| Front page | | Contents | | Previous | | Next |

Potential measures for reduction of releases of heavy metals, POPs, HCFCs, BFRs and industrial greenhouse gases with particular reference to Russia, Ukraine and China

4 Heavy metals

• 4.1 Mercury
  • 4.1.2 The mercury problem
  • 4.1.3 Sources and releases
  • 4.1.4 Main reduction measures
  • 4.1.5 International regulation and agreements
  • 4.1.6 Overview of existing activities
• 4.2 Lead
  • 4.2.1 Sources and releases
  • 4.2.2 Main reduction measures
  • 4.2.3 International regulation and agreements
  • 4.2.4 Overview of existing activities
• 4.3 Cadmium
  • 4.3.1 Sources and releases
  • 4.3.2 Main reduction measures
  • 4.3.3 International regulation and agreements
  • 4.3.4 Overview of existing activities

4.1 Mercury

4.1.2 The mercury problem

The following introduction is an extract of the key findings of the Global Mercury Assessment (UNEP, 2002). It was concluded in the assessment report 1) that significant evidence exists of mercury's adverse effects on a global level and 2) that initiatives should be taken to address these effects. These conclusions were later adopted by the Governing Council of UNEP. After two Governing Council meetings in 2003 and 2005 with measures on mercury on the agenda, a number of recommendations for national and international initiatives to enhance mercury release reductions have been agreed on. The Governing Council concluded that, for the time being, no global instrument on mercury reductions should be launched.

Environmental mercury levels have increased considerably since the on-set of the industrial age. Mercury is now present in various environmental media and food (especially fish) all over the globe at levels that adversely affect humans and wildlife. Widespread exposures are occurring due to human-generated sources, and past practices have left an inheritance of mercury in landfills, mine tailings, contaminated industrial sites, soils and sediments. Even regions with no significant mercury releases, such as the Arctic, are adversely affected due to the transcontinental and global transport of mercury.

The most significant releases of mercury pollution are emissions to air, but mercury is also released from various sources directly to water and land. Once released, mercury persists in the environment, where it circulates between air, water, sediments, soil and biota in various forms. Current emissions add to the global pool; mercury that is continuously mobilised, deposited on land and water, and re-mobilised.

Once deposited, the mercury form can change (primarily by microbial metabolism) to methylmercury, which has the capacity to bioaccumulate in organisms and to concentrate up through the food chains (biomagnify), especially in the aquatic food chain (fish and marine mammals). Methylmercury is therefore the form of greatest concern. Nearly all of the mercury in fish is methylmercury.

Mercury has caused a variety of documented, significant, adverse impacts on human health and the environment throughout the world. Mercury and its compounds are highly toxic, especially to the developing nervous system. The toxicity to humans and other organisms depends on the chemical form, the amount, the pathway of exposure and the vulnerability of the person exposed. Human exposure to mercury can result from a variety of pathways, including, but not limited to, consumption of fish, occupational and household uses, dental amalgams and mercury-containing vaccines.

Some populations are especially susceptible to mercury exposure, most notably the fetus, the new-born, and young children because of the sensitivity of the developing nervous system. Indigenous populations and others, who consume higher amounts of contaminated fish or marine mammals, as well as workers who are exposed to mercury, such as in small-scale gold and silver mining, may be highly exposed to mercury and are therefore at risk.

There are also particularly vulnerable ecosystems and wildlife populations. These include top predators in aquatic food webs (such as fish-eating birds and mammals), Arctic ecosystems, wetlands, tropical ecosystems and soil microbial communities.

Intervention

Mercury pollution has significant impacts at local, national, regional and global levels. These impacts can be addressed through a range of actions at each of these levels, targeting reductions in uses, releases and exposures. Numerous actions implemented in Europe, North America and elsewhere have successfully reduced uses and releases of mercury; for example some reduction of releases from coal combustion and waste incineration. However, inventories are still incomplete in these regions, and some releases are still significant. Also, global releases are not reported as decreasing similarly, probably because of the growth of certain sectors in other parts of the world. The extent of decreases in environmental levels and ecosystem improvements in response to decreased releases of mercury will vary considerably depending on local ecosystem characteristics and other factors, and in some cases may take several decades. However, an evaluation of mercury levels in Swedish lakes indicates that by reducing releases, environmental levels of mercury, such as in freshwater fish, may be reduced significantly in specific locations within one to two decades.

4.1.3 Sources and releases

Global release data

The following table illustrates the current comprehension of major contributions to atmospheric mercury releases globally. The data should likely be considered best available data, and is subject to considerable uncertainties; not all sources are included in the inventory. Note that releases to other media (water, land) are not included and may in some cases be significant.

