Search Results

1-20 of 34 results for subject:Nitrates

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Nutrient neutrality and housing development

The government announced plans to change Habitats Regulations which underpin nutrient neutrality. The amendments were rejected by the House of Lords.

Type

Commons Briefing papers

Date

13 October 2023

Reference

CBP-9850

Diffuse Pollution of Water by Agriculture

Water pollution regulation is devolved in the UK. Surface, coastal and ground waters in England suffer from significant pollution problems: 78% of surface and groundwater bodies fail to meet the ‘good’ ecological status prescribed by the EU Water Frameworks Directive. Pollution increases water treatment costs and adversely affects wildlife. Compared...

Type

POSTnotes

Date

15 October 2014

Reference

POST-PN-478

Proposals to revise Nitrates Action Programme and extend the Nitreate Vulnerable Zones (NVZs). 42 p.

Type

Impact assessments

Date

10 August 2009

Reference

RIA 09/135

Partial regulatory impact assessment on proposals to revise Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZs) Action Programme and extend NVZ coverage in England. 52 p.

Type

Impact assessments

Date

20 August 2007

Reference

RIA 07/142;HINF 2007/1661

Deposited Paper DEP 07/1961

Deposited by

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Consultation papers; Deposited papers

Date

10 August 2007

Reference

DEP 07/1961

House

House of Commons

Water Supply: Purification

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they have plans to require water companies to produce disaggregated reports of (a) the capital, and (b) the operating costs associated with purifying water of pesticides, nitrates, cryptosporidium and metals.

Asked by

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (Liberal Democrat)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

28 March 2007

Reference

2713; 690 c289-90WA

House

House of Lords

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many nitrate-sensitive areas were designated in each year since 1997; and if she will make a statement. - Inc figures.

Asked by

Lord Barker of Battle (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

11 June 2003

Reference

117531; 406 c883W;406 c884-5W

House

House of Commons

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what representations she has received concerning progress made on designating nitrate-sensitive areas required under the urban waste water treatment directive since 1997. - None.

Asked by

Lord Barker of Battle (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

11 June 2003

Reference

117486; 406 c881-3W;406 c883-4W

House

House of Commons

Dept of Health

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, what recent checks have been carried out on bottled water to determine levels of (a) pesticides, (b) nitrates and (c) endocrine disrupting chemicals; and if she will make a statement. - Inc ref to Spring Water and Bottled Drinking Water...

Asked by

Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of Health

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

28 April 2003

Reference

99215; 404 c82-3W

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper DEP 02/1560

Deposited by

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Deposited papers

Date

1 July 2002

Reference

DEP 02/1560

House

House of Commons

Whitty, Lord

Lords Statement on what action is being taken to address diffuse pollution of water by agriculture; and how they intend to implement the Nitrates Directive in England in the light of consultation. [HL 4954]. - Including fact that I am publishing today a discussion document The Government's Strategic Review of...

Asked by

Lord Gregson (Labour)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

27 June 2002

Reference

HL 4954; 636 c157-60WA

House

House of Lords

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what the outcome was of the 2001 review of sensitive areas as required by the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994; and if she will make a statement. (List in library Dep 02/1560).

Asked by

Lorna Fitzsimons (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

26 June 2002

For answer on

27 June 2002

Answered on

27 June 2002

Mrs. Fitzsimons: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the outcome was of the 2001 review of sensitive areas as required by the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994; and if she will make a statement. [65669] Margaret Beckett: Based on recommendations from the Environment Agency I have reviewed the identification of Sensitive Areas in England in accordance with the criteria in Part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994 (which transposes the European Council Directive (91/271/EEC) concerning urban waste water treatment). This review has resulted in the identification of 33 more water bodies in England as Sensitive Areas. 32 are because the waters have since the last review in 1997 been found to be eutrophic, or that they may in the near future become eutrophic if protective action is not taken. Eutrophic waters are those which are, or may be, adversely (in terms of their ecology and quality) affected by discharges from sewage treatment works serving communities of more than 10,000 inhabitants. The remaining water body, the River Itchen in the midlands, which supplies drinking water, has been identified on the basis of elevated levels of nitrate under the terms of the regulations. Identification of these areas will result in more stringent treatment being provided at 53 qualifying treatment works by water companies. This treatment involves reducing levels of phosphorus and/or nitrogen in discharges to tackle eutrophication and nitrate levels of these waters. These new requirements on water companies to remove these nutrients from sewage treatment work discharges will complement and add to the action required by farmers under the Nitrates Directive, and by my Department on diffuse pollution, which I also announced today. Lists of the new sensitive areas have today been deposited in the Libraries of both Houses. Maps showing the location of all current sensitive areas (eutrophic) and (nitrate) will be deposited in the Libraries of both Houses and at offices of the Environment Agency in due course.

