ENVIRONMENTAL COMPANY OF SAO PAULO STATE – …[email protected] Sao Paulo – SP –...
Transcript of ENVIRONMENTAL COMPANY OF SAO PAULO STATE – …[email protected] Sao Paulo – SP –...
-
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPANY OF SAO PAULO STATE – CETESB
REGIONAL CENTRE OF STOCKHOLM CONVENTION ON POPs FORLATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN REGION
V INTERNATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM ON ENVIRONMENTAL SOUND MANAGEMENT ON CHEMICALS AND WASTES, ESPECIALLY ON PERSISTENT
ORGANIC POLLUTANTS (POPs) AND MERCURY (Hg)
Biological Monitoring of SedimentsEcotoxicological Tests and Aquatic CommunityMarta Condé Lamparelli
2016
Sao Paulo – SP – Brazil
-
Biological Monitoring of SedimentsEcotoxicological Tests and Aquatic Community
Marta Condé [email protected]
Sao Paulo – SP – Brazil
-
Why is the monitoring of the aquatic ecosystems important?
- Evaluate the tendency of the quality of the water;- Recognize critical places (Hot Spots);- Determine the causes/sources;- Establish priorities of control action or recovery;- Obtain information to subsidize environmental planning
and to accompany impact of human activities (e.g.: licensing/permits);
- To inform the population.
-
How to Monitor Water Quality for Aquatic Communities?
Indirectly:- Through parameters reflecting water and sediment quality and that are directly linked to protection of the aquatic communities;
Directly:- Through the communities, assessing their degree of preservation, diversity and operation.
-
AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS
-
Sediment Quality
- Higher concentrations of pollutants;- Presence of diversified community = benthic communities;- Presence of persistent pollutants (PCBs, Organochlorine
Pesticides, Hg)
-
Evaluation of Sediment Quality
Sediments, mainly in urban/industrial areas and harbor areas arecontaminated. But not all the contaminated sediment is harmful tohuman health or to the biota.
The question is to determine the degree of sediment contamination.
Criteria and standards help to define the risks, to identify options and priorities for management.
To assess risks is necessary to check the availability of pollutants in the environment and whether the concentrations found in sediments are sufficient for effect
These are complex physical, chemical and biological questions.
-
CHEMICAL IMPACTS
-
Environmental evaluation regarding contaminants
Integrated evaluation of results
Communities Toxicity test
Chemical Analysis
-
Sediment is considered the most important compartment to the study of the impact of POPs on aquatic environment, since it is where the POPs present longer residence times. Compounds found with higher frequency on the accessed literature were DDT, HCH, PCB and heptachlor. The POPs scenario in the sediments in Brazil is illustrated on Figure 4
-
EXPOSURE TO POLLUTANTS
• Pollutants – natural or xenobiotic
• Different standards of buildup of xenobiotics:• The balance between the rate of assimilation and the metabolization rate and the elimination of chemic compounds
• E.g.: PAHs - accumulate on invertebrates- are metabolized on vertebrates
• other pollutants, such as DDT, are not metabolized or eliminated – thereforethey accumulate in the food chain - biomagnification
-
A. Contaminated Sediment and Aquatic Organisms 1. Benthic Community2. Bioaccumulation:
- Ictiofauna- Crustaceans- Other aquatic organisms.
3. Toxicity – Ecotoxicity Tests4. Sediment Quality – Case Study (Rio Grande)
B. Dredged Material - Classification - Disposal
- Case Study (Santos Harbour)
-
A.1. Benthic Community (= Benthos)
DEFINITION:• biota inhabiting the substrate found in aquatic environments
APPLICATION:
• evaluation of the ecological quality of aquatic environments;complying with the legal use of these environments in preservingaquatic life and adapting to the goals of conservation managementand sustainable development.