Table 4-1 Estimates of global atmospheric emissions of mercury from a number of major anthropogenic sources in 1995 (metric tons/year; Pirrone et al., 1996 and 2001, as cited in UNEP, 2002)

Notes

*1 Estimates of maximum values, which are regarded as close to the best estimate value by the authors of the inventory. Totals represent total of the sources mentioned in this table, not all known sources.

*2 The total emission estimate for 1990 also includes 171.7 metric tons from chlor-alkali production and other “less significant” sources.

*3 The authors of the inventory state that releases from waste incineration are most likely underestimated due to lack of national data on wastes (Pirrone et al., 2001).

*4 Not including releases from gold extraction (has been estimated by Lacerda (1997) at up to 460 metric tons/year at about 1990, of which most was released to the atmosphere). Also not including releases from chlor-alkali production and "other sources". The uncertainty on the total is significant – the authors mention that an estimation accuracy of less than 50 percent can be assigned for mercury in Europe (Pirrone et al., 2001). Most likely, the inaccuracy is higher for large parts of the world.

Russia

As part of the ACAP mercury project, ACAP (2005) developed the most detailed inventory of mercury releases, uses and wastes for Russia available so far. The inventory focused on atmospheric releases and total mobilisation (consumption plus releases) of mercury, but presented releases to water, soil, waste etc., where data were available to do so. An overview of reported releases and consumption/mobilisation in the Russia is given in table 4-2.

Note that the atmospheric releases values presented for production of thermometers, production of light sources and other products (included in "other intentional uses") do not represent all releases from these products in their life cycle; the releases from the incineration of the spent products after their use are included in the waste treatment entries in the table.

Table 4-2 Overview of reported releases and consumption/mobilisation in Russia (from ACAP 2005a)*1

*1 Best estimates; "+ ?" indicates that the value only represents the assessed activities but some categories not been assessed may add significantly to the total. Note that the total may be equally higher than indicated.

*2 Direct emissions from the chlor-alkali production processes. In 2002 totally 56 t lost from the process was unaccounted for. A part of this may be emitted to the air.

Ukraine

According to the available information no national inventories of mercury releases have been made for Ukraine. At UNEP's mercury workshop in Kiev in 2004 a Ukrainian representative expressed a wish for Ukraine being one of the countries where UNEP's Mercury Inventory Toolkit Demo (under development by COWI for UNEP) could be tested.

China

Much focus has been on China in the discussions of global mercury releases. China is responsible for significant parts of the releases from Asia shown in table 4-1 above. A rough inventory of atmospheric releases in China was developed by Feng Xinbin (2005), see table 4-3 below. Note that gold mining was considered a major mercury release source in 1995. Mercury use in artisanal gold mining became illegal in 2000 in China and may perhaps have been reduced since then. Another aspect which Feng Xinbin describes is that the mercury consumption is increasing, and most of the increase seems to take place in the battery manufacturing sector. This is in spite of an observed steady decrease of the demand for mercury containing batteries in the west due to strict regulation in North America and Europe.

Table 4-3 Emission factors and rough inventory of atmospheric mercury releases from China in 1995 (Feng Xinbin, 2005)

Mercury source categories present in China were also summarised by Chengang Lu (2004) as shown in table 4-4 at UNEP's mercury workshop in Thailand in 2004. The source categories are by and large the same categories as identified in Russia, except for the dedicated mercury mining taking place in China. A source category which is not mentioned in the table, but which other information indicates may perhaps still be substantial, is the intentional use of mercury for amalgamation in both artisanal and large-scale gold mining in China.

Table 4-4 Mercury source categories identified in China (Chengang Lu, 2004)

4.1.4 Main reduction measures

The main reduction measures relevant to the Arctic countries, including Russia, were presented and discussed by ACAP (2005b). Suggestions for specific reduction/prevention actions in Russia are under development in cooperation between the Russian Federal Service for Environmental, Technical and Atomic Supervision and the Danish EPA (assisted by COWI). Both of these activities are part of the Arctic Council ACAP mercury project coordinated by the Danish EPA. The measures are listed in table 4-5 below. The list includes most of the generally applicable reduction measures, but is not exhaustive. Note that most products with intentional mercury use are covered under the waste treatment heading in the table, because most of the mercury releases from products take place in the waste treatment phase. In specific cases manufacturing and use of such products may however also result in mercury releases.

For a summarised introduction to the main principles of reductions measures for mercury, see the introduction to this section on mercury.

