Metal pollution around Norwegian industries studied by analysis of naturally growing moss samples. 2015 survey.

(1)

Metal pollution around Norwegian industries studied by analysis of naturally growing moss samples

2015 survey

Eiliv Steinnes and Hilde Uggerud

NILU report 1/2017

(2)

NILU report 1/2017

1

NILU report 1/2017

ISBN: 978-82-425-2867-4 ISSN: 2464-3327

CLASSIFICATION

A - Unclassified (open report)

DATE 10.02.2017

SIGNATURE OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON Ole-Anders Braathen (sign.)

NUMBER OF PAGES 81 TITLE

Metal pollution around Norwegian industries studied by analysis of naturally growing moss samples

PROJECT LEADER

Hilde Thelle Uggerud

2015 survey NILU PROJECT NO.

O-115067

AUTHOR(S) QUALITY CONTROLLER

Wenche Aas Eiliv Steinnes (NTNU) and Hilde Uggerud (NILU)

REPORT PREPARED FOR

Miljødirektoratet v/Malene Vågen Dimmen

CONTRACT REF.

ABSTRACT

On request from the Norwegian Environment Agency, a survey of atmospheric deposition of heavy metals around industrial enterprises in Norway has been carried out. The participation was voluntary and 22 industries located at 17 different sites financed their own participation. The survey is based on analysis of samples of naturally growing moss collected around the enterprises during the summer of 2015 and includes 57 different elements. For a majority of the sites this survey is a follow- up of corresponding surveys carried out in 2000, 2005, and 2010. In general the results show that deposition of heavy metals close to the industries depends closely on the industrial processes used as well as the local topographic and meteorological conditions. The results are evaluated relative to corresponding background levels in moss in parts of Norway with low impact of air pollution. Like in previous surveys, the generally most polluted industrial location is Mo i Rana, followed by Odda. At most sites only minor general improvement is observed since the previous survey in 2010.

NORWEGIAN TITLE

Tungmetallforurensing rundt norske industrier studert ved analyse av moseprøver. Undersøkelse i 2015.

KEYWORDS

Metals Survey Moss samples

ABSTRACT (in Norwegian)

Etter oppdrag fra Miljødirektoratet, er atmosfærisk nedfall av tungmetaller undersøkt rundt aktuelle industrianlegg i Norge.

22 industribedrifter på 17 forskjellige steder ønsket å delta og har finansiert sin egen deltakelse. Undersøkelsen er basert på prøver av naturlig voksende mose innsamlet rundt de enkelte bedrifter sommeren 2015 og omfatter 57 grunnstoffer. I et flertall av tilfellene dreier det seg om gjentakelse av tilsvarende undersøkelser i 2000, 2005 og 2010. Resultatene viser at nedfall av metaller i nærområdet til disse bedriftene avhenger sterkt av de prosesser bedriften arbeider med så vel som de lokale topografiske og meteorologiske forhold. Grad av forurensning er vurdert i forhold til verdier fra moseprøver tatt i strøk av Norge lite utsatt for luftforurensning. Det generelt mest forurensede industristedet er som tidligere Mo i Rana, etterfulgt av Odda. På de fleste stedene er det kun små til moderate endringer å spore fra tidligere undersøkelser.

PUBLICATION TYPE: Digital document (pdf) COVER PICTURE: Source: NILU

The publication may be freely cited where the source is acknowledged

NILU’s ISO Certifications: NS-EN ISO 9001 and NS-EN ISO 14001. NILU’s Accreditation: NS-EN ISO/IEC 17025.

(3)

Summary

On request from the Norwegian Environmental Agency a survey of atmospheric deposition of heavy metals was carried out around industrial enterprises in Norway. Participation was voluntary and 20 industries at 15 locations financed their own participation. The survey is based on analysis of moss samples collected locally around each enterprise during the summer of 2015, and includes 58 elements. The present survey is for most locations a repetition of corresponding surveys executed in 2000, 2005, and 2010. The results show that deposition of heavy metals close to the companies strongly depends on the processes used by the enterprises as well as the local topographic- and meteorological conditions. The results are evaluated in relation to median values from a nationwide moss survey in Norway 2015, covering 230 background sites. Temporal trends are presented for Mn and Zn in Sauda, Ni and Bi in Årdal and Cd in Odda. Mean values from the 3 apparently most influenced sites at each location are shown together with mean values from previous surveys.