Date

27 June 2002

Reference

387 c1005-6W;387 c1003-4W; 65669

House

House of Commons

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

Statement on what action is being taken to address diffuse pollution of water by agriculture; how the Government intends to implement the Nitrates Directive in England; and if she will make a statement. (Report in Library Dep 02/1376).

Asked by

Lorna Fitzsimons (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

26 June 2002

For answer on

27 June 2002

Answered on

27 June 2002

Mrs. Fitzsimons: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action is being taken to address diffuse pollution of water by agriculture; how the Government intend to implement the nitrates directive in England; and if she will make a statement. [65668] Margaret Beckett: One year after the creation of DEFRA, it gives me enormous pleasure that what were different Departments are now working well together to develop an integrated approach to the problems of pollution, and especially diffuse pollution from agriculture. The increased intensification of farm production and the great steps made to reduce point source pollution from factories and sewage works mean that, as the Policy Commission on Food and Farming noted, agriculture is now clearly one of the major contributors to the pollution of water. It is also a significant polluter of air. Over time we will need to take further steps to reduce pollution from agriculture, but in a cost-effective way. We therefore need to involve farmers very closely in continuing work to achieve a cleaner and healthier environment. Many farmers are committed to protecting and enhancing the environment, but much more needs to be done to raise standards across all farms to the standards of the best, and to tackle the specific problem of diffuse pollution. Over the next few years we will be implementing the EU directives we have signed up to in order to improve water quality. As part of this work, later this year we will be holding a more detailed consultation with all sectors to follow up our first general consultation on implementing the water framework directive. Over 70 per cent. of nitrates and over 40 per cent. of phosphates in English waters originate from agricultural land. Up to a half of England's bathing waters are affected by short-term contamination by agricultural pollution, mainly by microbes from livestock manure being washed off farm land after rain. Excessive loads of fine silt are generated by soil erosion from intensively farmed land. Pesticides are contaminating drinking water sources, requiring expensive additional treatment at water works to remove pesticides before water can be supplied to consumers. No one farmer is responsible for this, but cumulatively diffuse pollution from farms is having a substantial impact on the quality of English waters. That is why we have begun a strategic review of diffuse water pollution from agriculture, to identify cost-effective policy measures to prevent and control this pollution and to improve the sustainability of agriculture. We are co-ordinating this review with work announced in the Budget to review the particular role that economic instruments could play in tackling such pollution. As part of the open approach to policy development that we are seeking to adopt in the new Department, I am publishing today a discussion document, "The Government's Strategic Review of Diffuse Water Pollution From Agriculture in England", so that we can start a debate with farmers and other stakeholders about the problems that we face and how we can best solve them. This marks the beginning of a process for working with stakeholders to develop a package of policy measures to reduce pollution. Part of what we need to achieve is improved control of the application of manures and fertilisers to land. Through the review we are considering the full range of policy mechanisms that could play a part in the future in encouraging and assisting farmers to improve their management of manure and nutrients. But we also have to implement some measures now, to comply with the European Court of Justice judgment that we have failed to meet our obligations under the 1991 Nitrates Directive to tackle agricultural nitrate pollution of waters. We published proposals for implementing the directive in December 2001. We have carefully considered the responses to the consultation, and I am today publishing an analysis of these responses. We have decided to apply the minimum regulation consistent with our obligations under the directive, to avoid closing off other options for tackling the wider problem of diffuse pollution that might be identified through the current review. We will designate new nitrate vulnerable zones (NVZs) covering 47 per cent. of the land area of England, which will take the total designated area in England to 55 per cent. These are areas draining into rivers, ground water and other waters which are affected by nitrate pollution. In consequence, farmers using manufactured nitrogen fertilisers or organic manures will be required to follow an action programme to reduce pollution. This action will help to prevent and reverse damaging impacts of eutrophication, and improve the quality of drinking water sources. Better control of manure spreading will also cut microbiological inputs to water, helping to maintain and further increase the quality of bathing waters and shellfish waters. The overall extent of the new designations will be less than was originally estimated in the consultation document, as a result of work to define and quantify the NVZ areas more accurately than was possible at the time the consultation document was issued. Some new areas have been added, as was anticipated in the consultation document; but more areas have been removed. I am today publishing a revised regulatory impact assessment, which estimates that the compliance costs incurred by farmers will amount to about £20 million per year. Costs will vary considerably from farm to farm, but I acknowledge that some farmers, particularly those who need to construct additional slurry storage facilities, will incur substantial costs. To assist those farmers who are most affected, we will extend the existing farm waste grant scheme to the new NVZ areas to help finance improvements to slurry storage facilities required to implement the action programme. Formal designations setting down the precise boundaries of the new zones will follow as soon as possible, and it will become a legal requirement to follow the action programme from 19 December 2002. By the end of July, DEFRA will make available detailed interactive maps of the new NVZ areas. As soon as these are available, we will write to farmers to explain how to access these maps. We will also send all farmers in affected areas explanatory guidance material, together with sources of further advice on how to comply with the measures and details on the availability of grant under the farm waste grant scheme. We are also taking action to reduce phosphate and nitrate pollution of waters from other sources, and are announcing, separately, additional designations under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive that will require water companies to reduce phosphate or nitrate discharges from certain sewage treatment works. We are also committed to improving air quality. 85 per cent. of the ammonia which enters the atmosphere in the UK comes from fertilisers and manures used in agriculture. We will be publishing a booklet later this summer, which will explain the problems caused by ammonia emissions, to initiate debate on how to tackle this related problem. This all adds up to a substantial agenda for change. I recognise that we must secure these changes in ways which maximise the beneficial impact on the environment while minimising the regulatory burden on farmers. As we said in "Working Together", we need to explore joined-up ways of working; to develop whole farm approaches; and to identify smarter ways of regulating. For example, several of the measures I have mentioned could affect the ways farmers handle manures and fertilisers, pointing to the benefits of more integrated approaches.

