In order to assess socio-economic impacts of different water quality objectives (scenarios), programs of measures for reaching each objective were developed and analysed in terms of their effectiveness and costs. Costs of each program of measures were afterwards compared with benefits secured by water quality improvements as the result of implementing a program of measures. Comparison of net benefits of both alternative scenarios, in its turn, indicated the most socio-economically efficient scenario (or water quality objective).
This annex includes information about measures used for building alternative programs of measures. As it has been presented in the report, all pollution sources were grouped into homogeneous groups. Measures for preventing/eliminating pollution for each group of sources were characterized in terms of their effects and costs.
The table below provides information about measures considered for each group of pollution sources, qualitative characterization of effect of each measure and average costs of measures per source as well as contribution of each group of pollution sources into the total pollution load on the water body (used for assessing effectiveness of programs of measures).
Table 13. Characterization of measures, their effects and costs
Characterization of measures Effect of measures Average costs per source, milj.LVL **
Historical pollution sources
Detailed research for preparing the restoration works. Construction works, choosing technologies, administration and management of restoration works, monitoring
No direct effect (part of the restoration process)
0.267
Pumping up a floating layer (pollution with non-solvent products).
First of all to stop flowing of pollution to connected surface waters, then to remove fully a floating layer. Measure applied 5 years (the number of installations – 7).
Removing floating layer + preventing from pollution flow connected surface waters
0.121
Treating contaminated soil by using in-situ methods or by excavating it and treating in special treatment plant or depositing in waste damp
Preventing the "good" quality threshold also in the future (eliminating source of flow) + improved soil quality
Treating shallow groundwater from dissolved petroleum substances by using in-situ methods (e.g. biological degradation) or filtration method
Cleaning up GW up to the "good"
quality threshold (sustainable only if soil also is cleaned-up)
0.036
TOTAL: 1.024
Detailed research for preparing the restoration works. Construction works, choosing technologies, administration and management of restoration works, monitoring
No direct effect (part of the restoration process)
0.068
Treating contaminated soil (rather by using in-situ methods) Preventing the "good" quality threshold also in the future (eliminating source of flow) + improved soil quality
Treating shallow groundwater from dissolved petroleum substances by using in-situ methods (e.g. biological degradation) or filtration method
Cleaning up GW up to the "good"
quality threshold (sustainable only if soil also is cleaned-up)
0.012
TOTAL: 0.200
Detailed research for preparing the restoration works. Construction works, choosing technologies, administration and management of restoration works, monitoring
No direct effect (part of the
restoration process) 0.065
Treating contaminated soil (rather by using in-situ methods) Preventing the "good" quality threshold also in the future (eliminating source of flow) + improved soil quality
0.105
Treating shallow groundwater from dissolved petroleum substances by using in-situ methods (e.g. biological degradation) or filtration method
Cleaning up GW up to the "good"
quality threshold (sustainable only if soil also is cleaned-up)
0.011
TOTAL: 0.181
Detailed research for preparing the restoration works. Construction works, choosing technologies, administration and management of restoration works, monitoring
No direct effect (part of the
restoration process) 0.193
Treating contaminated soil by using in-situ methods or by excavating it and treating in special treatment plant or depositing in waste damp
Preventing the "good" quality threshold also in the future (eliminating source of flow) + improved soil quality
Treating shallow groundwater from dissolved petroleum substances by using in-situ methods (e.g. biological degradation) or filtration method
Cleaning up GW up to the "good"
quality threshold (sustainable only if soil also is cleaned-up)
0.051
TOTAL: 0.769
Detailed research for preparing the restoration works. Construction works, choosing technologies, administration and management of restoration works, monitoring
No direct effect (part of the
restoration process) 0.177
Treating contaminated soil by using in-situ methods or by excavating it and treating in special treatment plant or depositing in waste damp
Preventing the "good" quality threshold also in the future (eliminating source of flow) + improved soil quality
Treating shallow groundwater from dissolved petroleum substances by using in-situ methods (e.g. biological degradation) or filtration method
Cleaning up GW up to the "good"
quality threshold (sustainable only if soil also is cleaned-up)
0.034
TOTAL: 0.736
Sources of current pollution flows
(1) Anti-filtration decks (2) Rain water collection system (3) Individual rain water pre-treatment facilities and connection to the public rainwater collection system
Regular monitoring of groundwater (for FFS 1 x year, for PS 2 x year)
Maintaining/preventing the current GW state also in the future (Baseline scenario measure)
Total costs for time period 2007-2015 (including investment and annual costs for the current and new sources): 5.3 milj.LVL
Run-off from streets and roads
2 Extension of rain water collection network (in districts of the city
where rainwater collection is not secured) Eliminating pollution flows and maintaining current GW state also in the future
total costs are attributed to this program.
Non-used drill-holes (300 in total)
Closing non-used drill-holes Preventing likely infiltration of
pollution into the deep (artesian) aquifers
LVL 750 per source
* Assessed based on expert inquiry
** Costs were estimated as an interval (minimum and realistic). The upper bound of the intervals is provided. Costs include investment and annual costs (not discounted)
Sources: expert inquiry (for pollution load), reviewing legislative documents, available studies and practices, information and assessments provided by experts, calculations of the consultant