(6)

NILU report 1/2017

5

Metal pollution around Norwegian industries studied by analysis of naturally growing moss samples: 2015 survey

2015 survey

Introduction 1

The moss biomonitoring technique, first employed in Sweden (Rühling and Tyler, 1973) is particularly well suited in territories where mosses are frequent and grow on a humic soil substrate. Since 1977, moss samples have been collected all over Norway every five years according to a regular network to serve as monitors of atmospheric deposition of heavy metals (Steinnes et al., 2009, 2016), and are also employed in coordinated deposition surveys on the European level (Harmens et al.). The moss species preferentially used in Norway for this purpose is Hylocomium splendens. This moss is characterized by a well- defined annual growth, which allows definition of the time period it was exposed to atmospheric deposition.

The primary use of this approach in Norway is for studies of metal deposition over large territories (e.g. Steinnes, 1980, Steinnes et al., 1992a, Berg et al., 1994; 1997). A first attempt to use this approach for monitoring of metal deposition in detail around a local industry was carried out at Mo i Rana (Steinnes et al. 1992b). Based on the experience from this work, a more extensive monitoring of metal deposition at 11 sites in Norway was carried out in 2000 (SFT 2001). This monitoring involving a gradually increasing number of sites and industries, was followed up in 2005 (Steinnes et al., 2007) and 2010 (Steinnes et al., 2011). The work described in the present report is a further extension of previous work, with additional industries and sites, based on moss sampling in 2015. Totally 22 industries listed below, distributed among 17 geographical locations, participated in the 2015 survey. The industries financed their own participation.

Eramet Porsgrunn, Porsgrunn Glencore nikkelverk, Kristiansand S Elkem Carbon, Kristiansand S Alcoa Lista, Lista

Eramet Kvinesdal, Kvinesdal Hydro Aluminium, Karmøy Eramet Sauda, Sauda

Sør-Norge Aluminium, Husnes Boliden, Odda

TiZir Titanium, Odda Elkem AS, Bjølvefossen Hydro Aluminium, Høyanger Nystar, Høyanger

Hydro Aluminium, Årdal Hydro Aluminium, Sunndal Wacker Chemicals, Hemne Elkem Thamshavn, Orkanger Alcoa Mosjøen, Mosjøen

Glencore Manganese Norway, Mo i Rana Fesil, Mo i Rana

(7)

NILU report 1/2017

6

Celsa Armeringsstål, Mo i Rana Finnfjord, Finnsnes

Figure 1: Map showing all locations where moss were sampled in 2015.

(8)

NILU report 1/2017

7

Since the first national survey of metal deposition at industrial sites in Norway, the number of participants has varied somewhat, as shown in Table 1. The number of sites varied from 11 in 2000, via 7 in 2005 and 14 in 2010, to 17 in 2015.

Table 1: Sites where the moss monitoring method has been employed in Norway to monitor metal deposition around local industries.

ID Location 2000 2005 2010 2015

Por Porsgrunn X X X

Krs Kristiansand S X X X

Lis Lista X X X

Kvi Kvinesdal X X X

Sau Sauda X X X X

Kar Karmøy X X

Hus Husnes X X

Odd Odda X X X X

Ålv Ålvik X

Høy Høyanger X X X

Ård Årdal X X X X

Sun Sunndal X X X X

Hem Hemne X

Ork Orkanger X

Msj Mosjøen X X X

MiR Mo i Rana X X X X

Fin Finnsnes X X

Experimental 2

Sampling 2.1

Samples of the moss species Hylocomium splendens were collected during the period May – August 2015 around the participating industries. The sampling sites were selected in order to reflect in a best possible way the local deposition pattern considering local topography and prevailing wind directions, in most cases at 1-10 km distance from the plant. At sites previously studied the sampling sites were as far as possible the same as before. The sampling network employed at each of the locations is shown on maps in Figs. 2, 3, 8-11, 13, 15, 19, 20, 23, 26-30 and 34.

