Biological and Environmental Engineering Eliminating...

Biological and Environmental Engineering

Soil & Water Research Group

Eliminating “Nonpoint” from

Nonpoint Source Pollution

Todd Walter

Zach Easton & Tammo Steenhuis

(among many others)


Soil and Water Lab

BEE 700 Feb. 5, 2008



Point Source Pollution

1969: Cuyahoga River, Ohio

Clean Water Act - 1972



Transport


LandscapeRivers



Landscape% Forest

% Agriculture

To

tal

P (

mg

/L)

100%

100%0%

0%

0.00

0.30

Lyon, Walter, et al. 2004. Hydrol. Proc. 18(15): 2757-2771

Traditionally the only control

considered has been land use



Can we find sources in the landscape?

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376



Outline

• Locate Runoff Sources

• Source-Specific Phosphorus Mobility

• Phosphorus Mobility with Hydrology

• Predicting Phosphorus Loads

• Evaluating Management Practices

• New Ideas



Hillside

Flood Plain

(valley bottoms)

Stream

Baseflow

(groundwater)

Shallow bedrock,

fragipan, or other

restrictive layerHillside

Drainage

Northeastern U.S. Hydrology

Scientific Background



Rain

Infiltration

“Runoff”


Most 21st century water quality models, tools, &

protection strategies assume this pre-1940’s

theory proposed by R.E. Horton

Common Perception of Runoff

Infiltration Excess

a.k.a. Hortonian Flow



New York City

Reservoirs

East Sidney

Boundary of Reservoir W

atersheds

NewNew YorkYork

23

10

17

97

88

28

Delhi

New York City

Reservoirs

East Sidney

Boundary of Reservoir W

atersheds

NewNew YorkYorkNewNew YorkYork

23

10

17

97

88

28

Delhi

Is Hortonian Flow

Common?

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0 10 20 30

Soil Permeability (cm hr-1)

Fra

cti

on

of

the A

rea

wit

h

Hig

her

So

il P

erm

eab

ilit

y

Soil Permeability

Distribution

JanuaryFebruary

March

April

May

June

July August

September

October

November

December

1 10 100

2

0

3

5

4

7

6

8

10

9

1

Return Period (yr)

Inte

nsi

ty (

cm

hr-1

)

Precipitation Frequency Analysis




New York

March

April

August

September

October

November

1 10 100

20

0

30

50

40

70

60

80

100

90

10

Return Period (yr)

% o

f A

rea

Gen

era

tin

g H

orto

nia

n F

low


Is Hortonian Flow

Common?

Walter, et al. 2003. ASCE J. Hydrol. Eng. 8: 214-218



Rain

Subsurface

water

rises

Some areas

saturate to the

surface

Saturation Excess Runoff




Rain

Rain on saturated

areas becomes

overland flow

Upland interflow

may exfiltrate

Dunne and Black. 1970. Water Resour. Res. 6: 478-490

Dunne and Black. 1970. Water Resour. Res. 6: 1296-1311

Saturation Excess Runoff




Saturated Area

Flow PathVariable in

Space and

Time!

Runoff Sources = Wet Areas




Interflow

Interflow

BedrockReservoir

ET

Precipitation

Percolation

Baseflow

Runoff

Soil Moisture Routing Model (SMR, a.k.a., SMDR, CSMR, SMorMod)

Watershed:Tremper Kill

Land Use

New Hydrology Models



Stream Flow

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Jun-93 Jun-94 Jun-95 Jun-96 Jun-97 Jun-98 Jun-99 Jun-00 Jun-01

Obs

SMDR

Str

ea

mflo

w (

mm

)

New York

Crow Rd Watershed

SMR Prediction

Observed

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Jan-97 Apr-97 Jul-97 Oct-97 Jan-98

Watershed Scale



25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Soil Moisture

0.2

0.3

0.4

0 60 120 180 240 300 360

0.2

0.3

0.4

0 60 120 180 240 300 360

SMR Prediction

Vo

l. S

oil

Mo

istu

re

Oct. 28, 1994

May 6, 1994

Models and Tools: New hydrology modelsFrankenberger, Brooks, Walter, et al. 1999. Hydrol. Proc. 13: 804-822