Date

27 June 2002

Reference

387 c1003-5W;387 c1001-3W; 65668

House

House of Commons

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent estimate she has made of the percentage of nitrate pollution in rivers which arises from discharges by sewage treatment plants. - Inc figures.

Asked by

Lord Brady of Altrincham (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

26 March 2002

For answer on

10 April 2002

Answered on

10 April 2002

Mr. Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent estimate she has made of the percentage of nitrate pollution in rivers which arises from discharges by sewage treatment plants. [48076] Mr. Meacher: The Environment Agency's 2001 publication "Rivers and Estuaries--a decade of improvement" provides information on general trends in nitrate levels of rivers in England and Wales. Although this information does not identify the source of the nitrates, the Agency's assessment was that in 2000 some 32 per cent. of rivers had high average concentrations of nitrate (greater than 30mg/l), and about 50 per cent. moderate or high average concentrations (greater than 20mg/l). It is considered that the average nitrate contribution from sewage treatment works is likely to be less than 20 per cent., and in most cases less than 10 per cent. However, where relatively large works, such as Altrincham and Sale, discharge to small rivers and provide a significant proportion of their flow, the nitrate contribution is likely to be higher than 20 per cent. immediately downstream of the discharge. Where surface freshwaters are used for the abstraction of drinking water the Environment Agency has on-going monitoring at numerous points. If sampling confirms the presence, or likelihood, of more than the permitted concentration of nitrates, and the source of the nitrates is sewage treatment works, then we identify the stretch of river as a Sensitive Area (Nitrate) under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations, and reduce the amount of nitrates in the discharge from qualifying works. On 5 March 2002 I announced the identification of stretches of the rivers Chelmer, Leam, Stour and Wissey as Sensitive Areas (Nitrate), and the requirement for two water companies to reduce the nitrate in discharges from six sewage treatment works by 2004.