Analysis 2.2

The moss samples were dried at room temperature and extraneous material was removed by hand. Segments of the moss plants corresponding to the last 3 years´ growth were selected for chemical analysis. Digestion of moss samples was performed with a microwave technique system (UltraCLAVE, Milestone, Italy). Dry moss (0.5-0.6 g) was accurately weighed and HNO3 (5 ml, s.p) was added. The samples were digested according to a 65 minutes long temperature programme, with stepwise heating to 250 °C and a holding time of 30 minutes at 250 °C. After cooling, the digests were quantitatively transferred to polypropylene tubes and diluted to 50 ml with deionized water.

(9)

NILU report 1/2017

8

For determination of metals, aliquots of 1.0 ml and 0.1 ml, respectively, were diluted to 10 ml. A high resolution inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-HRMS), ELEMENT2 from Thermo Scientific, Bremen, was used for determination of metals. All calibration standards, blank samples and reference materials contained 1%(v/v) HNO3 (s.p) and 1 ng ml^-1 rhenium as internal standard.

For determination of Hg , aliquots of 25 ml were diluted to 50 ml and added 5 ml BrCl for stabilisation. A cold-vapour atomic fluorescence spectrophotometer (CV-AFS), Tekran, Canada, was used for determination of mercury.

To assess the accuracy of the results a certified reference material traceable to NIST (1566b) were used. In addition, moss reference samples M-2 and M-3 prepared and distributed by the Finnish Forest Research were analysed. Calibration curves for all elements reported, including elements not certified in the CRMs, were verified using multi-element standards from Certipur.

Uncertainty 2.3

To minimize or eliminate uncertainty sources in the fieldwork, the principles as described in

“Heavy metals, Nitrogen and POPs in European mosses: survey 2015, Monitoring manual (UNECE ICP-Vegetation, 2015)”, were followed. Measurement uncertainties are calculated from CRM and reference moss samples M-2 and M-3. The uncertainties listed in table 1 include laboratory bias, uncertainty in CRM values, laboratory reproducibility and have coverage factor of 2.

Table 2: Estimated uncertainties in the determination of elements Element Uncertainty

(%) Element Uncertainty

(%) Element Uncertainty (%)

Be 18 ^Co 14 ^Cd 7

B 16 ^Ni 17 ^Sb 10

Na 20 ^Cu 10 ^Cs 13

Mg 20 ^Zn 20 ^Ba 12

Al 20 ^Ga 23 ^La 20

S 10 ^Ge 25 ^Ce 15

K 11 ^As 15 ^Sm 30

Ca 24 ^Se 20 ^Hg 10

Sc 30 ^Rb 17 ^Tl 11

V 19 ^Sr 11 ^Pb 18

Cr 30 ^Y 20 ^Bi 14

Mn 13 ^Mo 20 ^Th 18

Fe 20 ^Ag 10 ^U 10

Trend analysis 2.4

The statistical method used for detecting and estimating trends, is the nonparametric Mann- Kendall test and Sen’s method (Gilbert, 1987). The Mann-Kendall test is used to discover monotonic decreasing or increasing trend in data sets and the variables do not need to

(10)

NILU report 1/2017

9

conform to any particular distribution. To achieve the lowest level of confidence (= 0.1), the test requires at least four values. The present survey is the fourth moss-survey carried out around Norwegian industries. Some industries have participated in all four surveys, which facilitates trend analysis at the lowest level of significance. The locations where trends are studied are Mo i Rana, Sauda, Odda, Sunndal, and Årdal.

Sen’s method is a non-parametrical method that is used to estimate the slope of an existing linear trend. This method requires minimum 10 values to calculate confidence interval for the slope estimate. Hence, the present data set is too limited and does not fulfil the presumptions this method requires. Even so, the slope during the time period is shown, but it is emphasized that the uncertainty in these slopes are high.

Results 3

Results for concentrations of 57 elements in moss samples collected at 17 industrial sites in Norway during the summer of 2015 are listed in Tables 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30,and 32. Values exceeding background level in moss by a factor of 10 or more indicate obvious pollution, and these values are marked in blue print. Values exceeding background level by a factor of 50 or more indicate substantial pollution, and these values are marked in red print. Elements such as Cu, Mn and Zn are essential nutrients in plants and occur naturally in relatively high concentration in moss. For these elements values exceeding background level with a factor of 5 and 10, indicate obvious and substantial pollution, respectively. Deposition of mercury poses a special case where any increase should be considered as undesirable. Thus, values of mercury exceeding background levels with a factor of 3 and 10 indicate obvious and substantial pollution respectively.