Table 4-5 Overview of main release reduction measures for mercury in the Arctic countries (from the ACAP mercury project, including (ACAP, 2005b)

4.1.5 International regulation and agreements

Table 4-6 presents a summarised overview of the coverage in relevant agreements of the main mercury release source categories present in the Arctic countries. The source categories are ranked, the largest first, according to their atmospheric releases across all Arctic countries. Measures in bold are binding with specific deadlines and conditions.

CLRTAP-HM

One major agreement for mercury in the Arctic and European context, the UNECE CLRTAP HM Protocol, stipulates that each Party shall reduce its total annual mercury emissions into the atmosphere from the level of the emission in a set reference year, taking effective measures, appropriate to its particular circumstances. For specific sources, BAT and limit values should be applied (indicated in the table below), but a Party may, as an alternative, apply different emission reduction strategies that achieve equivalent overall emission reductions. Any Party whose total land area is greater than 6,000,000 km² (e.g. Russia) may, provided it can document that similar reductions have been achieved by other means, notify the secretariat that it wishes to be exempted from the obligations regarding limit values and BAT in existing stationary sources. So far only Canada has used this possibility. Ukraine has ratified the HM protocol, whereas the protocol is still not signed by Russia.

UNEP

Besides the agreements mentioned in the table, it should be noted that perhaps the most important agreement on mercury globally is the decisions taken in February 2003 and February 2005 by the Governing Council of UNEP (2003, 2005). They are not included in the table, because they address mercury broadly, and not with any particular stress on individual source categories. The 2005 decision strengthens the UNEP mercury programme, requests UNEP to develop a report on the supply, trade and demand for mercury on the global market for consideration at the 2006 session of the Governing Council and calls for partnerships between Governments and other stakeholders as an additional approach to reducing risks to human health and the environment from mercury. The decision encourages Governments, the private sector and international organizations to take immediate actions to reduce the risks to human health and the environment posed on a global scale by mercury in products and production processes. Possible actions mentioned include: application and sharing of information on best available techniques and measures to reduce mercury emissions from point sources, taking action related to mercury in products (such as batteries) and production processes (such as chlor-alkali facilities) through, for example, when warranted, introduction of bans or restrictions of uses and considering curbing primary production and the introduction into commerce of excess mercury supply. The Governing Council will again consider progress and assess, at the 2006 session of the Governing Council, the need for further action on mercury, considering a full range of options, including the possibility of a legally binding instrument, partnerships and other actions.

For the Stockholm Convention and the CRLTAP HM protocol, a brief summary on the objectives, scope, and included substances is given in appendix 1.

Table 4-6 Summarised overview of the coverage of mercury in relevant agree-ments (based on Danish EPA, 2005?)

*1 NARAP-Hg =The North American Regional Action Plan for Mercury. CLRTAP-HM = The Heavy Metals Protocol of the Convention for Long-Range Transboundary Atmospheric Pollution

*2 Note that the primary mercury releases from products happen in the waste treatment phase. Individual products entries in the table do not include releases from the waste treatment phase, but only for manufacture and use. Products constitute large parts of the mercury input to the waste treatment sectors in some countries.

*3 Only for new facilities.

*4 Limit values for medical waste incineration are not included and are to be evaluated by the parties before December 2005.

*5 Annex 1 of the Helsinki Convention states that: "…..the Contracting Parties shall endeavour to minimize and, whenever possible, to ban the use of the following substances as pesticides in the Baltic Sea Area and its catchment area:…..Mercury compounds….".

4.1.6 Overview of existing activities

An overview of identified, existing activities conducted by donor organisations and international finance institutions is presented in table 4-7 below.

It should be noted that in addition to the mentioned projects, a number of projects exist which may affect mercury releases indirectly. This is particularly the case for a large number of energy related projects being implemented in Russia, Ukraine and China, mainly to address the climate change problem. For example, projects on energy efficiency and renewable energy production have the potential for contributing significantly to mercury release reductions due to reduction of coal combustion. Unless such projects have direct relevance to the specific suggestions given for additional measures in this report, they have not been included in the lists of on-going activities.

Table 4-7 Existing initiatives in Russia, Ukraine and China with relation to mercury releases

*1 Reference www.world-bank.org; projects: 77 WB projects in Russia; 0 titles including Hg specifically; * 12 titles with possible source category relevance; * Further 8 titles, of less possible relevance (not read);'

Other information about ongoing activities - Russia

Russia is taking part in the ACAP Mercury Project ("Reduction of atmospheric releases of mercury from the Arctic States"). A substantial element of the pro-ject is to support mercury reduction activities in the Federation. One action in the ACAP project has been to prepare a national mercury release inventory for Russia (ACAP, 2005). The inventory is the most detailed ever for Russia, and is forming the basis for all other ACAP activities on mercury in Russia. Also, a draft input to priority actions on mercury in Russia was prepared as part of the ACAP Mercury project (ACAP , 2005c). As of April 2005, this document is in finalisation within the ACAP mercury project together with the Russian members of the Steering group (Russian Federal Service for Environmental, Technical and Atomic Supervision "Rostechnadzor"). The catalogue of measures presented in the document has already been used in Rostechnadzor's preparation of input to an expected meeting of the Russian National Safety Council.