-
Mollusca
Gastropoda Bivalvia
Oligochaeta
Annelida
Hirudinea
Insecta - Diptera
Benthic Community
-
POLLUTANTS: ROUTES OF EXPOSURE
Pollutants:
- in the bottom water (interface)
- in the interstitial water
Exposure surface gills and body
- adsorbed in the sediment
Exposure by sediment ingestion
Bioaccumulation/Metabolization
Biological effect
-
BENTHOS AS A BIOLOGICAL INDICATOR
• Integrates effects of different pollutants;
• Reflects the environmental conditions over a period of time;
• Wide range of tolerances to varying degrees and types of pollution;
• Abundant in all kinds of aquatic environment;
• Low motility = best represents local conditions;
• Intimate relationship with substrate, reflecting the quality of this compartment;
• Easily collected, with relatively inexpensive material;
• Quick identification.
-
DISADVANTAGES
• Few regional identification keys
• Quantitative analysis with large number of replicas
• Nonspecific answers
-
VARIATION FACTORS
• Geographical distribution• Interactions (predation, competition)• Aquatic vegetation (refuge, habitat, food)• Riparian forest
• Dissolved Oxygen• Organic Material• Grain-size • Humidity (Compactness)• Temperature • Luminosity• Flow rate• Level fluctuations• Habitat degradation • Pollutants
BIOTIC
ABIOTIC
-
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
rio T
ietê
,B
iritib
a M
irim
rio A
tibai
nha,
a ju
sant
e do
trutá
rio
rib. C
rista
is,
ETA
Caj
amar
rioC
orum
bata
í
rio S
oroc
aba,
Pin
ga-p
inga
rio S
oroc
aba,
Vitó
ria R
égia
Good Regular Bad Bad Bad BadEcological Classification
Species/Groups Distribution
Different Locations
-
NORMAL
DEFORMITIES ON MENTUM OF CHIRONOMID LARVAE
ABORMAL (INCIDENCE OVER 3%)
More
gap
-
PROTOCOLO PARA O BIOMONITORAMENTO COM AS COMUNIDADES BENTÔNICAS DE RIOS E
RESERVATÓRIOS DO ESTADO DE SÃO PAULO
PROTOCOLO PARA O BIOMONITORAMENTO COM AS COMUNIDADES BENTÔNICAS DE RIOS E
RESERVATÓRIOS DO ESTADO DE SÃO PAULO
CETESB – Companhia Ambiental do Estado de São Paulo
Governo do Estado de São Paulo Secretaria do Meio AmbienteGoverno do Estado de São Paulo Secretaria do Meio Ambiente
2012
-
C418p CETESB (São Paulo)Protocolo para o biomonitoramento com as comunidades bentônicas de rios e reservatórios do estado de
São Paulo [recurso eletrônico] / CETESB ; Mônica Luisa Kuhlmann ... [et al.]. – – São Paulo : CETESB, 2012.1 CD (113 p.) : il. color.
Disponível também em: ISBN 978-85-61405-36-6
1.Bentos 2. Comunidade bentônica – análise 3. Indicadores biológicos– métodos 4. Integridade ecológica 5. Macroinvertebrados aquáticos 6. Qualidade ambiental –
biomonitoramento 7. Reservatórios - São Paulo (Est.) 8. Rios - São Paulo (Est.) I. Kuhlmann, Mônica Luisa II. Johnscher-Fornasaro, Guiomar III. Ogura, Lucy Lina IV. Imbimbo, Hélio Rubens Victorino V. Título.
CDD (21. ed. Esp.) 363.739 463 169308161591.764 0286 8161
CDU (2. ed. Port.) 592/596:502.175 (282.2:815.6)
Catalogação na fonte: Margot Terada – CRB 8. 4422Avaliable for Download:http://aguasinteriores.cetesb.sp.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2013/11/protocolo-biomonitoramento-2012.pdf
PROTOCOL FOR BIOMONITORING OF SÃO PAULO STATE RIVERS AND RESERVOIRS WITH BENTHIC COMMUNITIES
-
A.2. BIOACCUMULATIONICTIOFAUNA / AQUATIC ORGANISMS
• POPs:– Aldrin and Dieldrin - Hexachlorobenzene– Endrin - Mirex– Hexachlorobenzene - Dioxins and Furans– Chlordane - Toxaphene– DDT - PCBs– Heptachlor
How POPs enter and accumulate in fish and other aquatic organisms?• Rarely found in water: association with lipids and suspended particulates.• Lipids - air-water interface (plankton) - Lipid Control• Particles - Sediment depositionand cycling of POPs• Interactions in the Food Chain - Biomagnification
-
BIOACCUMULATION
-
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/soe/archive/reports/et07/chapters/ET2007_Contaminants_Chapter.pdf
-
http://www.who.int/ipcs/publications/en/ch_3a.pdf
-
Food chain in Reservoirsin S.Paulo State
-
A.3. ECOTOXICITY TESTSMethods used to assess adverse effects of chemicals on living organisms under standardized conditions and reproducible, allowing comparison between distinct organisms, substances and laboratories.