Background levels are based on mean values for moss samples in a region of Norway little affected by air pollution as evident from the simultaneous nationwide survey (National Moss survey 2015). These background levels are presented in Table A2.

Mean values of selected elements for the three samples apparently exposed to the highest metal pollutant levels at each geographical location, are listed in Tables 4, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 28, 29, and 33. These results are basis for discussion in chapter 4 . The selected elements are those exceeding the criteria for obvious or substantial pollution. In addition, corresponding values from previous surveys involving the same local sampling sites are presented. The colouring codes are similar to those used in Table 3. Mean values exceeding criteria for obvious or substantial pollution were not found at Karmøy or Hemne.

Hence, there are no tables for these two locations.

Time trends of elements showing significant changes in concentration at given locations are shown in Figs. 12, 14 and 22.

Discussion 4

The discussion is divided and the results are first discussed according to location, and then for each element.

Location 4.1

In the following the results for each geographical location are discussed on the basis of the character of industries in question and the contamination levels observed, and maps are shown demonstrating the local distribution of the most important pollutant elements at each site. At most sites, sampling was carried out a five sites surrounding the industries.

(11)

NILU report 1/2017

10

Porsgrunn 4.1.1

The sampling sites at Porsgrunn are shown in Figure 2. The area is relatively densely inhabited and several minor sources may contribute to the general metal pollution. Some of the results indicate moderate pollution at one or more site, but no metals reach seriously high levels at any of the sites.

Figure 2: Sampling sites – Porsgrunn

(12)

NILU report 1/2017

11

(13)

Table 3: Concentrations of 57 elements in all 2015 moss samples (mg kg^-1). Values exceeding background level by a factor of 10 or more indicate obvious pollution, and these values are marked in blue print. Values exceeding background level by a factor of 50 or more indicate substantial pollution, and these values are marked in red print. Background values are listed in table A2.

Porsgrunn

Location Li Be B Na Rb Sr Y Nb Rh Ag Cd Sb Te Cs Ba La

Por 15-13 0.57 0.07 8.5 244 7.7 26 0.81 0.40 0.008 0.07 0.31 0.39 0.03 0.23 29 1.8

Por 15-14 0.50 0.05 5.9 229 13 14 0.78 0.35 0.003 0.06 0.29 0.24 0.02 0.27 25 1.6

Por 15-15 3.2 0.24 23 216 11 52 3.2 0.25 0.014 0.12 0.21 0.20 0.05 0.54 38 6.0

Por 15-16 0.12 0.02 6.0 200 9.3 42 0.51 0.13 0.011 0.02 0.08 0.10 <0.02 0.13 23 2.0

Por 15-18 0.45 0.06 4.8 159 28 17 0.85 0.27 0.006 0.06 0.25 0.16 0.05 0.31 38 1.4

Ce Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Hf Ir Pt

Por 15-13 3.2 0.31 1.1 0.20 0.091 0.30 0.04 0.14 0.03 0.10 0.008 0.074 0.010 0.05 0.018 0.039

Por 15-14 3.3 0.31 1.2 0.22 0.066 0.21 0.05 0.14 0.03 0.11 0.008 0.076 0.011 0.06 0.011 0.019

Por 15-15 12 1.4 5.0 0.86 0.230 1.2 0.19 0.60 0.11 0.46 0.041 0.317 0.043 0.12 0.003 0.007

Por 15-16 3.2 0.33 1.2 0.17 0.082 0.28 0.04 0.09 0.02 0.07 0.004 0.034 0.004 0.02 0.020 0.032

Por 15-18 3.1 0.28 1.1 0.19 0.104 0.22 0.04 0.16 0.03 0.11 0.011 0.085 0.011 0.04 0.004 0.008

Tl Pb Bi Th U Mg Al S Ca Sc Ti V Cr Mn Fe Co

Por 15-13 0.16 4.9 0.13 0.23 0.08 1276 870 1375 5060 0.19 46 2.4 2.9 377 707 0.57