Also as part of the ACAP Mercury Project, three potential demonstration projects for mercury reductions in the Russian Federation are under evaluation (by April 2005). It is expecting that 1-2 projects may be selected for further demonstration implementation:

• Mercury release reductions and mercury-pesticide destruction at a mercury recycling plant.
• Collection and treatment of spent mercury lamps and other mercury-containing waste.
• Mercury release reduction with carbon injection at a coal power plant (pilot scale).

China

The single source category with the largest reported atmospheric mercury releases globally is coal combustion for power production and other uses. China has been mentioned as one of the major contributors to these releases globally. The power demand is increasing very rapidly in China, and the production capacity is continuously built out. The USA and perhaps other countries have measurement and perhaps inventory activities in progress for coal-fired power combustion in China. The details of the US activities are not known.

The study by Feng Xinbin (2005) mentioned above, and a few earlier studies not reviewed here, indicate that a number of studies on mercury pollution have been performed in China over the years, and that a scientific community on the issue exists in China. Most studies address local pollution incidents, but some seam to consider the regional or national level. Most existing studies are only reported in Chinese and have not been published internationally.

4.2 Lead

Lead is a heavy metal with a high toxicity and has no known beneficial effects in living organisms. Lead is toxic at very low exposure levels and has acute and chronic effects on health and the environment. Lead is not degradable in nature and will thus, once released to the environment, stay in circulation.

In humans lead can affect the nervous system, the reproductive system, and the heart and blood system. Chronic low exposure is of concern. Lead accumulates in the bone structure in humans and can be released under pregnancy from the bone structure to the blood. Lead is causing concern in particular due to the possible impacts on children. Lead influences the nervous system. This influences learning abilities and behaviour. A source of particular importance to the exposure of the general population has been lead additives to petrol.

In the environment lead is known to be toxic to plants, animals and microorganisms. The demonstrated effects of lead on birds ingesting lead shot and sinkers have led to the phase out of lead for these purposes in a number of countries. Lead is, contrary to mercury and the POPs, in general not biomagnified in the food chains.

It is characteristic to lead that many different products containing lead will end up in waste management systems and be a source of lead to incineration plants and/or landfills. Significant quantities of lead are continuously stockpiled in landfills and other deposits and represent a potential for future releases to the environment.

Long-range transport of lead by air is demonstrated from ice core samples from Greenland. Emissions from Eurasia and North America must be considered important sources for lead to the Arctic Region.

4.2.1 Sources and releases

Consumption

The global consumption of lead has during the period 1970 to 2000 increased from 4.5 million tonnes to 6.5 million tonnes (LDAI 2002). In the absence of global consumption figures, the consumption by end uses in the OECD countries in 1970, 1990 and 2000 is shown in table 3.4.

The most significant changes in the overall use pattern in the OECD countries are an increased consumption for batteries and a decrease in the areas of cable sheeting and petrol additives.

Table 4-8 Lead consumption by end uses in OECD countries (based on Hansen and Lassen 2003a)

Original sources: *1 (OECD 1993) and *2 (LDAI 2002). For details see Hansen and Lassen 2003a.

Lead compounds have during the whole period accounted for about 10% of the total, but some major changes within this category have taken place. A breakdown of the production in consumption in OECD countries in 1990 is shown in table 4-9. The major part of the lead compounds is today glass pigments for cathode ray tubes and crystal glass and stabilisers for PVC. Although lead compounds account only for 10% of the consumption, they take up a more significant part of lead disposed of to landfills and releases to the environment as the compounds are, apart from cathode ray tubes, in general not recycled.

Table 4-9 Lead compounds consumption by end uses in OECD countries 1990 (derived from /OECD 1993/)

Emission to air

In the mid-1990s fuel additives still accounted for 74% of the global lead emission to air (table 4-10). This amount will due to the widespread phase-out today be significantly lower making non-ferrous metal production and stationary fuel combustion (mainly coal combustion) the main source categories. The releases to the atmosphere are of particular concern because of the transboundary nature of the pollution.