BIOLOGICAL TESTS: procedure in which the answers of aquatic organisms are used to evaluate the presence of one or more toxic substances.Different endpoints can be measured such as: mortality, reproduction, motility, weight.
Laboratory tests under controlled conditions:
- tº, pH, medium, duration, concentration. - homogeneous population of test organisms with defined sensitivity.
* water or sediment sample/ acute or chronic tests
-
Acute Effect
-
Mortality ?
SEDIMENT SAMPLE CLEAN SEDIMENT (control)
ECOTOXICOLOGICAL ASSAYSSIMPLIFYIED
-
GOAL: EVALUATE BIOAVAILABILITY ANDINTERACTION OF CONTAMINANTS
SEDIMENT SAMPLE CLEAN SEDIMENT (control)
Results: significance of
measured Toxic Effect
(mortality) in relation to control
-
Sublethal Effect−Different availability of contaminants.
−Different compartments - water, sediment or food.
The concentration present in the environment and inanimals alone does not mean effects on organisms andcommunities at risk.
Biomarkers: alterations resulting form xenobiotics exposure in cellular level ofbiochemical components, process, structures or functions, measurable in a biological system or sample.
“Evaluation of sublethal effects of chemical contaminants in aquatic
organisms.”
-
Lytechinus variegatus – (sea-urchin) Stages of embryo-larval development
-
Ecotoxicological tests Evaluation of sediments by CETESB
Criteria for the diagnosis of sediment quality, based on the results of the ecotoxicological tests with Lytechinus variegatus and Leptocheirus
plumulosusDiagnostic Leptocheirus plumulosus Lytechinus variegatus
Excellent Non toxic (a) Non toxic (a)
Good - 71 a 80% of normal larvae
Regular - 51 a 70% of normal larvae
Bad Mortality
-
• Microtox – Interstitial water Test with bioluminescent bacteria: inhibition light It is used as a chemical "screening".
•Ames
Genotoxicity Assay
Other toxicological tests
-
A.4. Evaluation of the Sediment Quality
o Chemical Analysis
o Quality criteria based on effects:– Toxicity– Bioaccumulation
-
Chemical Qualityo Effect criteria on aquatic biota – based on ecotoxicological tests and chemical analysis combined.
o Canada• TEL (Threshold Effect Level) – inferior level
•
• PEL (Probable Effect Level) – superior level•
• FEL (Frequent Effect Level) – maximum level
o USA• ERL (Effects Range Low) - corresponds roughly to a 10% likelihood of toxicity• ERM (Effects Range Median) - possible-effects range.
