms of compliance with all the quality standards
established for chemical substances at European level. The Directive also provides a
purpose for renewing these standards and establishing new ones by means of a
prioritization mechanism for hazardous chemicals. This will ensure at least a minimum
chemical quality, particularly in relation to very toxic substances, everywhere in the
Community. 
Europe's Groundwater 
The case of groundwater is somewhat different. The presumption in relation to groundwater
should broadly be that it should not be polluted at all. For this reason, setting
chemical quality standards may not be the best approach, as it gives the impression of an
allowed level of pollution to which Member States can fill up. A very few such standards
have been established at European level for particular issues (nitrates, pesticides and
biocides), and these will always be there.. But for general protection, we have taken
another approach. It is essentially a precautionary one. It comprises a prohibition on
direct discharges to groundwater, and (to cover indirect discharges) a requirement to
monitor groundwater bodies so as to detect changes in chemical composition, and to
reverse any anthropogenic ally induced upward pollution trend. Taken together, these
should ensure the protection of groundwater from all contamination, according to the
principle of minimum anthropogenic impact. 
3
The Water Framework Directive
Quality standards can underestimate the effect of a particular substance on the
ecosystem, due to the limitations in scientific knowledge regarding dose-response
relationships and the mechanics of transport within the environment. For this reason, a
consensus has developed that both are needed in practice - a combined approach. The Water
Framework Directive makes this. It does so by the source side, it requires that as part
of the basic measures to be taken in the river basin, all existing technology-driven
source-based controls must be implemented as a first step. But over and above this, it
also sets out a framework for developing more controls. On the effects side, it
coordinates all the environmental objectives in existing legislation, and provides a new
overall objective of good status for all waters, and requires that where the measures
taken on the source side are not sufficient to achieve these objectives, additional ones
are required. If there is a company that is polluting to much there are penalties.
PENALTIES
Anyone who disposes of a substance at sea, except in accordance with a permit, or anyone
who fails to make an emergency report is guilty of an offence. 
Penalties range up to $300, 000 or six months imprisonment, or both, on summary
conviction and up to $1 million or 3 years imprisonment, or both, on indictment.
Waste Advice
Hazardous materials can often be identified by certain characteristics that they possess
such as being corrosive, flammable, reactive or toxic. Hazardous materials are used at
most federal facilities in the Atlantic Region for activities as ordinary as cleaning to
highly specialized work with radioactive materials. Most materials are consumed during
use. Some hazardous materials, however, may no longer be required, such as laboratory
chemicals, some may have reached the end of their lifespan, such as batteries and used
oil, and some may have been found to be a health or environmental concern, such as leaded
paint and asbestos. These hazardous materials, and sometimes their containers, become
waste and must be disposed of safely. 
Within the year, Federal Hazardous Waste Regulations, are expected to be in place. These
Regulations will apply to the management of hazardous waste on federal lands and to
federal works and undertakings. These Regulations will place limits on gaseous releases
to the air, effluent releases and leach ate releases from solids. 
. 4
Solutions to Europe's Water Ways
Many years ago nobody would have thought that Europe's water ways would ever need saving.
The covers over 17% of the earth's surface. People would wonder how something so colossal
ever be effected by their actions. Unfortunately, the oceans do suffer from mankind's
careless, selfish acts. There are numerous ways to begin to clean up the oceans. These
solutions range from individual action to government action. The individual can begin to
help stop the leaking and dumping of harmful pollutants into the river. . One of the best
ways to get involved in the clean up and preservation of the ocean is to become educated
on the subject, get involved, and push for government action. Individuals can become
involved by helping to organize activities that involve focusing on the marine
environment. Some of these activates might be: beach seeps, eco-regattas, youth projects,
exhibits, concerts, research, and conferences The EPA suggests that the individual can
take care of the oceans by being responsible, and getting involved. Each person can keep
themselves informed of current issues, use and dispose of products properly, and use the
right to vote to get legislation passed The Natural Resource Defense Council has a few
ways in which to help clean the oceans and prevent any further pollution. 
Conclusion 
Much progress has been made in water protection in Europe, in individual Member States,
but also in tackling significant problems at European level. But Europe's waters are
still in need of increased efforts to get them clean or to keep them clean. After 25
years of European water legislation, this demand is expressed, not only by the scientific
community and other experts, but to an ever increasing extent by citizens and
environmental organizations. We should take up the challenge of water protection, one of
the great challenges for the European Union, as it approaches the new millennium. Let us
seize the initiative generated by the present political process on the Water Framework
Directive for the benefit of all Europe's citizens and waters: 
5
Bibliography
Holing, Dwight, eds. Ebb Tide for Pollution: Action for Cleaning up Coastal
Waters.National Resources Defense Council: New York, 1989. 
Weber, Peter. Abandened Seas: Reversing the Decline of the Oceans* Worldwatch Paper 116,
Library of Congress, November 1993. 
Windom, H.L., and R.A Duce eds. Marine Pollutant Transfer. Massachusetts: Lexington
Books, 1973. 
Environmental Protection Agency. The Quality of Our Nation's Water. 1992. U.S. EPA. World
Wide Web. Available at: http//www.epa.gov/305b/sum1.html#SEC8. 
Ocean Institute of Canada. Oceans Day. 1995. Nova Scotia, Canada. World Wide Web.
Available at: http://www.conveyor.com/oceansday.html. 
Smithsonian's Ocean Planet. Oceans in Peril. 1995. World Wide Web. Available at:
http://seawifs.nasa.gov:80/OCEAN_PLANET/HTML. 
Water Pollution.1995. Available at:
http://riceinfo.rice.edu/projects/TELRC/vns/Wpage_10.html 
Bibliography
Bibliography
Holing, Dwight, eds. Ebb Tide for Pollution: Action for Cleaning up Coastal
Waters.National Resources Defense Council: New York, 1989. 
Weber, Peter. Abandened Seas: Reversing the Decline of the Oceans> Worldwatch Paper 116,
Library of Congress, November 1993. 
Windom, H.L., and R.A Duce eds. Marine Pollutant Transfer. Massachusetts: Lexington
Books, 1973. 
Environmental Protection Agency. The Quality of Our Nation's Water. 1992. U.S. EPA. World
Wide Web. Available at: http//www.epa.gov/305b/sum1.html#SEC8. 
Ocean Institute of Canada. Oceans Day. 1995. Nova Scotia, Canada. World Wide Web.
Available at: http://www.conveyor.com/oceansday.html. 
Smithsonian's Ocean Planet. Oceans in Peril. 1995. World Wide Web. Available at:
http://seawifs.nasa.gov:80/OCEAN_PLANET/HTML. 
Water Pollution.1995. Available at:
http://riceinfo.rice.edu/projects/TELRC/vns/Wpage_10.html