Memorandum submitted by the Environment
Agency
CLIMATE CHANGE AND WATER SECURITY
1. SUMMARY
1.1 Climate change creates increased challenges
for public policy. We believe there needs to be increased action
on both mitigation and adaptation.
1.2 Our approach is risk-based, and seeks
to support mitigation, the introduction of adaptation measures,
the delivery of integrated environmental outcomes, and the development
of appropriate indicators, monitoring strategies and tools.
1.3 The most fundamental impacts of climate
change will be on the water cycle. We recognise climate change
will require integrated solutions, for example, adopting land
management measures that can mitigate drought and flood impacts.
The Water Framework Directive will require the integrated management
of pressures on the water environment and will provide the opportunity
to "join up". There will also be a need to ensure that
CAP reforms help deliver complementary land management practices.
1.4 Many of the impacts of climate change
will be manifest at a regional and local level. The Water Framework
Directive will establish a catchment-based approach to the management
of the water environment. The Agency expects that many of the
actions that stakeholders will need to take to meet water quality
objectives in the WFD will involve land management and land use
planning. In seeking to manage the impacts of climate change,
an integrated catchment approach where environmental planning
and prioritisation are taken forward in conjunction with investment
regimes (CAP funding and AMP) will be required.
1.5 The Agency recognises the need for a
strategic approach to flood risk management, particularly in adopting
flexible and appropriate combinations of measures to achieve long-term
solutions to flood risk, rather than simply treating the symptoms.
We consider that the results of the Foresight Programme indicate
the need for a step-change in the approach to flood risk.
1.6 Climate change places additional pressures
on water supply systems. Responses should include managing demand
as well as developing additional sources. In time, new resources
may need to be developed. These will be expensive and may be controversial.
Therefore it is important that they are developed in time, but
not too early in view of ever improving understanding of climate
change and technological development.
1.7 Increased pressure on the water resource
during dry periods will mean that even more careful management
is needed for biodiversity, and possibly assistance to some species
for adaptation. Taking into account flood periods, there is a
need to build resilience into the landscape in the broader countryside
outside existing protected areas. However, changes are inevitable.
Society will need to decide what level of protection is feasible.
1.8 Current assessments on all sectors use
UKCIP scenarios based on the Hadley Centre model. We consider
it will be vital to use a wide range of global climate models
in the next round of research.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 Climate change is widely recognised
as the major environmental challenge requiring concerted action
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the inevitable
impacts of rising sea levels, temperature and precipitation changes.
Key impacts are anticipated on the hydrological cycle, with increased
droughts and floods, and an increase in the intensity and frequency
of extreme events.
2.2 We accept as our scientific points of
reference the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
Assessment Reports and Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES).
Our Science Strategy recognises the need for all environmental
policies and decisions to be founded on sound science.
2.3 We have a key role to play in reducing
emissions, and in facilitating the adaptation process. Our over-arching
approach to climate change has been laid out in our Statutory
Guidance which states that "The Agency contributes to the
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through its industry and
waste regulation objectives, provides information on the effects
of climate change under its data collection and monitoring objective,
and plans for the likely impacts of climate change especially
through its flood defence and water resources objectives. It also
participates in regional and local initiatives to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change."
2.4 The Environment Agency has a key role
on mitigation. We are the competent authority for the EU Emissions
Trading Scheme, we regulate processes which give rise to 40% of
UK climate change emissions and we have a role in regulating renewable
energy technologies. The Energy White Paper sets out a robust
framework for tackling climate change. The emphasis now needs
to be on delivery. Helpful measures would include: medium-term
targets for renewables and energy efficiency backed up with resource
commitment; more sustained support for regional and local delivery
mechanisms, action to remove barriers—such as planning and
network constraints—to renewables; improved carbon signals
to the economy through further use of economic instruments and
setting an ambitious cap for the second stage of the EU Emissions
Trading Scheme; and a step change in support for energy efficiency.
2.5 This evidence focuses on our role in
adaptation.
2.6 Tackling climate change is difficult
for all organisations. Uncertainties are inherent, and thus it
requires a capacity to manage risk. The cross-cutting nature of
the problem necessitates the ability to manage the bigger picture
and work between different policy areas. And long timescales are
involved.
2.7 We approach climate change in a multi-track
way. Where long-term new investments are now being made, for example
in flood defence, we try and ensure that appropriate allowances
are made for climate change on the basis of existing knowledge.