-
CANADA: Distribution of Toxic Effects of a contaminant for different Aquatic Organisms
Con
cen
trat
ion
of
con
tam
inan
t
95º percentile
TEL (rare toxic effects)Level 1
Level 2
x y g a h k s w b e t j n p z c l r q f0
500100015002000250030003500
Aquatic Organisms
5º percentile
PEL (probable toxic effect)
-
NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (USA)
-
Proposal of 5 (five) criteria to disposal decision arrangement:
REL – PreventionOEL – Need of ecotoxicological assayFEL – Remediation &
“no open water disposal”
CANADA
-
INTEGRATION OF RESULTS
SEDIMENT QUALITY
Chemical Analysis
Toxicity
Benthic Community
-
Criteria of Sediment QualityContemplates the classification for different lines of evidence, in each sampling site:
-
SED
IMEN
T M
ON
ITO
RIN
G
-
12
3
4
76
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1920
2122
CLASSIFICAÇÃODAS UGRHIS
Agropecuária
Conservação
Em industrialização
IndustrialAldrin DDT DDE DDD Heptacloro HCB Lindano
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,53 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 1 0 0 100 0 0 0 05 36 0 5,6 33,3 2,8 2,8 2,8 06 73 1,4 2,7 43,8 24,7 0 17,8 8,27 12 0 0 16,7 8,3 0 83,3 08 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 010 14 0 0 50 0 0 0 14,311 16 0 0 6,3 0 0 0 012 3 0 0 33,3 0 0 0 013 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 014 3 0 0 33,3 0 0 0 015 5 0 0 40 40 0 0 016 3 0 0 66,7 0 0 0 017 5 0 0 20 0 0 0 018 4 0 0 75 0 0 0 019 8 0 0 87,5 12,5 0 0 12,520 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 021 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 022 5 0 20 60 40 0 0 0
Total 217 0,5 2,3 34,6 11,5 0,5 11,1 4,6
conc máxima (µg/kg) 4,2 10,2 56,0 12,4 85,6 37,2 10,9
Frequencia de amostras com detecção de pesticidas (2003 a 2013)n amostrasUGRHI
CETESB’s Monitoring ofSão Paulo State 2003 to 2013
Frequency (%) of detection of pesticides in
different regions.
-
River Sampling stations:Points 1 and 2 – Near of two cities and potential source of Hg.
Reservoir Sampling stations:Point 3 – middle of reservoir.Point 4 – In front of catchment of water supply.
A.5 Case Study: Rio Grande ReservoirHigh concentration of Hg in sediment – Industrial Source.
-
Mercury Analysis in the Water Quality Monitoring Network - CETESB
•Hg water standard = 0,002 mg/L
-
Mercury Analysis in the SedimentMonitoring Network - CETESB
PEL = 0.486 mg/kg
-
Rio Grande Reservoir
Industry
-
Organic Hg includes all organomercury compounds present in the sample, including methylmercury
Total and Organic Hg in sediment samples of Rio Grande Reservoir
PointsParameter
(concentration units)Campaigns
Feb. 2009 July. 2009 Jan. 2010
River 1Total Hg (mg kg-1) 68.3 ± 0.9 25.9 ± 1.0 43.4 ± 1.5
Organic Hg (µg kg-1) 39.3 ± 3.8 35.2 ± 2.9 40.1 ± 3.5Organic Hg percent 0.058 0.14 0.092
River 2Total Hg (mg kg-1) 61.5 ± 0.9 68.1 ± 0.9 57.6 ± 0.8
Organic Hg (µg kg-1) 46.3 ± 3.2 38.0 ± 3.9 47.2 ± 3.9Organic Hg percent 0.075 0.056 0.082
Reservoir 1Total Hg (mg kg-1) 4.5 ± 0.2 2.2 ± 0.1 3.7 ± 0.2
Organic Hg (µg kg-1) 16.7 ± 2.0 18.0 ± 2.1 19.4 ± 2.9Organic Hg percent 0.37 0.82 0.52
Reservoir 2Total Hg (mg kg-1) 1.02 ± 0.09 1.8 ± 0.1 1.5 ± 0.1
Organic Hg (µg kg-1) 14.2 ± 2.1 < 10.0 13.8 ± 2.3Organic Hg percent 1.39 0.92
-
RISK ASSESSMENTRisk assessment of fish consumption
Fish species
Rhamdia quelen
Hoplias malabaricus
Hg(µg/kg)
1820
930
General(70 kg)
2.4
4.7
1 – 4 yrs(14,4 kg)
0.3
0.5
5 – 11 yrs(26,4 kg)
0.4
0.9
Sensitive(70kg)
1.2
2.3
Adult population Children
Number of fish meals (meal/month)
Fish species
Rhamdia quelen
Hoplias malabaricus
Hg(µg/kg)
1820
930
General(70 kg)
3.41
1.75
1 – 4 yrs(14,4 kg)
5.51
2.84
5 – 11 yrs(26,4 kg)
4.20
2.14
Sensitive(70kg)
6.82
3.50
Adult population Children
Hazard Quotient
Note: PTWI = 3.2 µg/kg bw/week (general population) PTWI = 1.6 µg/kg bw/week (sensitive population and children)
-
• Tiger Fish or Trahira
• South American Catfish
-
Hg Contamination: Corrective Measures
• Change in Industrial System.
