LIFE+ Environment Policy and Governance TECHNICAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part A – administrative information

Page 1 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597

LIFE+ 2012

FOR ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 LIFE+ Environment Policy and Governance project application Language of the proposal: English (en) Project title: Reduction of waste water nitrogen load: demonstrations and modelling (N-SINK) Project acronym: LIFE+ 2012 N-SINK The project will be implemented in the following Member State(s): Finland All regions Expected start date:

01/08/2013

Expected end date: 31/07/2017

LIST OF BENEFICIARIES Name of the coordinating beneficiary:

Lammin biologinen asema, Helsingin yliopisto

Name of the associated beneficiary:

Fysiikan laitos, Helsingin yliopisto

Name of the associated beneficiary:

MTT

Name of the associated beneficiary:

Suomen ympäristökeskus

Name of the associated beneficiary:

Jyväskylän yliopisto

LIST OF CO-FINANCIERS Name of the co-financier:

Hämeen liitto

Name of the co-financier:

Hämeenlinnan seudun vesi

Name of the co-financier:

Janakkalan Vesi

Name of the co-financier:

Ministry of the Environment

Name of the co-financier:

Valkeakoski

PROJECT BUDGET AND REQUESTED EU FUNDING Total project budget:

1,188,260 Euro

Total eligible project budget:

1,188,260 Euro

EU financial contribution requested:

594,130 Euro Page 2 of 86

(= 50.00%

of total eligible budget)

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597

PROJECT POLICY AREA Water

Page 3 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A2

Coordinating Beneficiary Profile Information Legal Name

Lammin biologinen asema, Helsingin yliopisto

Short Name

LBS

VAT No

FI03134717

Legal Registration No

0313471-7

Registration Date

04/12/1979

Legal Status Public body

X

Private commercial Private non- commercial

Legal address of the Coordinating Beneficiary Street Name and No

Pääjärventie 320

Post Code

16900

Town / City

Lammi

Member State

Finland

PO Box

Coordinating Beneficiary contact person information Title

Mr

Surname

Arvola

First Name

Lauri

E-mail address

[email protected]

Department / Service

Lammi Biological Station

Street Name and No

Pääjärventie 320

Post Code

16900

Town / City

Lammi

Member State

Finland

Telephone No

358919140311

Function

prof.

PO Box

Fax No

358919140746

Website of the Coordinating Beneficiary Website

www.helsinki.fi/lammi

Brief description of the Coordinating Beneficiary's activities and experience in the area of the proposal Lammi Biological Station (Lammin biologinen asema) of Universtity of Helsinki is the largest field station in Finland. It provides teaching and research facilities for biological sciences and related disciplines and has also developed a research profile of its own in aquatic sciences. The aquatic research at LBS consists of several research projects led by senior scientists working at the station, other units of the University of Helsinki, other universities in Finland or governmental research institutes. During 2002-2011 they have carried out research in several international cooperation projects such as in the EU research projects CLIME, EVO-LIFE,EURO-LIMPACS and CARBO-NORTH, in two projects funded by the Council of Nordic Ministers and two EU Life (+) projects, Evo Life and VACCIA. The international network consists of tens of scientists from Europe and elsewhere. The EC projects have been especially important in increasing international as well as national collaboration and cooperation in a productive way. By applying automatic measurement stations in Lake Pääjärvi,Valkea-Kotinen, Ormajärvi and Vanajanselkä, the group has been also a partner in the Global Lake Ecological Observation Network (GLEON) based on automatic water quality monitoring stations. The Lammi Biological Station is also taking the coordination responsibility on the Lammi LTER network, one of the seven FinLTSER sites. The leader of the N Sink project initiative, prof. Lauri Arvola, has been the director of the LBS and is nowadays a professor of environmental research. He has been involved in limnological research for more than 30 years, and directed several national, Nordic and EU funded research projects on climate/global change effects on boreal lake ecosystems. He has supervised four PhD, two PhL and 19 Master students. Presently he has three PhD students under supervision.

Page 4 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A3

Page 5 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A4

Page 6 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A4

Page 7 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A4

Page 8 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A4

Page 9 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A5

ASSOCIATED BENEFICIARY PROFILE Associated Beneficiary profile information

Legal Name

Fysiikan laitos, Helsingin yliopisto

Short Name

DPHYS

VAT No

FI03134717

Legal Registration No

0313471-7

Registration Date

04/12/1979

Legal Status Public body

X

Private commercial Private non- commercial

Legal address of the Coordinating Beneficiary Street Name and No

Gustaf Hällströmin katu 2a

Post Code

00014

Member State

Finland

Town / City

PO Box 64 Helsinki

Legal address of the Associated Beneficiary Website

www.helsinki.fi

Brief description of the Associated Beneficiary's activities and experience in the area of the proposal Fysiikan laitos (Department of Physics) belongs to the Faculty of Science at the University of Helsinki. The main field in geophysics (group led by professor Matti Leppäranta) has been sea ice geophysics, including sea ice dynamics and thermodynamics, remote sensing, and climatology of the seasonal sea ice zone, based on field investigations and mathematical modelling. A long-term research programme is also ongoing on the physics of boreal lakes and the interaction between physics and ecology in these lakes. In the NSINK project Department of Physics offers expertise in flow measurements and simulations.

Page 10 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A5

ASSOCIATED BENEFICIARY PROFILE Associated Beneficiary profile information

Legal Name

MTT

Short Name

MTT

VAT No

FI02446241

Legal Registration No

0244624-1

Registration Date

null

Legal Status Public body

X

Private commercial Private non- commercial

Legal address of the Coordinating Beneficiary Street Name and No

Maa- ja elintarviketalouden tutkimuskeskus O-talo

Post Code

31600

Member State

Finland

Town / City

PO Box null

Jokioinen

Legal address of the Associated Beneficiary Website

www.mtt.fi

Brief description of the Associated Beneficiary's activities and experience in the area of the proposal MTT Agrifood Research Finland is the leading Finnish research institute in the agriculture and food sectors. MTT has gathered extensive experience and competence in evaluating the effectiveness and costs of various water protection measures. MTT has developed numerical optimization models that can be used for determining and studying cost-efficient combinations of nutrient abatement efforts.

Page 11 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A5

ASSOCIATED BENEFICIARY PROFILE Associated Beneficiary profile information

Legal Name

Suomen ympäristökeskus

Short Name

SYKE

VAT No

FI 09961895

Legal Registration No

0996189-5

Registration Date

01/09/1995

Legal Status Public body

X

Private commercial Private non- commercial

Legal address of the Coordinating Beneficiary Street Name and No

Mechelininkatu 34a

Post Code

00251

Member State

Finland

PO Box 140

Town / City

Helsinki

Legal address of the Associated Beneficiary Website

www.environment.fi

Brief description of the Associated Beneficiary's activities and experience in the area of the proposal The Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) is both a research institute, and a centre for environmental expertise. SYKE's research focuses on changes in the environment, and seeks ways to control these changes. SYKE's research programmes assess environmental problems from a multi-disciplinary perspective, by integrating socio-economic considerations into scientific research. SYKE's expert services can provide vital expert assistance on a wide-range of environmental issues for administrators, local authorities, industries, firms and other organizations. We can produce detailed environmental assessments drawing on expertise from many fields. SYKE also closely monitors environmental trends and the state of the environment in Finland in co-operation with regional environmental administration. SYKE serves as the national centre for environmental data in Finland. The data stored in our information systems is widely used for environmental monitoring, environmental modelling, forecasting and impact analysis. SYKE co-operates closely with other research institutes, universities, environmental experts and businesses, both in Finland and internationally.

Page 12 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A5

ASSOCIATED BENEFICIARY PROFILE Associated Beneficiary profile information

Legal Name

Jyväskylän yliopisto

Short Name

UJ

VAT No

VAT FI 02458947

Public body

Legal Registration No

DEFAULT_VALUE

Private commercial

Registration Date

null

Legal Status

X

Private non- commercial

Legal address of the Coordinating Beneficiary Street Name and No

Seminaarimäki

Post Code

40014

Member State

Finland

PO Box 35 Town / City

Jyväskylä

Legal address of the Associated Beneficiary Website

www.jyu.fi

Brief description of the Associated Beneficiary's activities and experience in the area of the proposal Department of Biological and Environmental Science is part of the University of Jyväskylä, in central Finland. Aquatic Sciences is one of the four sections of the department with strong scientific profile, 3 professors and over 15 senior and post doc researcher. The work team focusing on the N-SINK project consists of two Academy Researchers (Marja Tiirola and Hannu Nykänen), and 6 PhD students, two of which are specialized on measuring denitrification processes in ecosystem and municipal treatment plants. The team has strong expertise in the N2 and N2O measuring techniques, which are much improved by the use of stable isotopes. Tiirola holds a lecturer position in Aquatic Sciences in Jyväskylä and adjunct professoship in Environmental Microbiology in Tampere University of Technology, and leads the Scandinavian network for Stable Isotope Research (NordSIR). UJ team has strong partnership with UH/LBA with common research; N-SINK is a natural consequence of previous collaboration in the ecosystem-scale analysis of the nitrogen cycle by using molecular microbiology tools and stable isotope analysis.