In some cases Defra is providing specific guidance. At the same
time we are lending our efforts to improving scientific understanding,
so that future investments, for example on water resources, can
be made with benefit of improved understanding. For some issues,
for example biodiversity we recognise that complete policy shifts
may be necessary.
2.8 In April 2002, Defra launched a new
set of climate change scenarios developed by the Hadley and Tyndall
Centres through the UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP02).[1].
The scenarios are derived from four emission scenarios and a single
global climate model (HadCM3). The resulting climate change scenarios
(available at 50 km resolution and daily time-scales) have underpinned
much of our work in water resources, flood defence, and biodiversity.
We have also been undertaking cross-cutting research in environmental
standards and climate change indicators.
3. OUR APPROACH
ON WATER
SUPPLY
3.1 The Agency's aim for water resources
is that there should be enough water for people, agriculture,
commerce and industry, and an improved aquatic environment.
3.2 In England and Wales the volume of water
taken from rivers, lakes and groundwater is regulated by a system
of abstraction. Setting licence conditions to protect the environment
requires an understanding of the hydrological characteristics
of the catchment as well as an assessment of the ecological needs
of the area's wildlife and plant species.
3.3 Climate change will affect the volume
of water in the environment, the ecological requirements and may
increase demands for example for irrigation. The Environment Agency's
policy (reinforced by the Water Act 2003) is to place a time limit
on all new abstraction licences. This means that periodically
we can adjust the balance between abstraction and the environment
to reflect changes in climate. Time limiting of all licences is
essential if we are to review the impact of abstraction in the
context of changing pressures, resource availability and environmental
need. We hope that water companies and other abstractors will
recognise and support the need to convert their licences to time
limited status.
3.4 The effect of climate change on public
water supply is especially important. We have participated in
a series of studies with UKWIR to look at the effect of climate
scenarios on the availability of water for abstraction and with
Defra on the effects of climate change on water demand. For the
current periodic review of water company prices (AMP4) we worked
with the water industry to develop guidance on the use of scenarios
in the calculation of future needs. We expect companies to make
allowance for these in their long-term water resources plans.
We have asked all water companies to ensure that their final plans
provide clear information about the impact of climate change.
Their long term plans must be sufficiently robust to cope with
the range of future climates that we may experience, without incurring
expenditure that may prove unnecessary. The companies have just
(April 2004) submitted their final plans to the Agency and Ofwat.
The Agency is now scrutinising them and will report to Ministers
in late July. On the basis of the draft plans submitted to the
Agency in August 2003 it seems likely that a number of major new
resources, primarily reservoirs, will be proposed by the companies
as being needed by 2030 to deal with increases in demand. Thames
Water has already started planning for a new reservoir in south-west
Oxfordshire.
3.5 Over the next 20 year planning horizon
it is unlikely that new resources will be needed solely to deal
with climate change, but where new resources are needed for other
reasons the impact of climate change must be considered and plans
must make appropriate allowances. In the longer term (beyond 2030
and perhaps not until after 2050) climate change may become a
driver for new resources.
3.6 Modelling using the UKCIP 2002 scenarios
suggests that across England and Wales there is likely to be less
water available for public water supply over the next 30 to 50
years. The effect is particularly marked in the south-east of
England where temperature rise is greatest. Seasonal variation
is likely to have an impact on agriculture—in particular,
on the reliability of irrigation systems—but public water
supply infrastructure is designed to cope with short-term supply-demand
balance changes. Demand for water will also rise though the effect
is relatively small. However, as the Hadley Centre model is known
to be relatively dry in summer compared to some other Global Climate
Models, we will be working with UKWIR for the AMP5/PR09 process
to develop a fuller set of scenarios, explore uncertainties due
to hydrological model parameterisation, natural climate variability
and the temporal sequencing of weather series.
3.7 We are encouraging water companies to
consider a wide range of responses. Building new resources may
be necessary. However, under the UKCIP02 scenarios, the volumes
of water available from existing resources, such as reservoirs,
may not reliably be available in the future. Similarly, new reservoirs
may not be the sole answer to future uncertainty. Making best
use of existing resources is important: this means, for example,
reducing leakage further and ensuring that supply networks are
integrated to allow them to cope flexibly with a full range of
climatic conditions. Demand management is also vital. We believe
that there should be tighter minimum standards for water fittings
and appliances, in both new build and refurbishment of existing
premises. We also believe that there should be new building regulations,
which could deliver improvements of at least a quarter on average
per capita consumption. There is also significant additional scope
for demand management in industry and commerce. More widespread
domestic metering is also essential if customers are to think
carefully about their water use. We look to water companies to
develop imaginative tariffs which meet the Government's social
policies and protect vulnerable groups but which also encourage
efficient use, particularly where water resources are scarce.