Table 4-10 Global atmospheric emission of lead in mid-1990s (Pacyna & Pacyna 2001)

Releases to water and soil

The global releases of lead to land was in 1983 estimated at 804,000-1,820,000 t/year; the main sources being atmospheric deposition, waste of commercial products (landfilled), mine tailings and smelter slags and wastes (Nriagu and Pacyna 1988). The atmospheric fall-out will be smaller today, whereas the other sources most probably have increased. Lead disposed of in waste products represent a potential release to soil and water environments in the future.

The direct releases to water environments excluding atmospheric deposition were estimated at 10,000-67,000 t/year.

Russia

In 1997, a white paper on lead contamination of the environment and the effect on human health in Russia was prepared by Russian Ecological Federal Information Agency by grants from US AID and the Federal Ecological Fund of the Russian Federation (SCEP 1997). The following is extracted from this document unless otherwise indicated.

Total releases to the air and water and waste production in 1995 are shown in table 4-11.

Table 4-11 Sources of lead releases to the environment in Russia for 1995 by industry and activity (SCEP 1997) tons of lead)

Notes (as indicated in SCEP 1997):

*1 Lead-containing wastes of all branches except those used, neutralized, properly buried at official sites or placed in proper storage.

*2 Estimate for 1993.

*3 Production of lead minimum (Author's comment: = red lead).

*4 Estimate of the amount of lead that leaked into the ground or water as electrolyte and paste from car batteries during their destruction.

*5 Worn-out car batteries except for those collected by the Committee for Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals.

The major source of atmospheric releases, vehicle transport, has in the meantime ceased as leaded petrol has been phased out 100% in Russia (UNEP 2004).

In 1995, approximately 660 tons lead was released to the atmosphere by non-ferrous metallurgical enterprises. Approximately 94% of this was discharged by 5 enterprises: Middle-Ural Copper-Smelting Factory (291 t/yr), JSC Sviatogor-Krasnouralsk Copper-Smelting Plant (170 t/yr); Kirovgrad Copper-Smelting Plant (11 t/yr); JSC Dalpolimetall (28 t/yr); and the Electrozinc factory (16 t/yr).

According to the white paper the inadequacy of particle detection systems available at non-ferrous metallurgical enterprises in the Urals is a vital factor that also determines the amount of lead discharges into the atmosphere.

The production of car batteries in the machine tool industry consumes half of the lead that was used in the country. In 1995, total discharges into the atmosphere by seven car battery plants in Russia, which form the JSC Elektrozariad, made up approximately 38.2 tons lead; total disposal into bodies of water (through sewers) was 35.3 tons.

The releases from glass production were 100-200 t/year.

With the transition to using plastic materials for sheets in the production of cables, cable factories had decreased their consumption of lead and lead alloys. In 1995, the consumption of lead within factories of this sub-industry has decreased to 5,000 tons, and the releases from these processes were considered insignificant.

According to official Russia statistics, the releases of lead from stationary sources is at the same level today as in 1995. The total releases from stationary sources in 2003 are reported at 632 tonnes lead (MNR 2004).

To what extent the releases from other sources has changed significantly has not been investigated, but most probably the main source categories identified in the white paper are also the main categories today.

Besides measures to reduce the use of leaded gasoline, the white paper proposes measures targeting recycling of batteries, production of batteries, substitution of lead shot, emissions from the metallurgical sector, lead waste from households and industries, substitution of lead pigments and phase-out of tin cans with leaded soldering.

Ukraine

No overview on lead consumption and lead releases in Ukraine has been identified.

Primary lead is not produced in Ukraine, whereas the secondary production totalled 12,000 t in 2003 (Smith 2003.) The totally reported lead emission to the air from Ukraine in 2004 was 144.5 t (EMEP 2005).

Leaded petrol has been phased out 100% in Ukraine as of 2001 (UNEP 2004).

China

It has not been possible to identify any comprehensive assessments of the use and releases of lead in China.

China is the world's second largest producer of primary lead with a mine production of 660,000 t in 2003 (Smith 2003). The refinery production totals 1,100,000 t primary and 230,000 t secondary lead. Further increases in the vehicle fleet, increased exports of automotive batteries, and ongoing investment in the telecommunications and information technology sectors are expected to result in a lead demand growth of 10.5% in 2004 (Smith 2003). Key lead applications in China at present are lead-acid batteries, cable sheets, lead products, chemical products and alloys. Lead-acid battery production is the largest consumer and made up 67% of total lead consumption in China in 1999 (Feng 2005).

According to UNEP (2004) leaded petrol is today 100% phased out in China.