• Effluent sent to a treatment plant.
• Dredging of sediment hotspots.
• Fish advisory leaflet :
“Do not consume fish from Rio Grande/SP”
-
A. Contaminated Sediment and Aquatic Organisms 1. Benthic Community2. Bioaccumulation:
- Ictiofauna- Crustaceans- Other aquatic organisms.
3. Toxicity – Ecotoxicity Tests4. Sediment Quality – Case Study (Rio Grande)
B. Dredged Material - Classification - Disposal
- Case Study (Santos Harbour)
-
Freshwater and Marine Sediment DredgingTOPICS:• present the sediment quality criteria and its application
on management of dredged material;• present alternative dredged material disposal areas;• discuss sediment quality in contaminated areas;• discuss the viability of the application of
remediation/recovery techniques;• to present international and national experience in port
areas.
-
To determine appropriate guidelines, it must be identified clearly:
• What/who must be protected for these values.• Possible effects,• Possible exposure routes,• Information/data on the particular location should be
collected• Disposal alternatives
-
Criteria to classify the sediment according to its degree of contamination.
– Physical
– Chemical
– Ecotoxicological
– Biological
• Grain-size• Sedimentation Rate• Circulation
-
Chemical (contaminants)
• Heavy Metals and Arsenic
• Halogenated solvents• Chlorinated aromatic
hydrocarbons• Organochlorine
pesticides• Polychlorinated
Biphenyls - PCBs• Phenolic compounds
• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons - PAHs
• Dioxins and furans• Other pollutants
-
• Toxic effects– acute – chronic
• Bioaccumulation
• Benthic Community
Ecotoxicological/Biological
-
Sediment/Dredged Material
Bioaccumulation
Toxicity
Food Chain Transfer
Sediment Evaluation
Benthos
-
Bioaccumulation
-
Human Activity
-
Navigation- Capital Dredging: construction of coastal engineering projects, like harbours, marinas and pipelines
- Maintenance Dredging: in order to keep navigation channels clear
Remediation Dredging
DredgingRemoval and disposition of Sediments
-
Remediation
Progressive evaluation with evaluation of risks and goals, case by case, based on quality and effects’ criteria.
To define the objectives and the Monitoring Program:
• Diagnose the impact on the ecosystem
• Decide to initiate the remediation
• Remediation goals
• Evaluation of the remediation
-
Dredging for Navigation
- Appropriate Methodology for Dredging- Destination of dredged material, according to its
degree of contamination:– simple ocean disposal – land disposal (landfill)– submerged caves– confined disposal facilities (aquatic – CDF)– beneficial use: sand/building materials - separation
All approaches require monitoring
-
BRAZILIAN REGULATION
- Dredged material characterization and monitoringof disposal areas
Ministery of the Environment(MMA – Ministério do Meio Ambiente/Brazil):
First regulated by : - RESOLUCÃO CONAMA 344, 25 DE MARÇO DE 2004
Revised in 2012:- RESOLUCÃO CONAMA 454, 01 DE NOVEMBRO DE 2012
-
Nível I < valoresorientadores
Não é necessárioestudo complementar
Nível II > valoresorientadores
Estudo complementar
Entre Nível I e II Metais exceto Hg,Cd, Pb e PAH´s
Não é necessárioestudo complementar
Entre Nível I e II Hg, Cd, Pb e PAH´s Testes de toxicidadedentre outrosestabelecidos peloorgão ambiental
Valores orientadores baseados nas publicações: Environment Canada, 2002,Florida Department of Environment Protection, 1994, Long & Morgan, 1995
Dredged Material Evaluation in São Paulo State
-
SEDIMENT SAMPLE
What is the effect on biota of a Complex Mixture?
metalsPAHs arsenic
pesticides
phtalatessilverphenol
toluene
TBT
aluminium
Regulated (Citeria/Guidelines)
Non-Regulated
-
Dredged Material Evaluation in São Paulo StateÁgua doce Água marinha
Testes de 10 dias com Hyalella azteca Teste crônico de curta duração com Lytechinusvariegatus
Teste de 9 dias com Chironomus xanthus Teste com Leptocheirus plumolosus
Objective – Aquatic Life Protection
Freshwater Marine water
-
Standardization:Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas
Organisms Meio Título ReferênciaPublicação e
Revisão
Sea UrchinLytechinus variegatus e Echinometra lucunter.