Date

10 April 2002

Reference

48076; 383 c287W

House

House of Commons

Whitty, Lord

What progress has been made to review and identify further sensitive areas under the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1004. - Inc fact that maps showing the location of all current sensitive areas will be deposited in Library of the House. [HL 3147].

Asked by

Lord Hoyle (Labour)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

27 March 2002

Reference

633 c71-2WA; HL 3147

House

House of Lords

Deposited Paper DEP 02/614

Deposited by

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Deposited papers

Date

6 March 2002

Reference

DEP 02/614

House

House of Commons

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what progress has been made to review and identify further areas under the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994; and if she will make a statement. (Tables in library Dep 02/614). - Includes fact that...

Asked by

Adrian Bailey (Labour; Co-operative Party)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

4 March 2002

For answer on

5 March 2002

Answered on

5 March 2002

Mr. Bailey: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what progress has been made to review and identify further areas under the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994; and if she will make a statement. [41242] Mr. Meacher: Based on recommendations from the Environment Agency I (by authority of the Secretary of State) announced this morning that I have reviewed the identification of Sensitive Areas in England in accordance with the criteria in Part I of Schedule I of the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994 (which transposes the European Council Directive (91/271/EEC) concerning urban waste water treatment). This review has resulted in the identification of four freshwater stretches of the rivers Stour, Wissey, Chelmer and Leam, which are intended for the abstraction of drinking water, to be identified as Sensitive Areas (nitrate) on the basis of elevated levels of nitrate under the terms of the regulations. These new requirements on water companies to remove nitrate from sewage treatment discharges will complement the action required by farmers under the Nitrates Directive. Work to provide more stringent treatment (nitrogen removal) at six qualifying treatment works is expected to be completed by end 2004. 180 bathing waters (already identified under the Bathing Waters Regulations 1991) in England are also to be identified as Sensitive Areas as discharges from qualifying sewage treatment works receive, or are to receive by 2005 more stringent treatment (ultraviolet disinfection) to fulfil standards of those regulations. Funding for these improvements have already been provided for in the Office of Water Services (Ofwat) Periodic Review of water company price limits for the five-year period from 2000. We are committed to a steady improvement to Britain's freshwater and bathing quality. Already we have the best ever recorded bathing water quality. Today's moves mean that we can continue our efforts to ensure clean and healthy water both for this country's inhabitants and its aquatic life. Lists of the new sensitive areas have today been deposited in the Libraries of both Houses. Maps showing the location of all current sensitive areas (nitrate) and (bathing waters) will be deposited in the Libraries of both Houses and at offices of the Environment Agency in due course.

Legislation

Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994

Date

5 March 2002

Reference

41242; 381 c231W

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, what was the cost of removing (a) pesticides and (b) nitrates from drinking water supplies in each of the last five years. - Inc table.

Asked by

Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

23 March 2000

For answer on

3 April 2000

Answered on

3 April 2000

Mr. Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what was the cost of removing (a) pesticides and (b) nitrates from drinking water supplies in each of the last five years. [116656] Mr. Mullin: The Director General of the Water Services collects this information from each of the licensed water and sewerage companies in England and Wales, via their July Return. The Director General informs me that capital expenditure to remove nitrates and pesticides from drinking water supplies (in 1998-99 prices) in each of the five years was: Capital expenditure £ million _________________________________________________________________________________________________. To remove nitrates from drinking water To remove pesticides from drinking water supplies supplies 1994-95 20 138 1995-96 9 160 1996-97 5 121 1997-98 6 64 1998-99 6 11 Total 46 494 _________________________________________________________________________________________________. There are also running costs associated with nitrate and pesticide removal but neither the Director General or the Government hold this information.

Date

3 April 2000

Reference

347 c320-1W; 116656

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1) what was the cost of removing (a) pesticides, (b) nitrates and (c) phosphates from water supplies to make them potable, in (i) 1994-95, (ii) 1995-96, (iii) 1996-97 and (iv) 1997-98; and what was the cost of...

Asked by

Anne Campbell (Labour)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

30 July 1998

Reference

317 c425W; 52546;52547

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper Dep/3 3060

Deposited by

Department of the Environment

Type

Deposited papers

Date

28 March 1996

Reference

Dep/3 3060

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher