Transcript Status of the UNEP Global Mercury Assessment and U.S. EPA

Status of the UNEP Global
Mercury Assessment
and U.S. EPA Support
May 1, 2002
Presented by Marilyn Engle
U.S. EPA, Office of International
Affairs (EPA/OIA)
Mercury is a Global Problem
• Mercury cycles globally
• About 40% of deposition in U.S. comes from
sources outside our borders; and
• About 65% of U.S. anthropogenic emissions
deposit outside our borders
• Nicola Pirone (1996) observed:
– Emissions are declining in U.S.
– However, “releases from human activities globally will
increase mercury deposition in the U.S. unless
reductions also occur in other countries”
• We cannot meet our Hg goals by U.S. actions alone
• Hence, we need to consider the international
dimension as part of our national Hg policies
What is needed?
• We must have an international plan; coordinating
with other countries to effectively reduce global
emissions & use
• EPA has increased the priority given to addressing
global mercury issues
• For example, the EPA Hg Action Plan addresses:
– International long-range transport and fate
– Mercury as a global commodity
– Technology transfer and capacity building to
help reduce global releases and exposures
• ECOS and others have also expressed the
need for global study and action
Current International Agreements Addressing
Mercury Bilaterally and Regionally
• 1997 Great Lakes Binational Strategy
– U.S. & Canada
• North American CEC Mercury Action Plan
– Mexico, Canada, U.S.
• Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy – Arctic
Council
– Numerous pollutants; 8 nations involved
• LRTAP Heavy Metals Protocol
– Nations of the UN Economic Comm. for Europe….
– Agree to control Hg emissions & report emissions
• Northeast Mercury Study (Framework for Action)
– U.S. Northeast States & Eastern Canadian Provinces
However, these International
Agreements do not provide a
comprehensive global assessment or
international risk management
approaches & policies
Thus, a Global Mercury Assessment
and Development of International
Policy Options are Needed
UNEP Global Mercury Assessment
• U.S. EPA/OIA & Dept of State (DOS) led
negotiation of UNEP Governing Council decision
(on 2/9/02) to conduct a global Hg assessment
• The ongoing UNEP Assessment is evaluating:
– Sources, emissions inventories, long-range transport,
chemical transformations, and fate
– Production & use patterns as a global commodity
– Prevention & Control Technologies & Practices, with
associated costs & effectiveness
– Exposures, effects, impacts to humans and ecosystems
– Ongoing actions & plans for controlling releases and
limiting use and exposures
• Study will id research needs; and outline policy
options for addressing global adverse impacts
UNEP WorkPlan
• Collecting and analyzing information submitted by
many Governments, Inter-government organizations
(IGOs), and non-government organizations (NGOs)
• Producing a Scientific Assessment Report as well
as Policy Options to present to UNEP Governing
Council in February 2003 for their consideration
• Forming Working Group (WG)
– Members nominated by Governments & NGOs
– Participate in review process, report preparation,
and discuss policy options
• Other people (not on WG) will also have
opportunity to participate, review materials
• Process may lead to international agreements
U.S. Input and Support
• EPA (and other Federal Agencies) submitted
substantial technical information in each topic
area, coordinated by DOS, on August 31, 2001
• EPA provided $100K in year 2001
– About 40% of total pledges
• Additional support planned for 2002
• The primary EPA reps to WG have been selected
– Additional experts from EPA and other Agencies
will be involved working through the primary reps
Status and Timeline
• In 3/02, UNEP alerted nations of serious shortage
of funds; thus needed to pare down review process
• After considering 2 options and input from parties,
UNEP revised plans to the following:
– UNEP plans to distribute a draft Assessment to
WG in April/May 2002 (for 6 week review)
– WG Meeting (in English only), in 9/02 in Geneva
• Meeting papers (in English) will be distributed 6
weeks prior to meeting
– Final Assessment report by December 2002
– Governing Council Meeting in February 2003
Countries responding to date:
• Albania, Armenia, Austria, Bahamas, Republic of Belarus,
Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Republic of
Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad,
China, Cote I’Ivoire, Croatia, Denmark, Ethiopia, Finland,
France, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Republic of Guinea,
Honduras, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya,
Republic of Korea, Kyrgyz Republic, Lesotho, Libya,
Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Republic of Moldova,
Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Peru,
Philippines, Seychelles, Slovak Republic, South Africa,
Spain, Sweden, Thailand, The United Republic of
Tanzania, The United States, Togo, Kingdom of Tonga, and
Zimbabwe
NGOs responding to date
• Ban Mercury Working Group; Basel Action
Network; Bellona Foundation; Ecograph;
GRASIM Industries LTD; Greenpeace;
Health Care Without Harm; ICESPS;
MAYA, S.A.; Northeast Midwest Institute;
Physicians for Social Responsibility (SR),
STORM Coalition; World Chlorine Council
(WCC)
How Can You be Involved?
• UNEP wants process to be “expeditious, open,
transparent and inclusive”
• People & organizations can be involved by
working through WG members, or possibly by
contacting UNEP directly
• The UNEP Global Mercury Assessment website
is: www.chem.unep.ch/mercury
• Website provides info on WG members, timetable,
WorkPlan, Status, and is continually updated