The increasing pressures of housing and population in the south-east
mean new housing stock must be constructed so that water efficient
fittings and appliances are included at the outset. Savings of
between 20 and 25% are achievable at minimal cost. Many studies,
including the Agency's Water Efficiency Awards scheme, have demonstrated
that for most industrial and commercial use water savings of up
to 30% are feasible with a very rapid payback.
3.8 Delivering effective reductions in demand
requires partnership. Water companies have a duty to promote demand
management with their customers. However, the incentives for companies
to do this are weak. We are considering alternative mechanisms
that may help companies ensure that water is used effectively.
On behalf of Defra we are assessing the potential for the establishment
of a "water saving trust"—an independent body
with the specific objective of encouraging demand management.
We are also recommending that the Home Information Pack should,
in the future, include detailed information on water and water
efficiency.
3.9 Building design and construction could
be more innovative and responsive to changing patterns of rainfall
and demand for water. Rainwater harvesting for non-potable use,
sustainable drainage systems and grey water recycling are all
technically feasible and increasingly cost-effective. Public receptiveness
may prove a barrier, particularly to wider use of grey water,
until there is a wider recognition of water as a scarce resource.
3.10 We are working at a regional level
to ensure that water resources are factored into strategic planning.
For example, in our Southern region we have produced supply-demand
balance maps that take account of climate change input into the
development of the regional spatial strategy. We are also working
with others in the Sustainable Buildings Task Group to develop
policy to deliver more water efficient homes and communities.
It is the south-east that poses the greatest challenge: water
resources are already scarce, development pressure is greatest
and the impact of climate change seems likely to be most severe.
4. OUR APPROACH
ON FLOOD
RISK MANAGEMENT
4.1 Today, nearly two million homes and
businesses in England and Wales are at risk from flooding with
a value of over £220 billion and affecting nearly 5 million
people (10% of the population).
4.2 A national appraisal of assets at risk
from flooding and coastal erosion, was produced for Defra in 2001.
It concluded that if our flood defences are not raised to adapt
to climate change by 2050, then average annual damages would increase
by approximately 50% to £700 million from rivers, and by
over 200% to £1 billion from the sea[2].
4.3 Currently, for capital investment decisions,
flood defence follows Project Appraisal Guidance (PAG) issued
by Defra/NAW. The Guidance provides climate change allowances
for both fluvial and coastal schemes, as set out below:
— Coastal/Tidal defence—Sea level
rise. PAG provides current guidance for England and Wales for
sea level rise which is taken as 4-6mm per annum depending upon
location. The overall impact of sea level rise is calculated given
the life of the defence and includes any assessment of benefits
and design criteria. Because there is inconclusive research on
storm surge, Defra does not recommend design standards. In practice
where long term tidal records are available an allowance for historic
returns may be factored in.
— Fluvial—Increases of up to
20% in peak flows have been indicated. PAG recommends that a sensitivity
analysis be undertaken to test the potential effects of the increase
in flows as part of any fluvial scheme development. The consequences
of such a test will vary depending upon catchment hydrology. Where
potentially significant consequences are identified.
— Possible mitigation may be allowed
for in the scheme proposals. The Government's PPG25 also states
that the potential effects of climate change may be a 20% increase
in peak flows.
— The Thames barrier was designed to
protect London from a 1 in 1,000 combined tidal/fluvial event
in the year 2030. This included allowance for sea level rise of
8mm per year until 2030, which should be sufficient to cope with
sea level rise as projected in UKCIP02 scenarios (despite recent
increases in the number of closures). The Thames barrier and associated
defences were not designed with the likely increase in winter
fluvial flows and possible increase in storm surge levels that
climate change will also bring. (A new project is underway which
is addressing the effect of climate change on the relationship
between sea level rise, storm surge, fluvial flow and erosion
and sedimentation regimes.)
4.4 Flood risk management is a very active
agenda for the Agency, since climate change will significantly
increase flood risk. We have recently completed our Flood risk
Management Strategy and will work with DEFRA in reviewing their
emerging national strategy for Flood and Coastal Erosion Management.