Soil & Water Research GroupObserved Saturation Degree (cm

3 cm

-3)

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Sim

ula

ted

Sa

tura

tion

De

gre

e (c

m3

cm-3

)

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0Saturation Degree

y = 1.4x - 0.23 r2 = 0.76

95% Prediction Intervals

Pre

dic

ted

Satu

rati

on

Deg

ree (

cm

3cm

-3)

Predicting Soil Moisture



New York State

(NTS)

0 1 2 30.5Kilometers

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !( !(#*

!(

!( !(

!(!(!(!( !( !(

!(!( !(

!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(

!(!(

!(

#*

")

0 50 10025Meters

Explanation

Townbrook Watershed

DEP Lands Boundary

Stream

Instrumentation

") Rain Gauge

!( Water Level Logger

#* Stream Gauge

1 m Contours

585 m

600 m

Town Br. Watershed

Being repeated Locally

We Are Not Just Modeling



…just Google It

Lyon et al. 2006. EOS 87(38): 386.



Take-home Message

• Storm runoff is generated from small parts

of the landscape

• Areas prone to saturate – e.g., toe slopes,

shallow soils, topographically converging areas

• Variable Source Areas – they expand and

contract

• We can predict where and when storm

runoff will be generated



Outline






• New Ideas



Each specific land use is assumed to have a

characteristic pollutant concentration in its

storm runoff.

This type of model cannot predict the impacts

of targeted management practices, like

incorporating riparian buffers.

Traditional Nonpoint Source Modeling



Phosphorus Sources We Considered

• Land-applied manure

(or chemical fertilizers)

• Soil

• Impervious areas

• “background P observed during baseflow

(i.e., non-storm periods)”



Land-applied manure

% o

f W

ater

Ex

trac

table

P

Data from:

Sharpley and Moyer. 2000. JEQ 29: 1462-1469

Time [min]Upshot: We can predict P from land-applied manure if we know

what kind of animal pooped it, how long it’s been in the field,

and what its water extractable P is (which appears to be pretty constant)

G'erard-Marchant, Walter, Steenhuis. 2005. J. Environ. Qual. 34: 872-876



0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Jan-99 Jul-99 Feb-00 Aug-00 Mar-01

PO

4-P

(m

g/L

)

Feb-96 Jun-96 Oct-96 Feb-97 Jun-970

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

SR

P (

mg

/L)

(b)

(a)

Scott et al. 2001 Biogeochemistry

Ag. Watershed

(Town Br., NY)

Forested Watershed

(Catskills, NY)

Walter, unpublished



Soil

Modeled Runoff

Easton, Walter, Steenhuis. 2007. ASCE (submitted)

QSTPQSTT

SST10

10,

Phosphorus

Load

Soil Test Phosphorus

Calculated

Photo by Susan Boyer, www.ars.usda.gov

Air Temperature

Avg. summer temperatureCalculated



Calculated Parameters

Ln(C/STP)

(T-Ts)/10

Ln( T,S)

Ln(Q10S)



P in baseflow

• Curiously, there is some P during non-storm flows

• During these periods the water feeding the stream is

largely groundwater

• Groundwater has very little P

• I assume that the source in these cases is near- or

in-stream soils… thus we can use an equation

similar to what we used for soils



P in baseflow

Easton, Walter, Steenhuis. 2007. ASCE (submitted)

Modeled

Baseflow

B

TT

BB QQB

1010

Phosphorus

Load

Calculated

Temperature

Assume: Avg. Summer TempCalculated

We use several P concentrations measured during summer low

flow conditions and determine parameters similarly to the soil

parameters.



Take-home Message

• We can independently quantify the relative

potential loads for different likely P sources

• The near- and in-stream mechanisms

controlling P constitute obvious knowledge

gaps.