Por 15-14 0.36 5.9 0.09 0.28 0.09 1378 849 1328 4538 0.20 62 2.4 2.4 749 834 0.54

Por 15-15 0.08 5.8 0.28 0.93 0.35 2567 3270 1379 10153 0.65 125 6.8 5.8 833 2231 1.6

Por 15-16 0.02 1.3 0.01 0.05 0.06 1233 470 972 3393 0.05 26 1.0 1.2 1209 197 0.36

Por 15-18 0.10 5.5 0.08 0.27 0.08 1775 1017 1183 5200 0.21 73 2.4 2.0 1004 837 0.68

Ni Cu Zn Ga Mo K Ge As Se Hg

Por 15-13 2.1 12 49 0.26 0.81 3480 0.03 0.34 0.35 0.104

Por 15-14 2.1 13 60 0.31 0.76 3569 0.04 0.33 0.25 0.029

Por 15-15 4.4 13 48 1.2 1.3 3575 0.07 0.89 0.42 0.084

Por 15-16 1.1 3.2 36 0.13 0.23 5612 0.01 0.07 0.10 0.049

Por 15-18 2.0 9.1 59 0.38 1.0 6295 0.04 0.31 0.32 0.064

(14)

NILU report 1/2017

13

Table 4: Mean values of selected elements for the three samples apparently exposed to the highest metal pollutant levels at the given sampling site.

Location Ag Cd Sb Te La Ce Pb Bi Th U Ti V Cr

Background levels 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.25 0.45 0.7 0.01 0.05 0.02 25 0.5 0.6

Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Mo As Hg Nb Ba

200 300 0.2 1 3.5 30 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.1 20

Location Site Year Ag Cd Sb Te La Ce Pb Bi Th U Ti V Cr

Porsgrunn 13,15,1

8 2015 3.2 6.0

2010 4.7 8.0

2000 2.1 3.7

2015 2010 2000

(15)

Kristiansand 4.1.2

The sampling sites in Kristiansand are shown in Figure 3. The main source of atmospheric metal pollution in this city is a copper-nickel smelter. In addition to the major metals Ni (Figure 4) and Cu Figure 5) this source is most probably responsible for high relative levels of Co, Ag (Figure 6), and Te (Figure 7). In 2015 five more sampling sites were added to the previous ones in order to distinguish any metal pollution from Elkem Carbon, an additional participant in the survey, but no evident metal contribution from this enterprise was observed.

Figure 3: Sampling sites - Kristiansand

(16)

NILU report 1/2017

15

Figure 4: Concentration of Nickel in moss samples – Kristiansand

Figure 5: Concentration of Copper in moss samples - Kristiansand

(17)

NILU report 1/2017

16

Figure 6: Concentration of Silver in moss samples – Kristiansand

Figure 7: Concentration of Tellurium in moss samples – Kristiansand

(18)

NILU report 1/2017

17

Kristiansand

Krs 15-02 0.29 0.02 5.8 306 14 17 0.57 0.14 0.007 0.17 0.47 0.14 0.07 0.20 28 0.77

Krs 15-03 0.34 0.03 3.7 205 21 10 0.76 0.16 0.006 0.29 0.35 0.28 0.13 0.27 21 0.77

Krs 15-04 0.66 0.04 11 293 21 17 1.2 0.24 0.010 0.30 0.23 0.26 0.20 0.24 37 1.6

Krs 15-05 1.6 0.14 7.5 246 25 27 7.0 0.04 0.043 3.9 0.40 0.11 0.61 0.36 68 12

Krs 15-11 0.50 0.03 3.3 294 17 16 1.1 0.19 0.010 0.46 0.27 0.44 0.12 0.30 29 1.4

Krs 15-12 0.44 0.03 2.0 199 16 11 1.0 0.18 0.009 0.45 0.16 0.28 0.09 0.29 29 1.3

Krs 15-13 0.26 0.02 2.1 597 17 15 0.66 0.21 0.009 0.41 0.34 0.65 0.15 1.2 20 0.6

Krs 15-14 0.39 0.03 2.7 219 26 15 0.82 0.16 0.013 0.59 0.20 0.28 0.12 0.41 29 1.1