AquáticoMarinho
Ecotoxicologia aquática- Toxicidade crônica de curta duração - Método de
ensaio com ouriço-do-mar (Echinodermata: Echinoidea)
ABNT NBR 15350Abril/2006
(1ª R /2011 atualizada
2012)
Sample Preparation Todos Preparo de Amostra para ensaio de ToxicidadeABNT NBR 15469 Março/2007
HyalellaHyalela spp e Hyalella azteca.
SedimentoDulcícola
Ecotoxicologia aquática – Toxicidade em sedimento-Método de ensaio com
ABNT NBR 15470 Março/2007
Amphipods* Sedimento Marinho
Qualidade de água – Determinação da Toxicidade aguda de sedimento marinho
ou estuarino com anfípodosABNT NBR 15638 Dezembro/2008
* Leptocheirus, Tiburonella, Grandidierella
•ABNT/CEE-106 - COMISSÃO DE ESTUDO ESPECIAL DE ANÁLISES ECOTOXICOLÓGICAS
-
Quality Criteria Adopted:Vary according to the deposition site.
There are alternatives to dispose highly contaminated material.
-
Alternatives:
-
CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITIES
-
Dutchland
• Dredged Material – once removed must be realocated– If contaminated is considered a residue.
• Ocean Disposal for non contaminated material• Confinement of Sediment • Use of Ecotoxicological criteria • River Rhein - Source Control
-
Port of Rotterdam
SLUFTER(1987)
Total Capacity 100 million m3
- 2 million m3/year (10%)
20 million m3/year
-
GermanyFederal guidelines for dredged material on rivers and estuaries/sea
- Standardized values for fine-grain fraction- Criteria for relocation of dredged material on rivers.
- Monitoring of particulate material. Background surveyElba River & Reno River
- Encouragement of reuse of dredged material – beneficial use
- Treatment of contaminated material
-
Germany – Hamburg HarbourMetha Plant : Treatament of Contaminated Sediments
Capacity for treatment: 1 million m3/year
Method:- separation: fine grain-size (silt & clay)- treatment of effluents- reuse of sand- contaminated material – landfill
-
Technical Report: "Estuarine System of Santos and São Vicente", August 2001
CETESB project /PROCOP supportPOPs:o The persistent organics pollutants Aldrin, Chlordane, DDT, Dieldrin, Endrin,
Heptachlor, Mirex and Toxaphene were not detected in water, sediment or organisms – DDT was detected in previous studies (70’s and 80’s).
POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBs) - (Ascarel)o Diffuse contribution - bioaccumulation of PCBs in some organisms collected in
the estuary of Santos, especially oysters, mussels and crabs.
HEXACHLOROBENENEo Reduction of pollution levels in water, sediment and biota, over the last years
in the Cubatão River and Santos Estuary. Organisms of 70% in 1989, to 2,5 on fishes and 6% in crabs, on 1999.
-
DIOXINS AND FURANSo The Santos estuary presented the highest total toxic equivalent values,
although they are lower than those found in other industrialized regions of the world. Presence of 2,3,7,8 TCDD characterizes the region. Crabs, mussels and oysters indicate the need for a more detailed study.
OTHER POLLUTANTSo Santos Estuary: Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), (e.g.
benzo(a)pyrene) sediments, and other substances such as heavy metals (cadmium, lead, copper, chromium, mercury, nickel, and zinc) and phenolic compounds in high levels of concentration.
o All Estuarine System: improved on the levels of heavy metals. Organisms do not occur with consumption restriction for Cd, Pb and Hg, however in sediment some are still problematic.
o Contamination by BHC in the Baixada Santista region has shown signs of decrease in recent years, however in the estuary of San Vicente are also found high levels in the sediments.