With the large primary and secondary production of lead it must be expected that the lead releases from this sector may be very significant. The state of the secondary lead sector is indicated by the following quotation:

"However, China's lead-recycling industry is underdeveloped, with production lagging far behind that of North America, Europe and Japan, where highly developed auto industries provide adequate raw materials for lead recycling. Most enterprises still use old polluting methods, and, to date, only two have adopted environment-friendly techniques. Experts have called for the strengthening of regulations in the industry, both for development and environmental protection." (China.org 1999)

According to articles of China Daily two issues related to lead in electronics are on the agenda: Complying with the EU RoHS Directive (Directive 2002/95/EC on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment) and collection and recycling of electronics. China exported about USD 380 billion worth of electric and electronic products in 2003 and about 30 per cent of them went into the European market and the complying with the RoHS directive will result in decreased use of lead in the electronic industry.

According to China Daily (2004) the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the country's top economic policy planning body, is currently circulating on its website a draft regulation on recycling old or scrap electronics, in a hope to elicit opinions from the public, before it is officially enacted. Currently, only a tiny portion of scrap electronics is being adequately handled, resulting in a huge waste of resources and environmental damage (China Daily 2004).

4.2.2 Main reduction measures

Technical measures for reduction of lead releases for major source categories are summarised in table 5-3.

Contrary to mercury, the main part of lead and cadmium is adhered to particles in the flue gas and effectively captured with air pollution controls for emission of particulate matter (PM) and sulphur/acid flue gases. The driving force for implementing more efficient controls will in power plants, industrial installations (except installations specifically using lead) and waste incinerators primarily be to reduce the emission of particulate matter, acid gases, NO_x, mercury and PCDD/PCDFs.

By the flue gas treatment system the lead is directed to other media (waste), and the most efficient measures for reducing the lead releases to all media are thus to reduce the lead input to the processes, e.g. by reducing non-essential intentional lead uses and the use of lead containing fuels and raw materials (particularly coal) and improved recycling of lead in waste products.

Recovery of lead from batteries and printed circuit boards is without proper emission controls highly polluting processes. Although the lead releases from these processes on a national scale are relatively small, the local impact may be very significant.

The options for substitution of lead for 30 different applications have been summarised in Hansen et al. 2002. Only major application areas for which substitution has taken place in many countries is listed in the table below.

Table 4-12 Overview of main technical release reduction measures for lead

4.2.3 International regulation and agreements

Table 4-13 presents a summarised overview of the coverage of specific lead release source categories in relevant agreements. Measures in bold are binding with specific deadlines and conditions.

The UNECE CLRTAP

HM protocol stipulates that each Party shall reduce its total annual lead emissions into the atmosphere from the level of the emission in a set reference year, taking effective measures, appropriate to its particular circumstances. For specific sources, BAT and limit values should be applied (indicated in table 4-13), but a Party may, as an alternative, apply different emission reduction strategies that achieve equivalent overall emission reductions. Any Party whose total land area is greater than 6,000,000 km² (e.g. Russia) may, provided it can document that similar reductions have been achieved by other means, notify the secretariat that it wishes to be exempted from the obligations regarding limit values and BAT in existing stationary sources. So far only Canada has used this possibility. Ukraine has ratified the HM protocol, whereas the protocol is still not signed by Russia.

Lead shot used in wetlands is addressed by the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA). AEWA is a multilateral environmental agreement, developed within the framework of the Convention of Migratory Species. The agreement is signed by Ukraine (01.01.2003) but still not ratified. The agreement is not signed by Russia which European part is within the geographic area of the agreement.

The "Pan-European Strategy on the Phase Out of Added Lead in Petrol" was presented and adopted at the fourth "Environment for Europe" Ministerial Conference held in June 1998 in Aarhus, Denmark. The Strategy was signed by Ukraine. Both Russia and Ukraine have phased out the use of lead in petrol for vehicle transport.

Table 4-13 Summarised overview of the coverage of lead in relevant agreements

*1 Lead content of petrol for on-road vehicles shall not exceed 0.013 g/l (=unleaded petrol) with some specified exemptions.

*2 Recommendation that recovery of metals from all zinc-rich (zinc concentration above 16%) filter dust and filter dust from all stainless steel production should be carried out to promote recycling of cadmium and lead.

BAT: Best Available Techniques; ww: waste water, PM-limit (air): limit value for particulate matter emission to air.

4.2.4 Overview of existing activities

Only one project specifically addressing lead use or lead releases in Russia, Ukraine or China has been identified.

One EBRD loan in 2002 for Chelyabinsk Electrolytic Zinc Plant, Russia, includes improvements that reportedly help to reduce the emission of lead from the plant.

Some activities of the ACAP project "Outspread and Implementation of the Cleaner Production Methodology in the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation" mentioned in table 4-7 may indirectly address the lead emission from the Norilsk Nickel smelter, but it has not been investigated.