Krs 15-15 0.44 0.04 1.9 149 25 10 1.2 0.14 0.011 0.40 0.21 0.39 0.09 0.39 25 2.6

Krs 15-02 1.6 0.16 0.61 0.11 0.06 0.14 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.07 0.007 0.054 0.007 0.02 0.005 0.012

Krs 15-03 1.6 0.17 0.68 0.13 0.06 0.15 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.09 0.009 0.074 0.010 0.03 0.007 0.015

Krs 15-04 3.5 0.36 1.4 0.25 0.10 0.31 0.06 0.20 0.04 0.15 0.014 0.116 0.016 0.04 0.007 0.019

Krs 15-05 25 2.9 12 2.2 0.39 2.5 0.46 1.5 0.269 1.1 0.088 0.673 0.089 0.08 0.010 0.081

Krs 15-11 3.3 0.33 1.3 0.25 0.092 0.29 0.05 0.21 0.04 0.15 0.014 0.109 0.015 0.04 0.008 0.025

Krs 15-12 3.1 0.33 1.3 0.24 0.089 0.28 0.05 0.18 0.03 0.14 0.012 0.097 0.013 0.04 0.008 0.025

Krs 15-13 1.3 0.13 0.52 0.10 0.063 0.12 0.03 0.08 0.02 0.05 0.005 0.041 0.007 0.03 0.008 0.027

Krs 15-14 2.4 0.25 0.96 0.18 0.081 0.20 0.04 0.14 0.03 0.11 0.010 0.083 0.011 0.03 0.006 0.031

Krs 15-15 4.5 0.62 2.4 0.42 0.089 0.52 0.08 0.23 0.04 0.16 0.012 0.105 0.014 0.03 0.010 0.034

(19)

NILU report 1/2017

18

Kristiansand cont.

Tl Pb Bi Th U Mg AI S Ca Sc Ti V Cr Mn Fe Co

Krs 15-02 0.05 4.4 0.11 0.24 0.19 1741 724 1191 5264 0.15 42 1.7 0.96 229 544 2.0

Krs 15-03 0.19 5.1 0.27 0.36 0.21 1443 850 1277 3028 0.22 61 2.8 1.5 343 818 1.2

Krs 15-04 0.09 5.5 0.31 0.65 0.30 1742 965 1029 3990 0.33 99 4.1 1.9 210 1349 3.3

Krs 15-05 0.09 13 1.6 3.6 1.3 2546 2182 1583 10016 1.2 175 6.5 4.9 130 2670 17

Krs 15-11 0.10 5.3 0.34 0.47 0.19 1914 1348 1325 3722 0.40 89 4.4 2.6 358 1534 3.0

Krs 15-12 0.08 7.6 0.25 0.35 0.19 1167 937 1184 3072 0.29 72 4.9 2.1 293 1096 2.9

Krs 15-13 0.07 19 0.35 0.18 0.08 1597 685 1071 2457 0.14 36 2.4 4.8 148 1721 1.5

Krs 15-14 0.08 7.7 0.36 0.28 0.14 1511 921 1389 3404 0.24 64 3.8 1.7 462 969 4.1

Krs 15-15 0.06 23 0.36 0.31 0.16 920 945 1625 3220 0.22 54 9.7 2.6 186 1000 2.4

Krs 15-02 17 25 88 0.23 0.47 5912 0.03 0.27 0.47 0.073

Krs 15-03 13 23 46 0.31 0.47 4877 0.03 0.41 0.82 0.074

Krs 15-04 38 47 57 0.43 0.61 6545 0.04 0.56 0.83 0.054

Krs 15-05 187 288 99 1.0 0.97 6333 0.12 3.6 11 0.147

Krs 15-11 23 48 62 0.52 0.70 6063 0.05 0.55 1.1 0.071

Krs 15-12 47 59 39 0.61 0.71 5246 0.07 0.97 1.3 0.066

Krs 15-13 12 33 106 0.27 1.4 5011 0.03 0.52 1.9 0.059

Krs 15-14 71 83 38 0.41 0.68 6101 0.06 1.0 1.1 0.085

Krs 15-15 48 74 43 1.1 0.95 4551 0.18 1.4 1.1

.