The Agency will regularly review and update, with Defra and the
Welsh Assembly, the guidance on Catchment Flood Management Planning.
Shoreline Management Plan guidance should also be updated as appropriate
by Defra. The Environment Agency's Flood Mapping Strategy proposes
the development of Flood Zones for planning consultation, as required
by PPG25 and TAN15 in Wales, taking into account current Government
allowances for climate change to allow for a 20% increase in peak
flows.
4.5 Recent research confirms that flood
risk should command greater attention. The Government's Foresight
Programme has investigated the scale of the impacts of climate
change by considering how flood risk may change over the next
30 to 100 years (2030-2100). It may underpin policy development
for strategic flood risk management in England and Wales[3].
Risks of flooding and coastal erosion were analysed using four
`socio-economic futures' that broadly correspond to the four UKCIP02
marker scenarios. The study concluded that continuing with existing
flood defence policies is not an option; that a raft of hard-engineering
and soft approaches are needed to tackle growing risks; and that
reductions in global emissions reduce, but do not entirely eliminate,
risks. Their predictions show that flood losses will increase
significantly by the 2080s (between £1 billion and £27
billion which is between 2 and 30 times over present levels) if
flood risk management policies and expenditure do not change.
The report shows that for some coastal locations, a water level
that at present has a 2% chance of occurrence in any one year
may increase to a 33% chance by the 2080s. The number of people
at "high" risk of flooding in 2080 will rise from 1.5
million to up to 3.5 million under the worst Foresight scenario.
4.6 We believe that there are four important
messages arising from Foresight, namely:
— a step-change in approach, and resources,
is needed or flood risk could grow to unacceptable levels in the
future, particularly in south-east England;
— tackling flood risks needs to be
undertaken using a broad range of measures, including engineering
and other large-scale interventions;
— policies and measures need to be
flexible combining funding, incentives and regulation in order
to adapt to accommodate the uncertainties of the future; and
— inappropriate development in the
flood plain must be prevented.
4.7 Foresight may well not contain the worst
case scenario. A new study has just emerged from the joint Defra/Environment
Agency Flood and Coastal Defence programme where we have reviewed
the adequacy of the allowance made for climate change (in all
plans and strategies) by an increase of 20% to peak flows[4].
Due to the significantly warmer and drier summers in UKCIP02 (compared
with the predecessor UKCIP98), the impact on flood flows was considerably
lower than previously determined. The Final Report concludes that
the 20% allowance is appropriate as a precautionary response to
the range of uncertainty of future climate change impacts. This
report suggests that climate change may have been under-estimated
in the Foresight Programme due to the choice of climate model.
Other policy changes we would like to see include:
— more efficient co-ordination of urban
drainage responsibilities and wider use of sustainable drainage
systems (SuDS);
— improved standards and regulations
to achieve flood resilience in buildings at risk of flooding;
— a strengthening of PPG25 on Development
and Flood Risk and the Environment Agency to become a statutory
consultee on flood risk; and
— appropriate incentives to encourage
land managers to adopt best possible water management and flood
attenuation practices.
5. IMPLICATIONS
FOR BIODIVERSITY
5.1 Managing the environment with climate
change will be ever more complex in view of changes in water flows
and fluxes. At a strategic level, we believe the main way to minimise
the impact of changes in water availability on biodiversity is
by taking a long term view in water resource management, allowing
for environmental needs when determining abstraction needs. We
take such an approach in our Water Resources Strategy and in Catchment
Abstraction Management Plans.
5.2 Generally, where we are faced with long
term changes in rainfall patterns due to climate change, it will
be unsustainable to try and maintain the status quo, and the most
appropriate response may be to allow for, and encourage, new species
and habitats to establish, adapted to the new climatic regime.
Protecting biodiversity through a fixed site approach alone (which
the current SSSI series, SPAs and SACs depend on) is not sustainable
in the longer term. To ensure that ecosystem resilience is built
back into the landscape, a strategic landscape scale approach
is needed, to develop corridors along which wildlife can move,
and to provide a buffer for the impact on individual sites.
5.3 Locally, or in the short term, it may
be possible to compensate for a decrease in rainfall and resulting
water availability by importing water from elsewhere, or (if a
contributing factor) reducing abstraction pressures. For example,
the catchment of a wetland site could be increased by extending
ditch systems, or manipulating water level management regimes,
or an abstraction source re-located. The viability of such solutions
will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. It must also
be recognised that other effects of climate change—for example
an increase in temperature, sea level rise, and increased storminess
will also affect biodiversity, so there may be changes even if
water availability can be maintained.