Outline






• New Ideas



The Watershed

Water

Impervious/Barnyard

Deciduous Forest

Shrub

Pasture

Hay

Crop



Stream Phosphorus20

16

12

8

4

0

Dis

solv

ed P

(kg)

Oct 93 Nov 94

0

500

Cum

ula

tive

Ex

port

(kg)

Observed

Predicted

0.49

0.48kg/ha-yr

Easton, Walter, Steenhuis. 2008. J. Environ. Qual. (accepted)



Outline






• New Ideas



The BMPs

Water

Impervious/Barnyard

Deciduous Forest

Shrub

Pasture

Hay

Crop

• New drainage, waterways, etc.

Tile

Diversion



Change Flow Patterns

Soil

Topographic

Index 1.6

22.0

Soil

Topographic

Index 1.6

22.0

Hydrologic Response Units Hydrologic Response Units

a b

Soil

Topographic

Index 1.6

22.0

Soil

Topographic

Index 1.6

22.0


a b

New drainage, waterway, etc.

Soil

Topographic

Index 1.6

22.0

Soil

Topographic

Index 1.6

22.0


a b

Pre BMP Post BMP



Water

Impervious/Barnyard

Deciduous Forest

Shrub

Pasture

Hay

Crop

The BMPs• Riparian fencing/buffers



The BMPs• Precision feeding



The BMPs• New manure spreading schedule

X



Back to Phosphorus20

16

12

8

4

0

Dis

solv

ed P

(kg)

Oct 93 Nov 94 Apr 97 Jun 98 Jul 99 Jun 00 Jul 01 Aug 02 Jul 03

0

500

Cum

ula

tive

Ex

port

(kg)

Observed

Predicted

Pre BMP Post BMP

Pre BMP

0.49

0.48

Post BMP

0.27

0.27kg/ha-yr




Pre-BMP(1993-1995)

0.004 0.005 0.070 0.027 0.101

Post-BMP(1997-2004)

0.004 0.006 0.069 0.020 0.024

No-BMP(1997-2004)

0.004 0.006 0.084 0.031 0.093Im

perv

ious

Areas

Non

-man

ured

Soil

Man

ured

Soil

Man

ure

“baseflo

w”

Kg/d




BMPs that Worked

• Manure spreading strategy that avoids

runoff contributing areas

• Eliminating cows and cropping from

riparian areas (a little speculative)

WHAT ABOUT PRECISION FEEDING

Water extractable P decreased by only 4%




Outline






• New Ideas



Recall the “Nonpoint” Problem

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376

P15

30.97376



Hydrologic Flowpaths

RiversLandscape

Pollutant Transport




3 m

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 1 2 3 4 5 9

PLGA

microspheres

Microtracers

DNA

Transport

sampleReal-Time PCR

Dan Luo

Jay Regan



Tip-of-the-Iceberg

Transport

sample

3G2R

2G3R

1G4R

3G2R

2G3R

1G4R

3G2R

2G3R

1G4R

3G2R

2G3R

1G4R

Blu

e

Gre

en

Red

Lasers

Cytometer

Fluorescent

Barcode



Thank You

Cornell, Soil & Water Research Group

Tammo Steenhuis, J.-Yves Parlange, Brian Richards,

Larry Geohring, Zach Easton, Shree Giri

Steve Shaw, Helen Dalke, Dan Fuka, Shannon Seifert, Asha

Sharma, Jo Archibald, Becky Marjerison, Brian Buchannon,

Maria Vicenta Valdivia, S. Lyon, V. Collins, L. Agnew

Penn State Univ., USDA-ARS (Bil Gburek)

USGS (M. McHale), USDA-NRCS (P. Wright, L. Agnew),

WAC, DCWC, CDSWCD, Landowners & Ag. Producers,

Tompkins County Environmental Planning (K. Hackett, C. Buck)

With support/encouragement from:

Biological and Environmental Engineering Eliminating...

Documents

Transcript of Biological and Environmental Engineering Eliminating...