(20)

NILU report 1/2017

19

200 300 0.2 1 3.5 30 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.1 20

Kristiansand 4, 5, 11 2015 1.6 0.27 0.31 4.9 10.4 8.7 0.70 1.7 0.63

2010 1.6 0.47 0.40 1.7 3.2 10.7 0.62 0.54 0.37

2005 0.7 0.42 0.96 0.68 1.9 12.5 0.23 0.24 0.15

2015 7.8 83 128 1.6

2010 5.4 74 110 1.3

2005 3.8 105 62 1.0

(21)

Lista 4.1.3

The aluminium smelter at Lista (Figure 8) is situated in a flat terrain with a generally high wind exposure. This may partly explain the low deposition of most metals in its surroundings. Only Ga, a very likely contribution from an aluminium smelter, is deposited at distinctly higher levels near the smelter.

Figure 8: Sampling sites – Lista

(22)

Lista

Lis 15-03 0.16 0.06 1.2 287 7.4 17 1.80 0.06 0.005 0.03 0.22 0.15 <0.02 0.11 18 2.1

Lis 15-04 0.26 0.03 2.9 342 5.2 26 0.64 0.09 0.007 0.04 0.20 0.25 <0.02 0.08 30 0.86

Lis 15-05 0.24 0.03 3.6 531 4.4 34 1.6 0.12 0.009 0.03 0.78 0.09 <0.02 0.06 34 1.9

Lis 15-06 0.12 0.02 5.6 484 10 23 0.41 0.06 0.007 0.02 0.16 0.11 <0.02 0.06 16 0.45

Lis 15-07 0.27 0.04 3.4 489 5.4 23 1.1 0.10 0.007 0.04 0.17 0.23 0.02 0.06 28 1.4

Lis 15-03 2.3 0.34 1.3 0.23 0.060 0.32 0.06 0.21 0.04 0.15 0.012 0.091 0.012 0.02 0.019 0.042

Lis 15-04 2.0 0.22 0.90 0.17 0.079 0.19 0.04 0.13 0.02 0.09 0.008 0.060 0.008 0.02 0.003 0.006

Lis 15-05 3.8 0.47 1.8 0.36 0.097 0.40 0.08 0.28 0.05 0.19 0.018 0.135 0.018 0.03 0.003 0.006

Lis 15-06 1.0 0.12 0.53 0.10 0.040 0.11 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.05 0.004 0.036 0.005 0.02 0.007 0.010

Lis 15-07 3.5 0.36 1.5 0.28 0.087 0.31 0.06 0.20 0.04 0.14 0.012 0.091 0.013 0.03 0.038 0.007

Lis 15-03 0.04 4.4 0.06 0.08 0.03 1617 678 862 1904 0.10 26 1.9 0.79 143 404 0.38

Lis 15-04 0.12 5.2 0.08 0.17 0.04 1767 1970 944 3164 0.17 35 2.4 1.1 128 742 0.40

Lis 15-05 0.04 5.4 0.05 0.37 0.06 2207 775 1052 3623 0.19 48 1.9 0.85 298 747 1.1

Lis 15-06 0.02 3.3 0.06 0.06 0.02 1954 1071 954 2583 0.09 26 1.5 0.66 284 363 0.36

Lis 15-07 0.03 7.3 0.16 0.20 0.06 1775 4242 1171 2346 0.20 39 3.8 1.7 229 1120 0.80

Lis 15-03 1.3 5.1 42 0.26 0.43 3886 0.02 0.13 0.52 0.045

Lis 15-04 1.7 6.5 59 0.81 0.78 3597 0.04 0.23 0.48 0.059

Lis 15-05 1.5 5.3 171 0.40 0.44 5150 0.04 0.19 0.45 0.080

Lis 15-06 1.9 5.1 77 1.1 0.43 5826 0.02 0.13 0.43 0.080

Lis 15-07 5.5 12 95 3.6 2.0 4376 0.04 0.39 0.52 0.111

(23)

NILU report 1/2017

22

200 300 0.2 1 3.5 30 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.1 20

Lista 4,5,7 2015

2010 2000

2015 1.7

2010 1.3

2000 nd

(24)

Kvinesdal 4.1.4

The only significant industrial source at Kvinesdal is a manganese production facility, and the sampling sites (Figure 9) are all located within relatively short distance from the smelter.

