Prof' Marko Ivetic, PhD

1
THE ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY OF BELGRADE
(RECEIVING) WATER BODIES
Faculty of Civil Engineering University of
Belgrade
Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering

• Prof. Marko Ivetic, PhD
• Faculty of Civil Engineering
• Miroslav Tanaskovic, MD
• Institute of Public Health of Belgrade

2
Presentation overview

• Introduction
• Monitoring
• Results

• River Sava
• River Danube
• Waste Water Management
• Recreation

• Concluding Remarks

3
Introduction

• Belgrade is the capital of Serbia
• Population 1.6 million
• Lot of migration in recent years, in the city
  (refugees and internally displaced) and out.
• Lot of illegal urbanization
• River Danube and river Sava key elements of
  Belgrade landscape
• And endangered by improper water management, as
  well.

4
Introduction

• In the late eighties technical documentation on
  WWTP was finished, and construction of the key
  element of the system (Interceptor) started, and
  stopped
• Monitoring of surface water quality is being done
  regularly, at limited scale, but improving
• Comprehensive study on hydrodynamics and water
  quality of the whole region of two rivers is
  being done. Hydrodynamic model tested and
  verified.

5
Introduction

• Explanation for not doing much expenses (around
  650 m Euro), and dilution of the order of 1500
  for minimum flow conditions.
• Djerdap reservoir with backwater extending to
  Belgrade is acting as a sedimenatation tank.
• Overall contribution of SCG to the water quality
  of Danube downstream, is questionable. Difficult
  to assess how much beneficial use of water is
  impaired by Bg, and how much from upstream. We
  are re-using treated (and untreated) and diluted
  waste water from the upstream.

6
Hydrodynamic and water quality study
Flow field at low flow conditions
ADCP Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler
7
??????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ?????? ??????
? ???? ??? ????????
?????? ??????? ? ????????? ?????? ?????? ? ????
?? ??????? ??????????? 3 D ?????? ??????? ? 3
?????????? ??????
????? ????? ?????? ??????????????? ????? ? ??
???? ??? ?????????? ?????? ? ????? ????? ??
???? ?? ?? ??????
8
??????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ?????? ??????
? ???? ??? ????????
9
??????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ?????? ??????
? ???? ??? ????????
10
??????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ?????? ??????
? ???? ??? ????????
11
??????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ?????? ??????
? ???? ??? ????????
12
??????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ?????? ??????
? ???? ??? ????????
13
Rivers are part of the Belgrade
14
River Sava VRO from Bg
15
River Sava and VRO from Kalemegdan
16
River Sava and VRO from Kalemegdan
17
River Danube flood plane
18
Monitoring - objectives

• To determine the environmental status of
  receiving waters and urban streams and to which
  extent present environmental status support
  beneficial use of water
• To assess the self-purification potential, to
  assess the possibility to use the water for water
  supply (more than 1.6 million of people rely upon
  the water sources directly linked to the two
  rivers) and for irrigation
• To assess public health hazard, because two major
  recreation zones are used by hundreds thousands
  of people during summer months.

19
Protection zones of WSS
20
Monitoring and water supply

• Belgrade water supply relies upon ground water,
  mostly extracted by one hundred wells with
  horizontal drains, located along the Sava river,
  and on one major surface water treatment plant
  (around 40) with the intake on the right bank of
  the Sava river.
• Consumers used to have strong feeling against
  surface water.
• Zones of protection impose restrictions over land
  use for the whole area around the river Sava,
  making all system very vulnerable. However, in
  reality, lots of violations, and seldom
  sanctions.

21
Monitoring and water supply

• To improve level of protection of ground water
  sources and to relax restrictions on urban
  development, gradual move is planned, from the
  extensive ground water extraction from wells
  located along the river, to the intensive one,
  from the area with artificial surface recharge.
• There is no doubt that there are many benefits in
  this approach, but the opposition is also strong,
  from those who believe that present technology
  can treat surface water at an acceptable cost,
  making such quests obsolete.

22
Results- river Sava

• Generally, better and more stable water quality
  than Danube
• Approximately 50 of all samples are within the
  class II, water is suitable for recreation,
  irrigation, and fishery, and for water supply,
  after proper treatment.
• Violation of some parameters to comply with
  standards is not so severe, concerning the number
  of parameters (physical-chemical or bacterial)
  and deviation, as well.
• Total organic carbon is stable and relatively
  low.
• During summer there is a certain oxygen
  depletion, but not so significant.

23
Results- river Danube

• During 2004, only 37 of data complied with
  class II, improved comparing to previous years.
  Oxygen regime is slightly impaired, but
  significantly improved comparing to the previous.
  
• Water quality is low during summer period,
  contact recreation limited and, in some cases,
  prohibited.
• Downstream from the confluence, along the
  Danube, protection policy is relaxed. Major
  industrial capacities and wet and dry weather
  outfalls are located there.
• City of Pancevo, located on the left bank of the
  Danube, urges to establish protection zones on
  the left side of the Danube, because the water
  source of Pancevo is located there.

24
Water quality and recreation
25
Quality of surface water
26
Water quality and recreation
27
Water quality and recreation(Social and economic
problems)
Accessible and affordable recreation.
28
Water quality and recreation Savsko jezero.
29
Water quality and recreation (too many?)
30
Water quality and recreation (too many?)
31
Water quality and recreation

• Along with the significantly reduced GNP of
  Serbia, which is, at present, lower than it was
  twenty years ago, and secession of Croatia and
  the Adriatic Coast, popular destination of
  Serbian tourists, nearby recreation spots became
  more interesting.
• Within the urban area of Belgrade there are
  several bathing zones, the most important of
  which, are Savsko jezero and Lido.
• Lido is in direct contact with Danube does not
  satisfy EU regulations (76/160EEC).
• Savsko jezero, going out of the bounds because of
  load much higher than estimated.

32
Water quality and recreation - Lido
33
Polluters and planned WWTPs
34
Polluters and planned WWTPs

• Two groups of stakeholders argue about the next
  step
• to update the existing documentation and
  implement or to redesign everything

35
Conclusions

• An account on the threats on beneficial use of
  water and some conflicts within urban water
  management of Belgrade has been given.
• Water protection zones cover more than two thirds
  of urban area of Belgrade, the area which is
  under pressure because it is very attractive for
  development.
• Policy of protecting such a big area was not
  successful. The only strategy applied so far, was
  to transfer outflows of storm water and waste
  water as much downstream as possible. The other
  solution to increase the safety of water sources
  is to shift towards artificial surface recharge.

36
Conclusions

• Recreation zones experience very big load, much
  higher than designed and expected. Monitoring and
  accompanying analyses are used to detect trends
  and to plan improvements of the existing status.
  Management of the zone (Z1), could reduce public
  health risk
• Discussion (and arguments) between two groups of
  stakeholders, responsible for the waste water
  management, block activities on the construction
  of the waste water treatment plants for Belgrade.
  Looking from the side, both groups have good
  points in their standings, but both lack good
  will to resolve differences.

37
THE ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY OF BELGRADE
(RECEIVING) WATER BODIES
Faculty of Civil Engineering University of
Belgrade
Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering
Thank you!

• Prof. Marko Ivetic, PhD
• Faculty of Civil Engineering
• Miroslav Tanaskovic, MD
• Institute of Public Health of Belgrade