NITROGEN POLLUTION IN THE EUROPEAN-UNION - AN ECONOMY-ENVIRONMENT CONFRONTATION

Citation
E. Vandervoet et al., NITROGEN POLLUTION IN THE EUROPEAN-UNION - AN ECONOMY-ENVIRONMENT CONFRONTATION, Environmental conservation, 23(3), 1996, pp. 198-206
Citations number
43
Categorie Soggetti
Environmental Sciences
Journal title
ISSN journal
03768929
Volume
23
Issue
3
Year of publication
1996
Pages
198 - 206
Database
ISI
SICI code
0376-8929(1996)23:3<198:NPITE->2.0.ZU;2-#
Abstract
The production and import of fertilizer have previously been identifie d as the major source of three separate European environmental problem s related to nitrogen compounds. In order to obtain a picture of the c hanges in the anthropogenic nitrogen flows needed for a solution, the effectiveness of several more radical interventions is estimated using Substance Flow Analysis (SFA). A selection of rigorous technical meas ures is expected to reduce the atmospheric deposition of N compounds t o a level that seems acceptable for the EU as a whole, and will reduce the anthropogenic input of N compounds into the North Sea well below the agreed level of 50% of the present load. The third problem, the po llution of groundwater with nitrates, would remain unsolved. Resolutio n of this last problem requires radical changes in the agricultural se ctor, reducing agricultural output substantially. Two directions are e xplored by assessing the impacts of the extremes: termination of indus trial fertilizer use to combat the problems at the source, and aboliti on of the entire stock-breeding sector to increase agricultural effici ency radically. These changes do contribute to a solution of the groun dwater problem, but imply either greater dependence on imported food, or a major change in food consumption patterns, from animal towards ve getable products. The current EU population and diet are incompatible with the absence of environmental problems. The question then arises, how does acceptance of the draconian measures required to solve such a n environmental problem weigh up against acceptance of the fact of hav ing to cope with contaminated groundwater?