Except for Mn the metal deposition is generally low.

Figure 9: Sampling sites – Kvinesdal

(25)

Kvinesdal

Kvi 15-02 0.19 0.02 2.9 235 19 17 0.30 0.06 0.005 0.03 0.12 0.15 <0.02 0.18 30 0.48

Kvi 15-03 0.28 0.05 3.9 264 8.4 21 0.62 0.06 0.006 0.06 0.24 0.19 <0.02 0.26 53 0.84

Kvi 15-04 0.23 0.05 1.9 220 12 23 0.43 0.07 0.006 0.06 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.73 59 0.74

Kvi 15-05 0.26 0.04 3.0 401 29 17 0.58 0.12 0.005 0.03 0.08 0.09 <0.02 0.14 32 1.5

Kvi 15-08 0.20 0.03 4.2 354 7.7 21 0.28 0.05 0.005 0.05 0.21 0.14 <0.02 0.15 35 0.51

Kvi 15-02 0.98 0.10 0.40 0.08 0.064 0.09 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.002 0.025 0.003 0.02 0.006 0.009

Kvi 15-03 2.1 0.20 0.79 0.15 0.121 0.16 0.03 0.11 0.02 0.08 0.006 0.052 0.007 0.05 0.014 0.029

Kvi 15-04 1.6 0.15 0.57 0.11 0.125 0.13 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.05 0.004 0.037 0.005 0.04 0.010 0.019

Kvi 15-05 3.3 0.30 1.1 0.19 0.081 0.22 0.04 0.12 0.02 0.09 0.007 0.058 0.008 0.03 0.004 0.008

Kvi 15-08 1.1 0.11 0.42 0.08 0.074 0.08 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.04 0.002 0.024 0.003 0.02 0.005 0.009

Kvi 15-02 0.05 4.5 0.04 0.11 0.03 1581 569 959 2444 0.11 23 1.6 0.74 350 424 0.22

Kvi 15-03 0.07 5.4 0.07 0.18 0.05 1464 1142 915 3210 0.27 37 2.1 1.6 1220 619 0.70

Kvi 15-04 0.12 5.8 0.07 0.14 0.05 1625 950 827 2789 0.21 32 1.8 1.6 1119 439 0.62

Kvi 15-05 0.03 2.1 0.02 0.43 0.09 1664 893 857 2625 0.18 44 1.6 1.2 512 567 0.34

Kvi 15-08 0.15 4.2 0.05 0.13 0.03 1546 746 1060 3077 0.13 28 1.9 0.88 601 422 0.41

Kvi 15-02 1.2 6.1 35 0.17 0.37 4672 0.03 0.20 0.58 0.106

Kvi 15-03 1.7 6.9 52 0.24 0.84 2707 0.02 0.32 0.70 0.143

Kvi 15-04 1.8 5.7 33 0.20 0.75 2792 0.02 0.33 0.71 0.090

Kvi 15-05 1.1 4.5 30 0.26 0.62 5181 0.02 0.16 0.42 0.055

Kvi 15-08 1.3 5.4 51 0.20 0.45 2993 0.02 0.21 0.57 0.095

(26)

NILU report 1/2017

25

Table 10: Mean values of selected elements for the three samples apparently exposed to the highest metal pollutant levels at the given sampling site.

200 300 0.2 1 3.5 30 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.1 20

Kvinesdal 3,4,5

950 1500

720

(27)

Karmøy 4.1.5

The sampling sites at this aluminium smelter (Figure 10) are all located in a flat and wind exposed terrain, and the results show that deposition of metals in its neighbourhood is generally limited.

Figure 10: Sampling sites - Karmøy

Metal pollution around Norwegian industries studied by analysis of naturally growing moss samples. 2015 survey.

Metal pollution around Norwegian industries studied by analysis of naturally growing moss samples

2015 survey

NILU report 1/2017

NILU report 1/2017

Contents

Summary

Metal pollution around Norwegian industries studied by analysis of naturally growing moss samples: 2015 survey

2015 survey

Introduction 1

Experimental 2

Results 3

Discussion 4