DEPA has supported a project “National System for Collection, Storage, Transportation and Treatment of used Lead Batteries, 2005“ in Bulgaria. The project included preparation of an inventory covering all collection sites for batteries and establishment of a new organisation for environmental safe handling of batteries.

Projects addressing the use of fossil fuels may indirectly to some extent reduce lead emissions among other pollutants.

Table 4-14 Identified initiatives in Russia, Ukraine and China addressing lead releases

4.3 Cadmium

Cadmium is a heavy metal with a high toxicity. Cadmium is not degradable in nature and will thus, once released to the environment, stay in circulation. Cadmium and cadmium compounds are, compared to other heavy metals, relatively water soluble. They are therefore also more mobile in e.g. soil, generally more bioavailable and tend to bioaccumulate.

Cadmium accumulates in the human body, especially in the kidneys. According to current knowledge, kidney damage (renal tubular damage) is probably the critical health effect. Other effects of cadmium exposure are disturbances of calcium metabolism, hypercalciuria, ostoemalaci and formation of stones in the kidney. High exposure can lead to lung cancer and prostate cancer.

Atmospheric deposition combined with cadmium impurities in phosphate fertilizers seems continuously to cause an increase of the content of cadmium in agricultural top soil, which by time will be reflected in an increased human intake by foodstuffs and therefore in an increased human risk of kidney damage and other effects related to cadmium.

In the marine environment levels of cadmium may significantly exceed background levels causing a potential for serious effects on marine animals and in particular birds and mammals.

Significant quantities of cadmium are continuously stockpiled in landfills and other deposits, and represent a significant potential for future releases to the environment.

Long-range transport of cadmium by air is demonstrated by ice core samples from Greenland. Emissions from Eurasia and North America must be considered important sources for cadmium to the Arctic Region.

4.3.1 Sources and releases

Intentional consumption

Cadmium is produced mainly as a by-product from mining, smelting and refining of sulphide ores of zinc, and to a lesser degree, lead and copper. As it is a by-product of zinc, the production of cadmium is more dependent on zinc refining than on market demand.

The general trend in the global cadmium consumption over the last two decades has been a steep increase in the use of cadmium for batteries and a decrease in the use for nearly all other applications. In the absence of global consumption figures, total Western World consumption and EU consumption in 2000 is shown in table 4-15. NiCD batteries take up more than 50% of the total cadmium production. Although the use of cadmium for pigments, PVC stabilisers and plating in some countries by and large has been phased out, these applications at the EU level still account for a significant part of the total cadmium consumption in 2000, a pattern which presumably can also be seen in other parts of the world.

Table 4-15 Intentional cadmium consumption by end-uses in Western World 1990 (based on Hansen and Lassen 2003b)

Original sources: *1 (OECD 1994b) and *2 (Scoullos et al. 2001). For details, see Hansen and Lassen 2003a.

Unintentional mobilisation as impurity

Cadmium is like other heavy metals mobilised as impurity in raw materials and fuels. In products cadmium in zinc and phosphorous fertilisers has been of major concern, and the content of cadmium in zinc products and fertilisers is regulated in many countries.

Emission to air

From 1983 to mid-1990s the global emission of cadmium to air decreased from about 7,600 tonnes (medium estimates of Nriagu and Pacyna 1988) to 3,000 tonnes (table 4-16). According to the assessment, by far the major source of cadmium emission to the air is non-ferrous metal production followed by stationary fossil fuel consumption (mainly coal utility boilers).

The estimates should, however, be treated with caution as some sources may be significantly underestimated due to the methodology of the inventories. In particular waste incineration may be underestimated (AMAP 2002).

In countries with extensive waste incineration the pattern may be significantly different. In Denmark, waste incineration accounts for 50% of the total air emission, and combustion of oil products accounts for 35% of the total (Drivsholm et al. 2000).

Table 4-16 Global emission of cadmium to air in mid-1990s (Pacyna & Pacyna 2001)

The significant decrease in air emissions noted in table 4-16 is mainly caused by improved flue gas cleaning, which has partly changed a problem of direct release to the environment to an issue of how to control cadmium being stockpiled in landfills and other deposits in the long-term perspective.

Russia

It has not been possible to identify any assessments of cadmium use or cadmium releases in Ukraine.

Russia produced in 2003 about 950 t of cadmium (Plachy 2005).

Cadmium in phosphorous fertilizers has in many countries been a problem of concern because of the resulting increased cadmium level in agricultural soils. Russia has a significant mining of phosphate rock for fertilizers. The Russian phosphate rock from the Kola Peninsula has a cadmium content of about 8 g Cd per ton P (phosphorous); the lowest among the major phosphate reserves in the world (Karlsson et al. 2004).