Page 13 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A6

Page 14 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A6

Page 15 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A6

Page 16 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A6

Page 17 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A6

Page 18 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A7

OTHER PROPOSALS SUBMITTED FOR EUROPEAN UNION FUNDING

Please answer each of the following questions: •

Have you or any of your associated beneficiaries already benefited from previous LIFE cofinancing? (please cite LIFE project reference number, title, year, amount of the co-financing, duration, name(s) of coordinating beneficiary and/or partners involved): University of Helsinki (UH):LIFE09 ENV/FI/000572: Mitigation of Arctic warming by controlling European black carbon emissions, MACEB:1.1.2011-31.12.2013, UH total budget 322 397 e, EU contribution 159 397 e* LIFE09 ENV/FI/000571: Climate change induced drought effects on forest growth and vulnerability, CLIMFORISK:2.1.2011-31.12.2014, UH total budget 121 915 e, EU contribution 60 102 e* LIFE09 ENV/FI/000569: Participatory monitoring, forecasting, control and socio-economic impacts of eutrophication and algal blooms in river basins districts, GISBLOOM1.10.2010-30.9.2013, UH total budget 29 286 e, EU contribution 14 643 e* LIFE08 ENV/FIN/000609: Climate Change Adaptation Tools for Environmental Risk Mitigation of Acid Sulphate Soils, CATERMASS1.1.2010-31.12.2012, UH total budget 169 603 e, EU contribution 67 359 eLammi Biological Station (LBS), University of Helsinki:* LIFE07ENV/FIN/000141: Vulnerability assessment of ecosystem services for climate change impacts and adaptation, VACCIA1.1.2009-31.12.2011, UH total budget 901 373 e (LBS 99240 e), EU contribution 450 688 eUniversity of Jyväskylä (UJ), Department of Biological and Environmental Science: EnvEurope: Environmental Quality and pressures 1.1.2010-31.2013 (UJ budget 106 200€)Vaccia: Vulnerability assesment of ecosystem services for Climate change impact and adaptation 1.1.2009 – 31.12.2011 (UJ budget 155 000€)Boreal Peatland LIFE 1.1.2010-31.12.2015 (UJ budget 160 000€)Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE): * LIFE03 NAT/FIN/000039: Management of wetlands along the Gulf of Finland migratory flyway. 2003-2007. SYKEs contribution 54391 e.* LIFE04 ENV/FI/000300 "Risk assessment and risk management procedure for arsenic in the Tampere region".1.12.200430.11.2007. 78 693 e. *LIFE04 ENV/FI/000304 "Integration of spatial environmental information across different themes,scales, resolutions and uses : added value of facilitating mechanisms" 1.1.200431.12.2006. 74 098.* LIFE06 NAT/FIN/000129 "From Ancient to the Present Estuary, Kokemäenjoki Wetland Chain. 2006-2011. *LIFE05/NAT/FIN/000105 "EU Life Nature project ""Conservation of Anser erythropus on European migration route". 1.7.2003-31.12.2008. 3 723 e.*LIFE07 ENV/FIN/000141 "Vulnerability assessment of ecosystem services for climate change impacts and adaptation". 20092011. 396 100 e.*LIFE07 NAT/FIN 000151. "Inventories and planning for marine Natura 2000 network in Finland". 2009-2012. 438347 e.*LIFE 09 ENV/FI/000569 "Participatory monitoring, forecasting, control and socio-economic impacts of eutrophication and algal blooms in River Basin Districts " 2010-2013. 1 252 997 e.*LIFE09 NAT/LV/00238 "Innovative approaches for marine biodiversity monitoring and assessment of nature values in the Baltic Sea" 2010-2015. 440 326 e.*LIFE07 ENV/FIN/000145 "Mitigation of and Adaptation to the Climate Change in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area - From Strategy to Implementation" 2009-2011. 89 999 e.*LIFE07 INF/FIN/000152 "Climate Change Community Response portal" 2009-2011. 307 465 e.*LIFE09 ENV/FI/000572 "Mitigation of Arctic warming by controlling European black carbon emissions" 2011-2013. 168 727 e.*LIFE 09 INF/UK/032 "Rivers: Engaging, supporting and transfering knowledge for river restoration in Europe" 2010-2013. 176 147 e.*LIFE07 ENV/FIN/000133 "Monitoring and assessment of carbon balance related phenomena in Finland and northern Eurasia" 2009-2012. 379 857 e. *LIFE08 ENV/FIN/000609 "Climate Change Adaptation Tools for Environmental Risk Mitigation of Acid Sulphate Soils" 2010-2012. 313 696 e. MTT:1) "LCA Landscaping” Application of LCA for sustainable green cover management using waste derived materials (LIFE09 ENV/FIN/000570). 1.9.2010 – 30.11.2014. EU co-financing 280 500 €. 2) “PesticideLife” Reducing environmental risks in use of plant protection products in NorthernEurope. (LIFE+ 08ENV/). 01.01.2010 - 31.12.2013. EU co-financing 510 965 €.3 ) “SusAgri” Sustainable development in Agriculture: Indicators, administrative programmesand demonstrations (LIFE96GENV/FIN/77), Co-financing 1 629 946 €, 1997-1999,1.1.2009 – 31.12.2013 and EU co-fincing. 274 539 €. 4)“Eco Learn” Integrated management of rural-based environmental education -relations ofenvironment, food chain and sustainable development (LIFE02 ENV/FIN/000322) 2002-2005, Cofinancing 389.564€. 5) ”EquineLife” A performance model for an ecologically and ethically sustainable equinesports (LIFE04 ENV/FI/000299) ), 2004-2008, Co-financing 548.848€, 4) “RAMAS” Risk assessment and risk management procedure for arsenic in the Tampereregion (LIFE04 ENV/FI/000300), 2004-2007, Co-financing 78693€.

Page 19 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - A7 •

Have you or any of the associated beneficiaries submitted any actions related directly or indirectly to this project to other European Union financial instruments? To whom? When and with what results? No

•

For those actions which fall within the eligibility criteria for financing through other European Union financial instruments, please explain in full detail why you consider that those actions nevertheless do not fall within the main scope of the instrument(s) in question and are therefore included in the current project. not relevant

Page 20 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 TECHNICAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part B - technical summary and overall context of the project

Page 21 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B1

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT (Max. 3 pages; to be completed in English) Project title: Reduction of waste water nitrogen load: demonstrations and modelling (N-SINK)

Project objectives:   The main objectives are 1) to develop and demonstrate new economically sustainable methods for nitrogen removal using applied ecosystem services 2) to evaluate the environmental and socio-economical impacts of cost-efficient nitrogen removal The project contributes to the realization of the objectives set in the Nitrogen Removal Directive and in the Water Framework Directive (WFD) as well as in national and regional river basin management plans. The project aims to find out the best ways for sustainable water management with minimal harmful effects on greenhouse gas emissions, water quality and aquatic ecosystem processes. The project demonstrates evaluates the benefits and disadvantages of present and new nitrogen removal methods and improves the understanding of nitrogen fluxes in the watersheds.    

Actions and means involved: A1.Preparation of the study sites for the N-SINK demonstration action Includes technical planning, permit procedures and consultations. B1.N-SINK sediment filtration demonstrations Implementation phase for the alternative nitrogen load reduction method, N-SINK sediment filtration.  B2.Long term and model demonstrations of catchment scale N retention Demonstration of long term changes in the water quality in heavily loaded river basins in southern Finland due to the  protection actions. Development of scenarios of nutrient purification in waste water treatment and in agricultural production to mitigate nutrient losses to waters and air. B3.Cost-effective allocation of nutrient abatement measures at watershed level Development of a spatial optimization framework to study cost-efficient combination of nutrient abatement measures and the economic potential of the new sediment filtration measure. The final product, ecological-economic model framework, can used as a decision support and demonstration tool by the stakeholders and decision makers. C1-2. Monitoring the ecosystem effects of sediment filtering system Monitoring of the demonstration sites (denitrification, emission of N2O, physico-chemical parameters). C3.Monitoring and verifying of catchment scale N retention models Catchment models will be verified in relation to the monitoring results. The catchment models provide the input information for cost-effective modeling. D1. Communication and dissemination This action includes dissemination of the previous actions (workshops, meetings with experts and stakeholders, information events for public, reports and publications) E.Project management and monitoring of the project progress This action ensures that the project is running successfully and all the activities including meetings, reports and time-tables promised will be achieved on time.