-
BAIXADA SANTISTA• Santos Port Dredging
- aprox. 2 million m3/year
• Canal de Piaçaguera/Bacia de Evolução Dredging- dredging suspended from 1996 - 2007- aprox. 5 million m3
-
Port of Santos
1. Sediments Quality Survey2. Monitoring of the disposal area
– sediment quality– circulation
3. Alternative Disposal of Contaminated Material
Channel Piaçaguera/Evolution Basin
1. Source control2. Sediments Quality Survey3. Alternative Disposal of Contaminated Material
-
BIOTA
ECOTOXICOLOGICAL
PHYSICAL & CHEMICAL
+
+
FINAL DIAGNOSTIC
-
Monitoring of Ocean Disposal Area by CODESP
Benthic community data:
Indicators
- Taxa Distribution/ sampling stations
- Number of Crustaceans / area unit / sampling station
CASE STUDY
-
Dredged Material Disposal Areas
former
altered
Monitoring Stations
in operation
-
SEDIMENT QUALITY MONITORING SAMPLING STATIONS
-
SEDIMENT MONITORING STATIONS
+ PLUME OF SEDIMENT
-
RESULTS OF THE MONITORING PROGRAM IN THE DISPOSAL AREA 2005-2006
Chemical characterization of sediments
- Generally contaminants below Level 1 of CONAMA Resolution 344/04;- Changes in the ratios C/N indicating continental origin.- Area of influence of the material dredged between points 3 and 8.
Mutagenicity-Not detected.
Ecotoxicity - Transient toxic effects associated with the volume of dredged material.- Sediment tests:
Leptocheirus plumulosus and Tiburonella viscana
-
DISPOSED VOLUMES & TOXICITY
0
50.000
100.000
150.000
200.000
250.000
300.000
350.000
400.000
450.000
mar/05 mai/05 maio/jun-05 jul/05 nov/dez-05 jan/06 fev/06 abr/06
Monitoring Period
Dis
pose
d Vo
lum
e (m
³) 15
day
s
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Aver
age
Mor
talit
y co
nsid
erin
g al
l sam
plin
g st
atio
ns(%
)
Dredged material Toxic effect
-
•Excluindo os dados de março/05, maio/05, julho/06 e maio/07:
•y = 1E-04x + 12,05 N=22R² = 0,735
• P
-
MONITORING RESULTS 2005-2007
Bioaccumulation (Fish and shellfish)- Metals do not exhibit higher values for human consumption.- Organic compounds – low concentrations.-No deformities or tumors in organisms.
Benthic Community- Less diversity in the area of influence of the dredged material between points 3 and 8.
-
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
nemertiniAnelidasipunculanematodabivalvegastropodeenteropneustaofiuroidetanaidaceaostracodadecapodacopepodacumaceaanfípoda
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
nemertiniAnelidasipunculanematodabivalvegastropodeenteropneustaofiuroidetanaidaceaostracodadecapodacopepodacumaceaanfípoda
June/06
October/06
Benthic CommunityMarine disposal area
-
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
tanaidacea
ostracoda
decapoda
copepoda
cumacea
anfípodaJune/06
October/06
Density of Crustaceans in marine disposal area
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
tanaidacea
ostracoda
decapoda
copepoda
cumacea
anfípoda
-
Contaminated Dredged Material was confined in a Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) – Dique do Furadinho
-
Brasil
Confinament in Geotubes• Rio de Janeiro Port (Ilha da Pombeba e canal do Fundão)• Embraport
• Impacts : Effluent production (percolating water) Soil monitoring required
-
ALVAREZ-GUERRA, M., VIGURI, J.R., CASADO-MARTÍNEZ M.C., DELVALLS T.A Sediment quality assessment and dredged material management in Spain: Part II, analysis of action levels for dredged material management and application to the Bay of Cádiz. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 2007 3(4):539-51.
BERTOLETTI, E. & LAMPARELLI, M.C. Monitoramento das operações de dragagem no porto de Santos. In: Boldrini, E.B.; Soares, C.R.; Paula, E.V. (org.). Dragagens portuárias no Brasil: Licenciamento e monitoramento ambiental. SEMA/PR; ADEMADAN; UNIBEM. p 72-76. 2007.
BRASIL. CONAMA. Resolução nº 454, de 01 de novembro de 2012. Estabelece as diretrizes gerais e os procedimentos referenciais para o gerenciamento do material a ser dragado em águas sob jurisdição nacional.Diário Oficial da União: República Federativa do Brasil, Poder Executivo, Brasília, DF, 08 nov. 2011, No.216. Seção 1, páginas 66 a .68. Disponível em: http://www.in.gov.br/imprensa/visualiza/index.jsp?jornal=1&pagina=66&data=08/11/2012 Acesso em: dez. 2012.
CETESB, Sistema estuarino de Santos e São Vicente. CETESB, São Paulo – Relatório Técnico, 178p. 2001.
CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of th Environment). Canadian sediment quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life: Introduction. In: Canadian environmental quality guidelines. CCME. Winnipeg. p. i., 1999.
DEP (1994). Approach to the Assessment of Sediment Quality in Florida Coastal Waters. Vol. I. Development and Evaluation of Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines. Prepared for Florida Department of Enviromental Protection - FDEP, Office of Water Policy, Tallahasee, FL, by MacDonald Enviromental Sciences Ltd., Ladysmith, British Columbia. 1994.
ENVIRONMENTAL CANADA. Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life. - Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines - Summary Tables. , atualizado em 2002.
JAAGUMAGI, R. & PERSAUD, D. Sediment Assessment and Remediation - Ontario’s Approach. In: POSW - Satellite Seminar “Remediation of Contaminated Sediments” Fifth International FZK/TNO, Conference on Contaminated Soil, p. 21-32. 1995
LONG, E. R., HONG, C.B. & SEVERN, C.G. Relationship between acute sediment toxicity in laboratory tests and abundance and diversity of benthic infauna in marine sediments: A review. Environ.Toxicol.Chem. 20 (1): 46-60. 2001.
BIBLIOGRAPHY (1/2)
-
BIBLIOGRAPHY (2/2)
LONG, E.R., MACDONALD, D.D., SMITH, S.L. & CALDER F.D. (1995). Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuarine sediments. Environmental Management 19 (1): 81-97.
ONELIO CARBALLO HONDAL, GUSTAVO ARENCIBIA CARBALLO, JOEL CONCEPCIÓN, MERCEDES ISLA MOLLEDA. Los Bioensayos de Toxicidad en Sedimentos Marinos. Centro de Investigaciones Pesqueras. 5Ta Ave. Y 248, Barlovento, C.Habana. Cuba. http://www.sertox.com.ar/img/item_full/32004.pdf.
PRÓSPERI, V.A. Comparação de métodos ecotoxicológicos na avaliação de sedimentos marinhos e estuarinos. Tese de doutorado, Escola de Engenharia São Carlos/USP, 119p. 2002.
QUINÁGLIA, G. Caracterização dos níveis basais de metais dos sedimentos do Sistema Estuarino da Baixada Santista. Tese de Doutorado, Instituto de Química da Universidade de São Paulo (IQUSP). 2006.
SÁ, F. & MACHADO, E.C. Metais pesados e arsênio em sedimentos do canal de acesso aos portos do Estado do Paraná (PR). In: Boldrini, E.B.; Soares, C.R.; Paula, E.V. (org.). Dragagens portuárias no Brasil: Licenciamento e monitoramento ambiental. SEMA/PR; ADEMADAN; UNIBEM. p 253-263. 2007.
SMITH, S.L. et al. The development and implementation of canadian sediment quality guidelines. MUNAWAR , M. & DAVE, G (eds). Development and progress in sediment quality assessment: Rationale, Challenges, Techniques & Strategies. SPB Academics Pub. Amsterdam. p. 233-249. 1996a.
TRAVASSOS, M.P.; TORRONTEGUY, M. & CARDOSO JR., H.G. Experiência do Estado do Espírito Santo (ES) na caracterização do material dragado. In: Boldrini, E.B.; Soares, C.R.; Paula, E.V. (org.). Dragagens portuárias no Brasil: Licenciamento e monitoramento ambiental. SEMA/PR; ADEMADAN; UNIBEM. p 99-107. 2007. USEPA 1998.
U.S. Environment Protection Agency. EPA’s contaminated sediment management strategy. EPA-823-R-98-001. 1998. 105p.