Ukraine

It has not been possible to identify any assessments of cadmium use or cadmium releases in Ukraine. Ukraine produced in 2003 about 25 t primary cadmium (Plachy 2005).

China

China is the world's largest producer of cadmium with a production of 2,500 t in 2003 (Plachy 2005). China is today also the major cadmium consumer with an annual consumption of about 5,400 t of cadmium, primarily for production of NiCd batteries. According to a preliminary proposal by the State Environmental Protection Administration of China, domestic battery manufacturers and importers will be required to set up collection networks for discarded batteries, based on their distribution chains (Plachy 2003). Releases of cadmium from two NiCd factories in China have recently been studied by Greenpeace (Brigden and Santillo 2004) demonstrating contamination by heavy metals in environmental samples in the vicinity of both factories.

Major Chinese battery producers advertising on the Internet provide both NiCD and NiMH (nickel metal hydride) batteries.

4.3.2 Main reduction measures

Contrary to mercury, the main part of lead and cadmium in flue gas is adhered to particles in the flue gas and effectively captured with air pollution controls for emission of particulate matter (PM) and sulphur/acid flue gases. The driving force for implementing more efficient controls will in power plants, industrial installations (except installations specifically processing cadmium) and waste incinerators primarily be to reduce the emission of particulate matter, sulphur/hydrochloric acid, mercury or PCDD/PCDF.

By the flue gas treatment system the cadmium is directed to other media (waste), and the most efficient measures for reducing the cadmium releases to all media are thus to reduce the cadmium input to the processes, e.g. by reducing non-essential intentional cadmium uses and the use of cadmium containing fuels and raw materials (particularly coal).

The major source of cadmium directed to the waste treatment systems is in many countries NiCd batteries. The releases (today and in the future) from discarded batteries can be reduced by implementation of effective battery collection systems and promotion of cadmium-free batteries, in particularly nickel metal hydride, NiMH.

The options for substitution of cadmium for 7 different applications have been summarised in Hansen et al. 2002. Only major application areas, for which substitution has taken place in many countries, are listed in the table below.

Table 4-17 Overview of main technical release reduction measures for cadmium

4.3.3 International regulation and agreements

Table 4-18 presents a summarised overview of the coverage of specific cadmium release source categories and cadmium products in relevant agreements. Measures in bold are binding with specific deadlines and conditions.

The UNECE CLRTAP HM protocol stipulates that each Party shall reduce its total annual cadmium emissions into the atmosphere from the level of the emission in a set reference year, taking effective measures, appropriate to its particular circumstances. For specific sources, BAT and limit values should be applied (indicated in table 4-18), but a Party may, as an alternative, apply different emission reduction strategies that achieve equivalent overall emission reductions. Any Party whose total land area is greater than 6,000,000 km² (e.g. Russia) may, provided it can document that similar reductions have been achieved by other means, notify the secretariat that it wishes to be exempted from the obligations regarding limit values and BAT in existing stationary sources. So far only Canada has used this possibility. Ukraine has ratified the HM protocol, whereas the protocol is still not signed by Russia.

Cadmium is specifically addressed by a number of OSPAR and HELCOM recommendations and the minimised use of cadmium compounds as pesticides (among a list of other pesticides) is included by the Helsinki Convention.

UNEP Governing Council adopted at its February 2005 meeting a plan to study lead and cadmium releases to determine the transboundary impacts of the two metals, with a view toward possible international action if found to be warranted.

Table 4-18 Summarised overview of the coverage of cadmium in relevant agreements

*1 The parties of the Helsinki Convention shall endeavour to minimize and, whenever possible, to ban lead and cadmium compounds as pesticides in the Baltic Sea Area and its catchment area.

*2 Recommendation that recovery of metals from all zinc-rich (zinc concentration above 16%) filter dust and filter dust from all stainless steel production should be carried out to promote recycling of cadmium and lead.

BAT: best available techniques; ww: waste water, PM-limits: limit value for particulate matter emission.

4.3.4 Overview of existing activities

Only one project specifically addressing cadmium use or releases in Russia, Ukraine or China has been identified (see table 4-19).

One EBRD loan in 2002 for Chelyabinsk Electrolytic Zinc Plant, Russia, includes improvements addressing cadmium production by the plant.

Projects addressing the use of fossil fuels may to some extent reduce lead emissions among other pollutants.

Table 4-19 Identified initiatives in Russia, Ukraine and China addressing cadmium use and releases

| Front page | | Contents | | Previous | | Next | | Top |

Version 1.0 May 2006, © Danish Environmental Protection Agency