9 Atmospheric Contribution to Eutrophication of the Baltic Sea
57
Transportation and combustion are the main emission sectors contributing to oxidized nitrogen deposition, whereas, agriculture is the dominating emission sector
contributing to reduced nitrogen deposition.
Questions and Answers
Questioner name: Valerie Garcia
Q: Were you able to discern sources of the P inputs into the Baltic Sea from rivers?
A: Only atmospheric input is discussed in this study, but the information about P
inputs into the Baltic Sea from rivers is available in the HELCOM reports.
Questioner name: Eric van der Swaluw
Q: The normalized reduced nitrogen deposition is going down, whereas the reduced
nitrogen deposition is going up. Did you do a statistical test of the significance of
the two trends over the period considered?
A: Yes. The statistical tests indicate that there is no trend in annual deposition of
reduced nitrogen and that there is a declining trend in normalized deposition of
reduced nitrogen with significance level 0.001.
Acknowledgements The HELCOM Convention has financed a part of the work presented here.
The author is indebted to the scientific team at MSC-W for their help and inspiring discussions.
References
1. J. Bartnicki, Atmospheric deposition to the Baltic Sea. Monographs of the Institute of Meteorology and Water Management. Warsaw, Poland, 126 p. (2014)
2. J. Bartnicki, A. Gusev, W. Aas, M. Gauss, J.E. Jonson, Atmospheric supply of nitrogen, cadmium,
mercury, lead, and PCDD/Fs to the Baltic Sea in 2015. EMEP Centres Joint Report for HELCOM.
EMEP/MSC-W Technical Report 2/2017. Norwegian Meteorological Institute. Oslo, Norway.
Available in the web: http://www.emep.int/publ/helcom/2017/index.html (2017)
3. M. Gauss, S. Tsyro, H. Fagerli, A.-G. Hjellbrekke, W. Aas, Acidifying and eutrophying components, Supplementary material to EMEP Status Report 1/2017, available online at www.
emep.int, The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway (2017)
4. D. Simpson, A. Benedictow, H. Berge, R. Bergström, L.D. Emberson, H. Fagerli, C.R. Flechard,
G.D. Hayman, M. Gauss, J.E. Jonson, M.E. Jenkin, A. Nyíri, C. Richter, V.S. Semeena, S.
Tsyro, J.-P. Tuovinen, Á. Valdebenito, P. Wind, The EMEP MSC-W chemical transport model—
technical description. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 7825–7865 (2012). https://doi.org/10.5194/acp12-7825-2012
5. D. Simpson, R. Bergström, H. Imhof, P. Wind, Updates to the EMEP/MSC-W model, 2016–2017.
In Transboundary particulate matter, photo-oxidants, acidifying and eutrophying components.
EMEP Status Report 1/2017. The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway (2017)
57
Transportation and combustion are the main emission sectors contributing to oxidized nitrogen deposition, whereas, agriculture is the dominating emission sector
contributing to reduced nitrogen deposition.
Questions and Answers
Questioner name: Valerie Garcia
Q: Were you able to discern sources of the P inputs into the Baltic Sea from rivers?
A: Only atmospheric input is discussed in this study, but the information about P
inputs into the Baltic Sea from rivers is available in the HELCOM reports.
Questioner name: Eric van der Swaluw
Q: The normalized reduced nitrogen deposition is going down, whereas the reduced
nitrogen deposition is going up. Did you do a statistical test of the significance of
the two trends over the period considered?
A: Yes. The statistical tests indicate that there is no trend in annual deposition of
reduced nitrogen and that there is a declining trend in normalized deposition of
reduced nitrogen with significance level 0.001.
Acknowledgements The HELCOM Convention has financed a part of the work presented here.
The author is indebted to the scientific team at MSC-W for their help and inspiring discussions.
References
1. J. Bartnicki, Atmospheric deposition to the Baltic Sea. Monographs of the Institute of Meteorology and Water Management. Warsaw, Poland, 126 p. (2014)
2. J. Bartnicki, A. Gusev, W. Aas, M. Gauss, J.E. Jonson, Atmospheric supply of nitrogen, cadmium,
mercury, lead, and PCDD/Fs to the Baltic Sea in 2015. EMEP Centres Joint Report for HELCOM.
EMEP/MSC-W Technical Report 2/2017. Norwegian Meteorological Institute. Oslo, Norway.
Available in the web: http://www.emep.int/publ/helcom/2017/index.html (2017)
3. M. Gauss, S. Tsyro, H. Fagerli, A.-G. Hjellbrekke, W. Aas, Acidifying and eutrophying components, Supplementary material to EMEP Status Report 1/2017, available online at www.
emep.int, The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway (2017)
4. D. Simpson, A. Benedictow, H. Berge, R. Bergström, L.D. Emberson, H. Fagerli, C.R. Flechard,
G.D. Hayman, M. Gauss, J.E. Jonson, M.E. Jenkin, A. Nyíri, C. Richter, V.S. Semeena, S.
Tsyro, J.-P. Tuovinen, Á. Valdebenito, P. Wind, The EMEP MSC-W chemical transport model—
technical description. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 7825–7865 (2012). https://doi.org/10.5194/acp12-7825-2012
5. D. Simpson, R. Bergström, H. Imhof, P. Wind, Updates to the EMEP/MSC-W model, 2016–2017.
In Transboundary particulate matter, photo-oxidants, acidifying and eutrophying components.
EMEP Status Report 1/2017. The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway (2017)