5.4 Such solutions will add to the pressures
at the source location, and the wider implications of such action
need to be carefully considered. While they may be justifiable
for sites of particularly importance for biodiversity (for example
SSSIs and Habitats Directive sites), they are not a sustainable
option for the countryside as a whole.
5.5 As with other sectors, there are still
big research issues to be addressed. The MONARCH consortium has
examined how species and habitats might respond to the UKCIP02
scenarios. This research has highlighted freshwater ecosystems
as a priority research area[5].
Integrated catchment analysis and process modelling techniques
being developed under the EU Framework VI Euro-limpacs project[6]
offer an alternative strategy for investigating climate change
impacts on key freshwater habitats and species in the UK. We are
developing a research programme Preparing for Climate Change Impacts
on Freshwater Ecosystems (PRINCE) to evaluate a wide range of
emission scenarios and climate model outputs.
6. CROSS CUTTING
ISSUES
6.1 There are some strategic developments
at European level which will affect our management of the rural
environment as climate change unfolds. The requirements of the
Water Framework Directive will need to be addressed. CAP reforms
will mean that farmers have to maintain their land in good agricultural
and environment condition (GAEC—which requires issues related
to preventing soil erosion, damage to structure and declines in
organic matter are addressed). We believe that proper soil management
planning taking a risk based approach is essential for tackling
soil degradation that results from agricultural activities and
associated diffuse pollution.
6.2 Climate change scenarios suggest that
soil erosion, soil structural damage, declining organic matter
levels and the diffuse pollution that results from sediment and
run-off, will increase. This could have fairly important implications
for farmers in meeting the cross-compliance requirements for GAEC
and hence for the payments they receive. One conflict may be that
although cross-compliance conditions are meant to provide for
a basic level of management, combating future climate change may
require more active measures to be undertaken. It is therefore
important that other options, such as agri-environment schemes,
provide a means for tackling the more extreme situations.
6.3 The Water Framework Directive (WFD)
provides a way to integrate the management of climate change within
the water cycle within catchments. The Directive expects waters
to achieve "good status" and requires the integrated
management of pressures on the water environment. Action must
be taken to ensure the quality and quantity of water necessary
for good status to be achieved, as well as the necessary physical
conditions. The first cycle of plans must be ready by 2009 and
operational by 2012.
6.4 The Directive text does not mention
climate change. However, climate change has the potential to affect
reference sites and thus the whole concept of "good ecological
quality" itself. We have already recognised that failure
to factor in allowances for climate change in the implementation
stage could lead to failure in meeting the environmental objectives
set out in River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs). It is also recognised
that freshwater species are potentially vulnerable to direct and
indirect climate change effects arising from changes in discharge,
water temperature, habitat, and physio-chemistry of rivers, still-waters
and wetlands. Therefore, we will be undertaking research to characterise
ecological status in the face of natural variability and changing
climate conditions for different emissions and models.
Environment Agency
April 2004
1 Hulme, M, Jenkins, G J, Lu, X, Turnpenny, J R, Mitchell,
T D, Jones, R G, Lowe, J, Murphy, J M, Hassell, D, Boorman, P,
McDonald, R and Hill, S 2002. Climate change scenarios for the
United Kingdom: the UKCIP02 Scientific report, Tyndall centre
for climate change research, Norwich. Back
2
DEFRA National Appraisal of Assets at Risk from Flooding and
Coastal Erosion including the potential impacts of climate change.
A report produced for the department by; Halcrow Group Ltd, H
R Wallingford and John Chatterton Associates, July 2001. Back
3
Office of Science and Technology, 2004. Future flooding-our challenges
and choices. Draft Executive Summary of the Foresight Flood and
Coastal Defence Project. Back
4
Reynard, N S, Crooks, S M and Kay, A L 2004. Impact of climate
change on flood flows in river catchments. Draft Final R&D
Report W5B-01-05. Environment Agency, Bristol. Back
5
Harrison, P A, Berry, P M and Dawson, T P (Eds) 2001. Climate
change and nature conservation in Britain and Ireland: Modelling
natural resource responses to climate change (the MONARCH project).
UKCIP Technical Report, Oxford. Back
6
www.eurolimpacs.ucl.ac.uk Back
| 