Expected results (outputs and quantified achievements): The results of the project include: 1) Description of water quality changes in recipient waters due to the application of water purification techniques (D. 1.2 Report. Demonstration of the effects of water protection on water quality in two heavily loaded river basins in southern Finland, Lake Vanajanselkä and River Porvoonjoki) 2) Description of new alternative method for nitrogen removal exploiting a natural ecosystem service (sediment filtering) (D 3.2 Report. New alternative method for nitrogen removal exploiting a natural ecosystem service) Page 22 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B1

3) Information on environmental effectiveness of nitrogen removal using the newest methods in measuring denitrification and N2O emissions (D 6.1-6.3 Report. Environmental effectiveness of nitrogen removal using the newest methods. 2 related congress presentations and publications. 1 PhD thesis) 4) Description and scenarios of nitrogen fluxes in watersheds and the role of nitrogen removal at landscape level (D. 4.4 Report. Implementation for N-removal scenarios for Finnish river basins and associated conference presentations and publications) 5) Information on socio-economical effects of nitrogen removal at landcsape level (D. 5.5 Report. Spatially cost-effective allocation of nutrient abatement measures at watershed level and associated seminar presentations) These will be available in electronic form through the project www-pages. 6) Information for EU, stakeholders, authorities and public: www-pages, journal articles, press (D 8.1) Workshop reports (D 1.1, D 4.2, D 5.1, D 5.4) Seminars reports (D 8.2, D 8.3) Project reports (D 9.1-D 9.4)

Can the project be considered to be a climate change adaptation project?

Page 23 of 86

Yes

No X

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B1

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT (Max. 3 pages; to be completed in national language) Project title: Reduction of the waste water nitrogen load: demonstrations and modelling (N-SINK)

Project objectives: The main objectives are 1) to develop and demonstrate new economically sustainable methods for nitrogen removal using applied ecosystem services 2) to evaluate the environmental and socio-economical impacts of cost-efficient nitrogen removal The project contributes to the realization of the objectives set in Nitrogen Removal Directive and in Water Framework Directive (WFD) as well as in national and regional river basin management plans. The project aims to find out the best ways for sustainable water management with minor harmful effects on greenhouse gas emissions, water quality and aquatic ecosystem processes.

Actions and means involved:

Expected results (outputs and quantified achievements): The baseline scenario is that the purified wastewater N load can be reduced by the sediment filtration approach at least by 30%.  For Lake Vanajanselkä and River Porvoonjoki catchment areas model calculations for nutrient loading estimations and decision support systems will be run to find out the most cost-efficient strategies for those two areas with high loading from agriculture and point sources but completely different type of a hydrological system. The results of the project also include: 1) Description of water quality changes in recipient waters due to the application of water purification techniques (D. 1.2 Report. Demonstration of the effects of water protection on water quality in two heavily loaded river basins in southern Finland, Lake Vanajanselkä and River Porvoonjoki) 2) Description of new alternative method for nitrogen removal exploiting a natural ecosystem service (sediment filtering) (D 3.2 Report. New alternative method for nitrogen removal exploiting a natural ecosystem service) 3) Information on environmental effectiveness of nitrogen removal using the newest methods in measuring denitrification and N2O emissions (D 6.1-6.3 Report. Environmental effectiveness of nitrogen removal using the newest methods. 2 related congress presentations and publications. 1 PhD thesis) 4) Description and scenarios of nitrogen fluxes in watersheds and the role of nitrogen removal at landscape level (D. 4.4 Report. Implementation for N-removal scenarios for Finnish river basins and associated conference presentations and publications) 5) Information on socio-economical effects of nitrogen removal at landcsape level (D. 5.5 Report. Spatially cost-effective allocation of nutrient abatement measures at watershed level and associated seminar presentations) These will be available in electronic form through the project www-pages. 6) Information for EU, stakeholders, authorities and public: www-pages, journal articles, press (D 8.1) Workshop reports (D 1.1, D 4.2, D 5.1, D 5.4) Seminars reports (D 8.2, D 8.3) Project reports (D 9.1-D 9.4)    

Page 24 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B1 Can the project be considered to be a climate change adaptation project?

Page 25 of 86

Yes

No X

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM TARGETED The present day wastewater treatment plants can remove some 40-70% of nitrogen and 95-98% of phosphorus. In case of Finland and other Baltic States there is an urgent need to reduce the nutrient loads to the Baltic Sea. Therefore, the European Commission has asked Finland to improve nitrogen removal from wastewaters which will finally enter the sea. The rationale behind the proposal is that this claim is highly relevant in those wastewater treatment plants which convey their wastewater directly to the sea while not necessarily in those plants which are situating far enough from the coast and which convey their purified wastewaters to the upper parts of the drainage basins. This is because the inland waters, i.e. rivers and lakes, can retain and remove a remarkable amount of nutrients due to natural microbial processes and sedimentation. In lakes P retention is typically high but N retention may vary in a wide range. In the best case N retention can remove some 50-70% of the annual load which suggests that in many lakes there is a high potential for N removal. Considering the above mentioned facts and costs which are needed for improving tens of wastewater plants with present day low N removal capacity, the ecosystem services, such as denitrification potential of lakes, should be taken into account and enhanced, if possible. In many countries, agriculture is today mostly responsible for the N loading (in Finland ca 53%). It is very much a question of trade-off, i.e. how we use our limited financial resources; whether we renovate our wastewater treatment plants and invest tens of millions for the technical improvements each year and still spend additional costs for chemical demands or we allocate the money for reducing the releases of nutrients from agriculture. If we are successful in reducing N loads from agriculture, we will cut off parallel with N load also P loading. This is something which really may have a great positive impact on the recipient lakes and rivers, because the inland waters are typically P limited, but not nitrogen. The same is true in the estuaries in the Baltic, the areas which are most eutrophic in the sea. Nitrogen is not a permanent component in the water, but its total amount can either increase (by nitrogen fixation) or decrease (by denitrification) from the water system. Effective nitrogen removal in waste water treatments can increase the risk of enhanced N2O emissions and there are also other aspects that may be worth of consideration; demand of more effective nitrogen removal may generate new environmental problems: shortage of NO3-N may form higher risk for late-summer cyanobacterial blooms and diminish denitrification in natural ecosystems. On the other hand it is already very late for saving the sensitive ecosystem of the Baltic Sea, so decisions for the new environmental regulations have to be done quickly and focusing the economical efforts in most beneficial actions. Therefore state-of-the-art ecological and economical analyses are needed to find out the most efficient ways to protect the lakes and rivers within the Baltic Sea area. Without proper analyses, the resources can be wasted on inefficient measures and no substantial reduction in nutrient loading will be achieved. In such a case the costs for society and nature may become high. This demonstration project will focus on this paradigm of the ecosystem balancing of nitrogen, as the need of wastewater nitrogen removal is currently a hot topic in the environmental issues in all Baltic countries. This is related to water protection policy in general, and how to improve its cost-efficiency.   The recent national survey (by SYKE; Pietiläinen et al. 2008, URN:ISBN: 978-952-11-3281-0) gives us the most accurate statistics of the natural and anthropogenic nitrogen loadings of Finland and a scenario what happens if the minimum nutrient level (70%) required by the EU directive (91/271/ETY, EYVL L 135, 31.5.1991) would be taken as a standard in the Finnish WWTW:s. Compared to the Finnish traditional water management policy, EU legislation focuses less on phosphorus reduction (EU 80%, Finland 95%) and more on nitrogen reduction (EU 70%, Finland 55%) than are the actual WWTW reductions today in Finland. Currently, the status of Finnish inland waters is good or very good due to the national water management policy, but the river waters form a threat for the Baltic Sea. Wastewater discharge by municipal WWTW:s forms currently 15% of the anthropogenic nitrogen load to the surface waters and the Baltic Sea in Finland, and anthropogenic load is the main part (63%) of the nitrogen loading. All the Finnish WWTW:s have currently combined a biological/chemical process, and the nitrogen reduction is on average (year 2005) 54-56%. By the scenario predicted by the Finnish water authorities (Pietiläinen et al. 2008), enhanced nitrogen reduction from current level to 70% reduction in all bigger treatment units as planned (treating over 10 000 inhabitant’s wastes) would mean only a 5% decrease from the current anthropogenic load of Finland and only 0.4% reduction in the Baltic Sea nitrogen budget. Still, this reduction through combined nitrification-denitrification process would require an investment of hundreds of millions of euros, continuous use of methanol (30100 tn/day) or other substrates, and finally enhanced N2O emissions. None of these factors have been counted on by policy makers so far. As nitrification is already in the requirements of new WWTW permissions, we seek  an alternative for the artificial pool-based denitrification. In our prediction, sediment filtration would be a cost-efficient ecosystem service, with which the final nitrogen reduction of wastewaters would increase to 80% and which could been applied comprehensively in all the (nitrifying) WWTW units regardless of the size, due to the simple and economical infrastructure. In this scenario, the increase of the current 55% to 80% nitrogen reduction would mean 10% reduction in the Page 26 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B2 anthropogenic nitrogen load to the surface waters and the Baltic Sea, when nitrification would be part of the processes in all the treatment plants. The costs for spatial allocation of the sediment filtration would be at least 10 times less than the construction of the denitrification process on the treatment plants. We therefore estimate that with 1/10 of the cost of building the new denitrification processes we could double the nitrogen reduction in WWTW:s, but this has to be confirmed based on the costs (action B1) and results (action C1) of the pilot N-SINK demonstration sites. As the WWTW discharge is only a part of the problem, additional actions for load reductions should be taken into the cost-efficiency calculation (action B3), and one of the key issues is how to reduce agricultural loads more efficiently. However, different lake chains and river basins differ in terms of their hydrological conditions, land-use, nutrient retention capacity as well as nutrient loading. Therefore, we have chosen two contrasting drainage basins, one without lakes (River Porvoonjoki) and another with several lake basins (Vanajavesi). The rationale behind our plan is that the financial resources should be allocated depending on the properties of the drainage basins and their loading characteristics rather than by applying similar actions everywhere. For example, since the beginning of the implementation of the Finnish agri-environmental programme, nutrient fluxes from agricultural catchments have decreased only moderately, or in some areas the fluxes have even increased. This implies that the actions have not been planned most efficiently. Our goal is to maximize the efficiency of the protection actions, i.e. to achieve 50% reduction in the anthropogenic nitrogen load to the Baltic Sea. Therefore, in the catchment scale the effects of 1) wastewater treatment, 2) water protection measures in agriculture, and 3) combination of both on water quality in Lake Vanajavesi and River Porvoonjoki will be analyzed in detail in the implementation action B2 and monitoring action C2.  The models provide discharge and concentrations of total and soluble nitrogen and phosphorus as well as nutrient fluxes as outputs. From these we can calculate different indicators, like N/P relationships, and combine them to empirical models of ecological indicators of WFD. In the modeling the main aim is to study if the political targets of nutrient reduction (HELCOM, National Water Protection Policy Outlines) and good ecological and chemical status for all inland and coastal surface waters by the year 2015 (WFD, 2000) can be achieved by the best combination of these actions.

STATE OF THE ART AND INNOVATIVE ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT In this project we will demonstrate the cost-benefit value of the current wastewater treatment and nitrogen removal processes, for the first time by integrating the hydrological and chemical data and mass-balance calculations with the measured values of denitrification - the missing nitrogen sink. The most advanced stable isotope techniques will be used in the measurement allowing us to get accurate values of how much we can depend on the ecosystem services in the nitrogen removal in the current systems. Monitoring and modelling results will be used, for the first time, to evaluate the denitrification in natural system and enhanced by the wastewater nitrate. Sediment has a remarkable capacity to reduce nitrate load to nitrogen gas through denitrification. Denitrification is most importantly related to nitrogen concentration above the sediment and water residence time in the lake, as previous studies have consistently shown (Figure 1). Therefore we claim that spatial optimization of the wastewater discharge would be an efficient way to reduce nitrate-based nutrient load in the environment now, when most new environmental permits for new or reconstructed treatment plants have a nitrification sanction in Finland and many Baltic countries which care for the sensitive Baltic sea ecosystem. Currently the discharge of purified waste water has mostly been implemented using a one-point outlet system, either through a drain or a pipe, and many times the water is further mixed to the productive water layers of the lake. A new sediment filtration approach is suggested in which the nitrified water will be in contact with the reducing microbes of the sediment for longer period, which will result in the efficient denitrification of a portion of the nitrate load. Compared to the point outlet method/practice, nitrate will be spread to the sediment-water interphase, instead of mixing with the productive water layers. Nitrate is also expected to temporarily increase the redoxpotential of the sediment layers, thus improving the quality of near-bottom layers and preventing phosphorus release. N2O emissions are predicted to be minor compared to the forced denitrification in wastewater treatment plants, where the N2O gas can be easily discharged to the atmosphere in the high water circulation speed and mixing. In the implementation action we demonstrate this new technical innovation for nitrogen removal –NSINK sediment filtration. This technique is based on the observed field results and small-scale laboratory experiments, where we have shown the relationship between nitrogen concentration and denitrification in the above-sediment layers. The set of demonstration actions will be the first full-scale trial to test the sediment filtration technique, and it is unique both in its scale (will be tested in wastewater treatment utilities treating up to 20000 m3/day) and top-scientific monitoring techniques. This method would be a promising and minimum-cost way for the reduction of the nitrogen load by the Page 27 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B2 ecosystem services itself.  

Page 28 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 Name of the picture: Figure 1. Correlation between denitrification and residence time and nitrate concentration

Page 29 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 Name of the picture: Figure: Role of models

Page 30 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B3 DEMONSTRATION CHARACTER OF THE PROJECT Sediment filtration is a new innovation for the reduction of the nitrogen load when wastewater nitrogen is released in the form of nitrate. The primary goal of the project is to demonstrate this new approach to enhance nitrogen removal from waste water, benefitting the denitrification by natural ecosystem service in sediment. The basis for the new innovation is that micro-organisms living in the sediment have an enormous capacity to reduce nitrate to nitrogen gas through denitrification. In this demonstration waste water released from sewage plants as a point-source will be directed to a wider area near the sediment where denitrification takes place. We propose that with this new sediment filtering system we can reduce nitrogen load in an economically and environmentally sustainable way. We believe that the efficiency of nitrogen removal could be increased especially in small-medium size sewage treatment plants. The demonstration can be divided in phases phases. The first phase is to plan and prepare the primary demonstration (A.2). This preparation phase includes technical planning, permit procedures and consultation. Two project sites will be selected for the demonstration and 2 sites are used as control sites where the year-to-year variation in the denitrification activity will be measured. The most suitable treatment plants will be selected based on a hydrological and technical survey and together with the support of the Finnish Water and Waste Water Works Association (FIWA). In summer 2011 we conducted  preliminary-measurements outside four treatment plants, where the flow currents around the outgoing sewage pipe were studied. However, more detailed analysis of the data should be done to select the places and representative sampling points. One demonstration site is planned to be a smallscale treatment plant (300-600 m3/d) and one a medium-size plant (1000-2000 m3/d or partial discharge volume). The locations of proposed sites are presented in Appendix 2. The N-SINK sediment filtration phase (B.1) demonstrates sediment filtering conducted in two treatment plants. We claim that spatial optimization of the wastewater discharge would be an efficient way to reduce nitrate-based nutrient load in the environment, when most new environmental permits for new or reconstructed treatment plants in Finland and other Baltic countries have a nitrification sanction. Currently the discharge of purified waste water has mostly been implemented using a one-point outlet system, either through a drain or a pipe, and usually the water is further mixed to the productive water layer in the lake. In the new sediment filtration approach the nitrified water will be in much longer contact with the reducing microbes of the sediment. Compared to the narrow point outlet in the new approach, nitrate is spread close to the sediment and not mixed into the productive water layer. The demonstrations will last one full year each, starting in late-autumn 2014 and in 2015. Nitrate is expected to increase the redox-potential of the upper sediment layer, and thus improve the quality of near-bottom layers and prevent phosphorus release. However, the benefits of the new approach can only be analyzed in a proper comprehensive field demonstration. Monitoring is an essential part of the work and will be done both in the study sites during the action, and before and after the demonstration action as well as in the control sites in both years. Besides denitrification also the relative production of N2O, which is a greenhouse gas and released in the wastewater treatment processes (even 10%) as a by-product in both nitrification and denitrification processes, has to be measured. In addition, common water quality parameters, like phosphorus, nitrate and nitrite, ammonium and redox conditions, are important monitoring parameters which will be followed in the study sites. In the second phase, as a preparatory action (A.1) the project will demonstrate the changes and effectiveness of nitrogen removal in recipient waters by collecting long-term data from several waste water treatment plants and from the downstream rivers and lakes. The target areas include Lake Vanajavesi and its drainage basin as well as River Porvoonjoki and its drainage basin. The first one, L. Vanajavesi, is among the third most eutrophicated lake area in Finland, and respectively R. Porvoonjoki is the most polluted river basin in Finland when the major nutrient (N, P) concentrations are considered. This demonstration will monitor the water quality and emissions of N2 and N2O before and after remediation of nitrogen removal in waste water treatment plants. A new methodology will be used for the assessment. Monitoring data can be used for cost-benefit estimations. This provides the stake-holders a good basis for more realistic environmental policy decisions, for example, how long are the time-lags between the investments and the first visible responses in water quality. Within the project the information will be used in assessing ecologically and economically the most efficient methods in reducing nitrogen (and phosphorus) loads from waste water treatment plants. In the third phase, the project provides demonstration tool for assessment of nitrogen fluxes in lakes and rivers receiving different nitrogen loadings. We are going to use the newest hydrological models and results, and we will demonstrate how various water protection actions directed to decrease nitrogen loading into lakes and rivers may affect the nitrogen fluxes in the entire water systems, such as in the L. Vanajavesi water system as well as in the R. Porvoonjoki drainage basin (B.2). It must be realized that the hydrological models applied in this study are the same which are in operational use in the Finnish Environmental Institute. This means that all improvements in estimating the loadings will be automatically transferred into practice, a fact which clearly demonstrates the close interaction between the project partners and the stake-holders. In a wider context this also means that the results Page 31 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B3 of the project are almost immediately open for other end-users in Europe as well. This is confirmed by the fact that the partners of the project are involved in several international research projects in Europe. Finally, the economical and environmental costs of various actions to decrease nitrogen loading into lakes and rivers are computed and demonstrated using a state-of-the-art spatial optimization model framework (B.3). The optimization model is used for comparing the costs and effects of a number of nutrient abatement measures that can be carried out at different parts of the watershed and for determining the spatially optimal, cost-efficient combination of measures. Such computation also reveals whether the new innovative sediment filtration measure has economic potential compared to the other, already existing measures. Although in the project the framework will be built for the two target areas, L. Vanajavesi drainage basin and R. Porvoonjoki drainage basin, the model framework can be extended to other watersheds in Finland as well. We assume the framework can be applied to in many other EU countries, at least in the Baltic States and Sweden. This part of the project is a clear demonstration component with high socio-economical value. We believe that in addition to the Finnish stake-holders the results of our spatial optimization tool will have high relevance to the European Union. In the EU countries situating in the drainage basin of the Baltic Sea (Finland, Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany and Denmark), the implementation of the Water Framework Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directive requires strong actions in water purification, and thus all economically and environmentally valuable tools have to be considered. In this respect these demonstrations can be extremely informative and may give new tools which can be applied not only in theory but also in practice. We see that the above mentioned demonstration actions form a perfect project entity, which takes all important physical and  economical aspects into consideration and provides valuable tools for both planning and decision-making in the water resource management. If successful, the new sediment filtering system will highly improve the efficiency of nitrogen removal especially in small-medium size sewage treatment plants with relatively low cost. In a country like Finland with many small settlements and a great number (>300 units) of sewage plants, the new method may be especially important in reducing nutrient loading to the lakes and rivers when the local authorities nowadays have difficulties in making new expensive investments to this sector. If the method proves to be successful it can be applied in addition to the other EU member states also in other countries, such as in Africa, Asia and South-America where the water purification technologies are often poor or can be completely lacking. In countries further south, the environmental conditions can be even more favorable for a successful application of the sediment filtration method because of higher water temperature during the entire year.

EU ADDED VALUE OF THE PROJECT AND ITS ACTIONS This demonstration project will give tools and data about the fate of the wastewater nitrogen and will illustrate the potential for calculating nitrogen sources and sinks for an individual water system, which is important for the environmental permit prodecures. The 91/271/EU directive on waste water treatment requests enhanced nitrogen treatment of waste water for communities of more than 10.000 inhabitant units, and denitrification has been the argument for the Court of Justice of the European Communities to discard the lowsuit against Finland (proceeding C-335/07, decision 2009/C 282/04). Still, the grounds for the decision are weak and it is not really known or actually measured whether or not this ecosystem balancing is efficient enough, and new proceedings are therefore on-going. Actions that focus on monitoring real sinks of nitrogen and the fate of nitrogen before it reaches the Baltic Sea are therefore important to form the basis for cases being handled by the Court of Justice of the European Communities as well as national state administrative agencies and courts of justice. The other aspect of this demonstration is the innovative design of the distribution system for the purified wastewater. The full-scale demonstration in 3-4 treatment plants will test the new environmental-friendly technology and show the benefits and environmental consequences of the approach. The method will be extremely cheap and internationally fascinating for all waste-water treatment plants which have nitrifying steps in their process. Construction or reparation of the discharge system is estimated to cost 10 000-50 000€, and if it helps to reduce more than 10% of the nitrogen load it would be very beneficial for wastewater treatment utilities to reach the reduction targets internationally through the whole EU area. In addition, the project produces models that have high spatial resolution for cost-effective allocation of abatement measures. Without proper economical and ecological analyses, there is a risk that resources can be wasted on inefficient measures and no substantial reduce in nutrient loading will be achieved. Besides the EU Commission, in Finland there are several stake-holders such as the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, The Finnish Environment Institute, Centres Page 32 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B3 for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment as well as several local actors like water companies and waste water treatment plants, water protection associations, counselling organizations (e.g. Pro-Agria and Forestry Centres) and farmer´s own organizations (e.g. MTK), which can apply and implement the results of the project.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT The assessment of the economic viability of the sediment filtering approach (technology) is an essential part of the cost-effective modeling, and therefore it has not mentioned separately in the proposal. The idea is that the costs and benefits of different abatement measures will be estimated in terms of euros per kg of N which will be reduced. In a case of a medium size wastewater treatment plant, such as the HS-Vesi plant in Paroinen, the improvement of N retention from 50% to 70% requires new investments for a methanol unit with a minimum cost of 0.3*106 euros and possible new waste tank systems with a minimum cost of 2-3*106  euros. In addition to the investments also the chemical and other utilization costs have to be considered. Equally with above the costs of the sediment filtration approach can be estimated based on the investments, including the filtration textile, tube system and possible pumping devices, and the running costs including possible electricity and maintenance. When the costs and the true retention capacities of the treatments are known in detail, the analysis will show the most cost-efficiency practice. This information will be compared with the alternative nutrient abatement measures in the agriculture. This is the way we are going to assess the economic viability of the technologies. Because nutrient loads to inland waters can be reduced by several alternative nutrient abatement measures, these measures are attributed to different economic sectors and polluters, such as agriculture, forestry and municipal waste, and they vary in cost and effect. The funds allocated in water protection are limited and thus all possible abatement measures cannot be implemented. Therefore, economical analysis is needed to find out the most efficient way to protect Finnish lakes and rivers and the Baltic Sea. Without proper economic analysis, there is a risk that resources can be wasted on inefficient measures and no substantial reduction in nutrient loading will be achieved. In such a case the costs for the society and damage to the nature will be high. In Action B3 we will focus on cost-effective allocation of nutrient abatement measures at the watershed level and on development of a spatial optimization framework, first for two case study watersheds. The framework will be built such that it can be easily extended to other watersheds generalized for larger regions. There are several optional end-users such as the European Union, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Finnish Environment Institute, Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment as well as local actors such as water companies and waste water treatment plants, water protection associations, counselling organizations (e.g. Pro-Agria and Forestry Centres) and farmer´s own organizations (e.g. MTK), which can be responsible for the implementation of the results of the Action C3. The optimization framework can be also used as one tool in addressing and meeting the requirements of the Marine Strategy Framework directive (designing the programme of measures in particular) in those EU member states and regional seas where eutrohication is considered as an environmental problem.

EFFORTS FOR REDUCING THE PROJECT'S "CARBON FOOTPRINT" First of all we will invite the local enterprises to tender for purchasing goods and services when it is possible. Secondly, we will check the life cycle information of the goods to ensure that the principles of green procurement would be achieved. Finally, in all circumstances we try to use only environmentally friendly goods and/or services. This means that travelling will be used only when it is absolutely necessary, and public transport will be supported when it is possible. In detail, below is a list of actions and options which will be applied to ensure as low carbon footprint as possible:- The demonstration sites are selected as close as possible for project personnel to reduce travelling. - Project workers are supported to use public transport as much as possible when going to meetings. For sampling trips this is, however, not possible. - Foreign overseas conference attendance is reduced to 1-2 per year per person, and the public interest will be more attained by publications and reports. - The project favors direct flights when flying is necessary Page 33 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B3 - Places of meetings will be arranged so that public transport is possible (or group transport). - Working meetings are kept by internet and/or telephone if possible. - For the accommodation of the project meetings, the university research field stations with low costs and green policy will be preferred. - We will promote the project staff members to use bicycles as much as possible. During the project at least 6000 km of travelling will be done by bicycles. - Publications will be made available on the internet to reduce paper publishing. - All printing will be minimized and only computers with energy saving will be used. - The project will give quantitative measures of the N2O emissions from the natural denitrification and emissions from wastewater treatment plants. This will help in recognizing the problem and restricting the emissions, if drastic emissions are measured in the treatment plants. We will also estimate the CO2 emissions of the project and the results will be described in the mid-term and final reports of the project. - When possible a rowboawill be used for sampling and boats that are already on the sampling points instead of transporting the boat to every point. - The project will reuse exetainer sampling tubes and by this minimize the amount of waste produced. We will use the idea of green procurement to all the project beneficiaries and apply it in the subcontracting procedures as well.

Page 34 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 Name of the picture: Figure 2. Actions of the project

Page 35 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 Name of the picture: Figure: Schematic structure of the project

Page 36 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B4 STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED AND TARGET AUDIENCES OF THE PROJECT OTHER THAN PROJECT PARTICIPANTS To involve the main national stakeholders in the management of the project and the enhancement of the dissemination of the results 8 representatives of the following organizations will be invited to the Project steering and advisory board (SAB) by the Action leaders (see Action E1, Project management) before the inception meeting: 1. Wastewater treatment plants commenced to participate in the pilot demonstrations. WWTWs of the planned demonstration sites are located in Hämeenlinna/Paroinen, and Keuruu. Other optimal sites are Petäjävesi and Hankasalmi which may replace Keuruu in case of unexpected problems. The authorities of these sites have promised technical knowledge for preparing the sediment filtration systems. Hämenlinnan Seudun Vesi is also a co-financer of the project. The commitments of other WWTW’s (Keuruu, and in addition Petäjävesi and Hankasalmi) are attached, see letters of intend for collaboration in Appendixes 1a-c. 2. Finnish Water and Waste Water Works Association (FIWA). FIWA's membership includes over 300 Finnish water utilities and 130 collaborating members which cover about 90 % of water services in Finland. 3. Ministry of the Environment (MoE) and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF). Ministries define the national environmental policy and priorities, issues guidelines and prepares and issues national regulations. 4. Finnish Environment institute (SYKE, other than project participants). SYKE's expert services provide vital assistance on a wide-range of environmental issues for administrators, local authorities, industries, firms and other organizations. 5. The Regional Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (ELYs) and Regional State Administrative Agencies (AVI). Environmental authorities (AVI) are responsible for issuing permits and obligations of nutrient remediation in sewage treatment plants. ELYs are the organizations that controls and sets the scene for the obligations. For this purpose the project produces valuable new information and frameworks for environmental decisions defined by authorities. 6. Regional council of Häme. The objective of the Regional Council of Häme is to develop the region in order for it to become a competitive region as a part of Southern Finland, the area of the Baltic Sea, and the entire Europe. 7. Kokemäenjoen vesistön vesiensuojeluyhdistys (KVVY) – Water protection association of the river Kokemäenjoki water system. KVVY studies and monitors the environmental effects, makes drafts for the environmental permits and gives education e.g. for wastewater treatment plant personnels. This is one of the many national associations, but the activity area covers the planned demonstration sites.   8. Aalto University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.  Water and Wastewater Engineering Groups are the leading groups in the country focusing on new challenges in controlling wastewater processes. The biological removal of nitrogen is becoming more and more common. 9. Other Life projects in EU. With regard  to other Life+ projects in the EU, there are currently no closely related projects. Therefore we have a great interest if any new starting project could have scientific value for our project. In Finland we already have had collaboration with the GIS-Bloom Life+ project which started in 2010 and continues till 2013. Dr Bertil Vehviläinen belongs to team of the project and Vanajavesi is among the few pilot areas of the project, and the Finnish Environment Institute is responsible for and conducted the project. These facts ascertain that our new project will have a very close collaboration with the GIS-Bloom Life+ project during the next few years. 10. EU Commission. The results of the project can be exploited by the WISE EU which is a partnership between the European Commission (DG Environment, Joint Research Centre and Eurostat) and the European Environment Agency. In addition, other Finnish researchers and experts involved in related environmental problems will be informed in seminars, conferences and through written articles and publications. They will also be invited to open project seminars and workshops. Municipalities and municipal waterworks are reached by the Waste Water Works Association (FIWA) netpages and their monthly newsletter. Local water protection associations are informed in the annual “Vesipäivät” national conference. International stakeholders are informed by giving presentations in international conferences and workshops, and by publishing results of the project in scientific journals. In addition project members have co-operation with various international projects, which have several research partners in other Baltic Sea countries, in Europe and other countries, e.g. in China.

 

Page 37 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B5 EXPECTED CONSTRAINTS AND RISKS RELATED TO THE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND HOW THEY WILL BE DEALT WITH (CONTINGENCY PLANNING) In Action A1 only minor constrains and risks are foreseen because the existing data sets are available for the project and the collaborating partners are experienced in doing complicated physical, chemical and biological analyses, including phytoplankton and cyanobacteria. In Action A2 we already have an appropriate number of committed waste water utilities, but the hydrological conditions have to be checked because they may affect the criteria of the most suitable demonstration places. Sediment filtration does not change the quantity or place of the wastewater load, so it is not expected that environmental permit are needed in the smaller treatment plants in Finland, especially if the water is not stagnant but flowing. Although only positive effects are suspected, a permit may be needed for larger water volumes and therefore in the work schedule there are 1,5 years time allotted to the permit process. In the worst case we can conduct the demonstration in Lammi utility (WWT) which has an own pond suitable for the sediment filtration. Applying for the environmental permit may also be important to make the N-SINK sediment filtering technology more familiar to the authorities and generate publicity as an example case. Action B1. - Construction plans of the extended perforated sewage outlet may include some points which are difficult to predict. Water pressure in the outlet depths may influence the flow rate, so construction will be made one by one, to gain experience of the tube performance to modify the prototype of the outlet. As the outlet is perforated, it is not expected that the tubing needs extra-weights, but to get the tube closer or even inside the sediment, some weights have to be added. The effects will be continuously monitored and if harmful negative biogeochemical results will be recognized (like doubling of the phosphorus concentration) then the demonstration will be stopped within 3 months. Action B2 - The major risk is that the diffuse leaching of nitrogen is rather challenging to model in northern temperate zone with highly variable hydrological and weather conditions. Therefore, there is a risk that we may need more work to reach the goals than anticipated in the project plan. At the same time a good thing is, however, that our modeling team in SYKE has a great deal of experience in modeling, and especially the hydrological sub-model (WSFS) has already proven to successfully estimate hydrological patterns over large watersheds in Finland. Through our  INCA and VEMALA models we have gained valuable experience, and fortunately the INCA model has already been applied to one smaller catchment area (Lake Pääjärvi) in the upper reaches of the Vanajanvesi drainage basin. In that area the model results fitted rather well with the calculated loading estimates based on measured runoff and chemistry results with intensive sampling. It is hard to foresee any other major risk in achieving the targets of the project, because in this context all the basic requirements (e.g. the model structures and good verification data) for a successful modeling are available. Further, the INCA models have been used to similar questions already several countries in Europe e.g. INCA (EVK1-CT-1999-00011) and EUROLIMPACS (GOCE-CT-2003-505540) projects. Action B3: - We estimate that in Action B3 there is a low risk for failure. The reason is that the modeling team already has some experience in working with the issue, although in a much larger spatial scale in the Baltic. This means that the model structure and its demands are well known and therefore we assume that the key question (and problem) might be the spatial resolution of the model. In the new model version, higher spatial resolution complicates the model, which can be a risk, but at the same time it also improves the model and as a consequence the model results can be better applied in resource allocation at the case study areas. - Potentially there is a risk that the collaboration between the two modeling teams does not work properly. This is a relevant aspect and has to be considered carefully because Action B2 provides essential information for Action B3. . The INCA-catchment model version calibrated in Action B2 and the economic model (Action B3) will be used iteratively in determining cost-efficient programmes of measures for the case study catchments. If the collaboration fails, the goals of Action B3 cannot be achieved. However, we strongly believe this is just a hypothetical risk while in reality the collaboration between the two teams will operate according to the plans. Both team members know each other well, and all indicators suggest that the collaboration will not be difficult between the two teams. - Spatial optimization is technically challenging. One important, but also critical step of the process is to identify or develop a non-linear optimization algorithm that is suitable in solving water management problems. Although there are many alternative candidate algorithms (Hof and Bevers 2002), their efficiency in solving this particular optimization problem will not be known before the first versions of the simulation model become available for testing. If the problem turns out too complex to be solved for the entire watershed, there are ways to solve simpler problems for subregions separately and then iteratively for the entire region. Another possibility is to decrease the spatial resolution by aggregating areas. - Building up an integrated model for water management will be iterative work between the two Page 38 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B5 modeling teams (B2 and B3). Both an optimization tool and the simulation model will be developed simultaneously and jointly and by exchanging information between the teams.  This is the way to safeguard that the work will advance smoothly. Action C1 - The number of sampling and analyses may be too high for the budgeted personnel. However, we estimate that we can get 2-3 M.Sc. students during the project to help in the sampling and analysis process. - The machines used for stable isotope analysis are frequently booked and it may be difficult to find time enough for analysis from the University of Jyväskylä. To prevent this, planning and booking will be made well in advance, and collaboration with other groups will ensure that this constrain is not going to be a problem. However, another solution is to buy the service from international laboratories like Cornell University. If that happens we have to ask, if permission is needed from the EU, to change our cost allocation between salaries and external assistance costs for UJ. The same holds true for N2O measurements which also have limited availability in Finnish Universities. - Some of the machines necessary for research may break down during the project. However, the high amount of collaboration partners and a good network will ensure that the samples will be analyzed and also custom services can be bought. In Action D the risk for a successful dissemination is minimal because all the active members of the project have long experience in disseminating scientific results, and in fact many of the key stakeholders in Finland are somehow involved in the project. We are convinced that will ensure the dissemination. Due to information overload there is a risk that the information will not reach all expected target groups. However, all possible actions will be done to minimize that risk. In this respect a very important thing is that so many key players in the field are somehow connected to the project. This is why we believe that in this particular project, if in any project, the dissemination goals can be reached. We are aware, however, that dissemination is a challenging issue and needs plenty of time and energy from all partners, team leaders as well as the project coordinator, and it is not just a “simple” thing which can be left to the hired person. The management of the homepage, especially after the project´s life-time, is also a challenging issue. We have a plan, that the homepage will be maintained at the homepage of the Lammi Biological Station, University of Helsinki, at least three years after the project has ended. This allows other partners and collaborators to link the N-Sink page to their own homepages. In Action E there are no major constrains and therefore it is hard to see any major risk in project management. The project leader as well as the action leaders are all experienced persons and thus familiar with project management issues. Many of them have earlier experience in LIFE projects as well. Many of the SAB (Steering and Advisory Board) members also have a long experience in all kind of projects and thus they are capable to help and guide in the project management. This means that the key issue is to hire a suitable person for the project coordinator.

Page 39 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - B6 CONTINUATION / VALORISATION OF THE PROJECT RESULTS AFTER THE END OF THE PROJECT Which actions will have to be carried out or continued after the end of the project? Since the timeframe of the project is limited, international dissemination of the results will also be continued after the project. That will happen in a natural way by the university partners, MTT and SYKE through international conference talks and posters. If the demonstrated N-SINK nitrogen load reduction system proves to be feasible, further actions are needed in order to elicit its wide use in practise. A follow-up project may therefore be necessary for the commercialization of the method.  The model applications calculating N retention at different spatial scales (INCA and WSFS-VEMALA) will be developed and carried out at SYKE after the project. Also the cost-effective model will be further developed and carried out after the project at MTT. This means that all the three models applied in the project will be available after the project also for administrative purposes.

How will this be achieved, what resources will be necessary to carry out these actions? If the proposed N-SINK method proves feasible, further development of the method could be facilitated by the Finnish Technology Agency (TEKES), or the EU Eco-innovation funding system. The model applications will be developed partially by the resources of the responsible institutes (SYKE and MTT) and partially by the external funding. This means that for the further developments of the models new funds are needed. The possible external funding might come from the EU funding systems although the national resources can play a major role. At this stage we do not have any concrete plans beyond the end of this project in 2016.For developing denitrification measuring techniques LBS and UJ will apply for further funding from the Academy of Finland (AKVA programme 2011) and we assume that the Finnish Academy project will continue after 2016.Also MTT, SYKE and University of Helsinki will apply for further financing from the Academy of Finland for the developing of models.

To what extent will the results and lessons of the project be actively disseminated after the end of the project to those persons and/or organisations that could best make use of them (please identify these persons/organisations)? Dissemination will be continued through the established network, which consists of organizations represented in the Steering and advisory board (SAB), including two ministries, SYKE, MTT, universities, water protection associations, and FIWA. Also other contributors in water protection will be actively informed by the partners.

Page 40 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 TECHNICAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part C – detailed technical description of the proposed actions

Page 41 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - C0 LIST OF ALL PROPOSED ACTIONS A. Preparatory actions (if needed) A1

Preparation of the study sites for the N-SINK demonstration action

B. Implementation actions B1

N-SINK sediment filtration demonstrations

B2

Long-term and model demonstrations of catchment scale N retention

B3

Demonstration of spatially cost-effective allocation of nutrient abatement measures at watershed level

C. Monitoring of the impact of the project actions (obligatory) C1

Monitoring the ecosystem effects of sediment filtering in Lake Keurusselkä

C2

Monitoring the ecosystem effects of sediment filtering in Lake Vanajavesi

C3

Verification of catchment scale N retention models

D. Communication and dissemination actions (obligatory) D1

Communication and dissemination

D2

Development of after Life communication plan

E. Project management and monitoring of the project progress (obligatory) E1

Project management and monitoring of the project progress

Page 42 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - C1a

DETAILS OF PROPOSED ACTIONS A. Preparatory actions ACTION A.1: Preparation of the study sites for the N-SINK demonstration action Description and methods employed (what, how, where and when): This action is preparation phase for the N-SINK sediment filtration demonstration action, which includes technical planning, permit procedures and consultations. Sediment filtration is a new undemonstrated innovation for the reduction of the nitrogen load when wastewater nitrogen is released in the form of nitrate. The final and long-term benefits of the approach can only be analyzed in a proper field demonstration. In the N-SINK project we will select four places where the demonstration will be conducted and 1-3 places for control sites. In the preliminary survey (see http://www.vvy.fi/?29_m=1814&s=20 ) conducted together with the Finnish Water and Waste Water Works Association (FIWA) we have gained several treatment plants, who have been interested and committed in taking part in the demonstration and monitoring, including small communities and larger water companies: e.g., Lammi, HS-vesi (Hämeenlinna, Hattula), Keuruu, Hankasalmi, Petäjävesi, and Janakkala in the central and southern Finland. FIWA's membership includes over 300 Finnish water utilities and 130 collaborating members which cover about 90 % of water services in Finland. Based on hydrological and technical survey and together with the support of FIWA the two-three most suitable treatment plants (see below) will be selected for the N-SINK demonstration places. In addition one-two sites will be selected for control sites where the year-to-year variation in the denitrification activity can be determined. Thus the implementation of filtering approach will carried out in some of the proposed sites: Hämeenlinna/Paroinen (Lake Vanajanselkä), Keuruu (Lake Keurusselkä), Petäjävesi (Jämsänvesi), or Hankasalmi (Kuuhankavesi).  In Hämeenlinna/Paroinen the technology is tested for part of the 20 000 m3/d discharge, in other places for full outflow (300-800 m3/d).  The site selection will be performed based on the results of subproject A1. WWTW`s, their scales and locations are shown in Appendix 1. One reason for selecting these sites is to minimize travelling during the monitoring phase as Hämeenlinna/Paroinen is close to LBS and other sites close to JyU. Modeling and cost-effective calculations are performed for larger catchment areas, i.e. catchments of Lake Vanajanselkä and River Porvoonjoki, which contribute significantly to the nutrient load to the River Kokemäenjoki and further down to the Bothnian Sea and respectively to the Gulf of Finland. This allows us to estimate the effectiveness of different abatement measures relative to their costs within two large catchment areas, both with high relevance in relation to their loading and hydrological characteristics. See Appendix 1, Demonstration areas, Appendix 2, Demonstrations in river basins). Because of the relatively small volume of already purified waste waterwhich will be used in the sediment filtration approach, no environmental permits will be needed or in case they are needed the permits will be applied. Therefore in the preparatory action the environmental permits will be applied, if necessary, and the application procedure will be described in detail to give an example of the procedure for water utilities. This action completes the final choosing of the sites and planning the monitoring points, as well as drafting the application for the environmental permit from Regional State Administrative Agency (eg. In Vaasa). In Finland Regional State Administrative Agencies harmonises the regional environmental and development activities and is responsible for the environmental protection through environmental permits. The action A is divided to the sub-actions 1 and 2: 1. Choosing the study and monitoring sites based on the hydrological and technical survey (August 2013-May 2014) - DPHYS responsible for the implementation -includes interviewing representative water utility staff and authorities -collection of maps and other documentation -flow measurements and wastewater discharge flow simulations in the selected sites -determination of the most representative monitoring points 2. Drafting the environmental permit for the N-SINK sediment filtration in the medium-size wastewater treatment utility (2014) -planning the application for the environmental permit together with the local water protection associations

Constraints and assumptions: Only minor constrains are foreseen in the realization of Action A 2. We already have the appropriate number of committed waste water utilities, but it is better to check the hydrological aspect which are important choosing criteria and may affect the criteria of the most suitable demonstration places. Sediment filtration does not change then quantity or place of the wastewater load, so it is not expected that Page 43 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - C1a environmental permit are needed in the smaller treatment plants in Finland, especially if the water is not stagnant but flowing. Although only positive effects are suspected environmental permit may be needed for larger water volumes and therefore in the work schedule there are 2 years time to get the permit, which should be enough for the procedure. If, for some reason the permit takes longer or the permit is too strictly defined, we can conduct the fourth demonstration in Lammi utility which has an own pond suitable for the sediment filtration, although not the most optimum place. Applying the environmental permit may also be important to make the N-SINK sediment filtering technology more familiar for authorities and publicity and as an example case.

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UJ

Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated:

Expected results (quantitative information when possible): D 1.2. Report: Selection of the study sites and description of the flow directions and monitoring points of these sites D 1.1. Environmental permit for the Regional State Administrative Agency

Indicators of progress: M 1.1 Demonstration sites and monitoring points described (31.1.2014) M 1.2 Environmental permit applied for at least for the medium-size N-SINK demonstration place

Page 44 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - C1b

B. Implementation actions ACTION B.1: N-SINK sediment filtration demonstrations Description and methods employed (what, how, where and when): Sediment has an enormous capacity to reduce nitrate load to nitrogen gas through denitrification. Denitrification is very strongly related to the nitrogen concentration above the sediment and water retention in a lake, as previous studies have consistently shown (Figure). Therefore we claim that spatial optimization of the wastewater discharge would be an efficient way to reduce nitrate-based nutrient load in the environment especially now, when most new environmental permits for new or reconstructed treatment plants have a nitrification sanction in Finland and other Baltic countries which care for the sensitive aquatic system. Currently the discharge of purified waste water has mostly been implemented using a one-point outlet system, either through a drain or a pipe, and many times the water is further mixed to the productive water layer of the lake. A new sediment filtration approach is suggested in which the nitrified water will be in longer direct contact with the reducing microbes of the sediment, which are very efficiently denitrifying a portion of the nitrate load. Compared to the point outlet, nitrate rich water is spread close to the sediment where nitrate is also expected to increase the redox-potential of the uppermost sediment layer, and improve the quality of near-bottom water layers and prevent phosphorus release. This action is implementation phase for the alternative nitrogen load reduction method N-SINK sediment filtration, and is the technical part of the project. One-two demonstration site(s) will be a small-scale treatment plant(s) (300-800 m3/d), and one medium-size plant (up to 20000 m3/d or partial discharge volume), and in addition another one or two site(s) will be used for demonstration. The discharge outlet width is increased by 100-300 times (from 30-60 cm to 50-100 m), by perforated sewer system with heavy weights to sink the tubing in to the bottom sediment allowing a slow flow into the anareobic sediment. The site will be monitored during the action and one year before the action (C1.2; C2.2) or one year after the action (C1.1; C2.2). Life+ notice boards will be set in the demonstration sites. The demonstrations will last one full year each; starting on summer 2014 and 2015. The action includes planning, construction and disassembly of the sediment filtering system and perforated sewage outlet. Prototype construction includes 4 new perforated canals for wastewater allocation about 100 m per place, 10-60 cm diameter plastic tubes and connection parts, work for special perforation and water installation. Special purpose perforated wastewater canals have never been commercialized and/or iare not available as a serial product. The water pressure (~2bars) makes it challenging to get an even outflow from the tube, and therefore the perforation has to be done in a special way. Making the prototype needs mathematical calculations and simulations, which can be later used for new canals. -Permanent staff taking part time in the work will be specifically seconded to the project. Construction plans of the extended perforated sewage outlet may include some points which are difficult to predict. Water pressure in the outlet depths may influence the flow rate, so construction will be made one by one, to gain experience of the tube performance (first construction in June, next in August, then in June and in August) to modify the prototype of the outlet. As the outlet is perforated, it is not expected that the tubing needs extra weights, but to get the tube more close or even inside the sediment, some weights have to be added. A scuba diver will check the spatial construction of the outlet. The effects will be continuously monitored and if harmful negative effects are recognized (like doubling of the phosphorus concentration) then the demonstration will be stopped within 3 months. This action will produce 4 one-year long full-scale demonstrations of the N-SINK sediment filtration method. The new drain systems will be constructed and deconstructed.   

Constraints and assumptions: Construction plans of the extended perforated sewage outlet may include some points which is difficult to predict. Water pressure in the outlet depths may influence the flow rate, so construction will be made one after one, to gain experience of the tube performance (first construction in June, next in August, then in June and in August) to modify the prototype of the outlet. As the outlet is perforated, it is not expected that the tubing needs extra weights, but to get the tube more close or even inside the sediment, some weights have to be added. A scuba diver will check the spatial construction of the outlet. The effects will be continuously monitored and if really negative biogeochemical results will be recognized (like doubling of the phosphorus concentration) then that demonstration will be stopped within 3 months.

Page 45 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - C1b

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UJ

Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated:

Expected results (quantitative information when possible): This action will produce 2 one-year long full-scale demonstrations of the N-SINK sediment filtration method. The new drain systems will be constructed and deconstructed. D 2.1 Progress report D 2.2 Final report: New alternative method for nitrogen removal exploiting natural ecosystem service  

Indicators of progress: Milestones: M 2.1 Progress report 1 ready M 2.2 Final report ready

Page 46 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 Name of the picture: Correlation between denitrification and residence time and nitrate concentration

Page 47 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 Name of the picture: New sediment fitration method

Page 48 of 86

LIFE12 ENV/FI/000597 - C1b

B. Implementation actions ACTION B.2: Long-term and model demonstrations of catchment scale N retention Description and methods employed (what, how, where and when): This action has two phases: Phase 1. The aim of this supporting action is to analyze and demonstrate how the major nutrient loadings from point and non-point sources have changed the water quality in Lake Vanajanselkä and River Porvoonjoki in southern Finland, and how the water protection actions, like denitrification, have influenced water quality in the long-term. The time span will be the last 50+ years and the analysis is based on the available long-term data sets collected by the water authorities. The first target area includes Vanajavesi as a part of the Kokemäenjoki drainage basin with a total area of 27 046 km2, i.e. the fourth largest river basin in Finland. Lake Vanajanselkä and its upstream drainage basin consists of ca. 2700 km2, i.e. 10% of the entire water system. River Kokemäenjoki drains finally to the Bothnian Sea through the city of Pori. The second study area is River Porvoonjoki with a total drainage basin of nearly 1300 km2.  The river flows through the city of Porvoo into the Gulf of Finland. The river is the most heavily loaded (per area) river in Finland. The length of the river is 143 km and there are only a few lakes on it (1.4% of the total drainage basin area). The length of River Kokemäenjoki is about the same (150 km), but [due to the large drainage basin] it has many upstream river and lake areas. One of them is the water system called Vanajanreitti. From the upstream starting point to the mouth of the River Kokemäenjoki, the water has to flow >200 km. Nowadays both water systems receive purified effluents from municipalities and industry. However, Vanajavesi water system received untreated sewage waters for a long time before the first waste water treatment plants were build in 1970´s. As a result of waste water treatment plants and new purification techniques, especially phosphorus retention is very high (>95%). However, nitrogen retention is usually much lower and can achieve only about 50% of the load. In the area of Porvoonjoki the waste water treatment plants have higher nitrogen retention capacity, and up to 80-90% of the load can be retained in normal conditions. Organic matter retention is typically >95% of the load as well. The amount of purified waste waters can contribute, however, up to 30% of the discharge in River Porvoonjoki and