The Experts below are selected from a list of 291 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Curtis A Cooper - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Stream restoration and Sewers impact sources and fluxes of water, carbon, and nutrients in urban watersheds
Copernicus Publications, 2016Co-Authors: Michael J Pennino, Paul M Mayer, Sujay S Kaushal, R. M. Utz, Curtis A CooperAbstract:An improved understanding of sources and timing of water, carbon, and nutrient fluxes associated with urban infrastructure and stream restoration is critical for guiding effective watershed management globally. We investigated how sources, fluxes, and flowpaths of water, carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) shift in response to differences in urban stream restoration and sewer infrastructure. We compared an urban restored stream with two urban degraded streams draining varying levels of urban development and one stream with upland stormwater management systems over a 3-year period. We found that there was significantly decreased peak discharge in response to precipitation events following stream restoration. Similarly, we found that the restored stream showed significantly lower (p < 0.05) monthly peak runoff (9.4 ± 1.0 mm day−1) compared with two urban degraded streams (ranging from 44.9 ± 4.5 to 55.4 ± 5.8 mm day−1) draining higher impervious surface cover, and the stream-draining stormwater management systems and less impervious surface cover in its watershed (13.2 ± 1.9 mm day−1). The restored stream exported most carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus at relatively lower streamflow than the two more urban catchments, which exported most carbon and nutrients at higher streamflow. Annual exports of total carbon (6.6 ± 0.5 kg ha−1 yr−1), total nitrogen (4.5 ± 0.3 kg ha−1 yr−1), and total phosphorus (161 ± 15 kg ha−1 yr−1) were significantly lower in the restored stream compared to both urban degraded streams (p < 0.05), but statistically similar to the stream draining stormwater management systems, for N exports. However, nitrate isotope data suggested that 55 ± 1 % of the nitrate in the urban restored stream was derived from leaky Sanitary Sewers (during baseflow), statistically similar to the urban degraded streams. These isotopic results as well as additional tracers, including fluoride (added to drinking water) and iodide (contained in dietary salt), suggested that groundwater contamination was a major source of urban nutrient fluxes, which has been less considered compared to upland sources. Overall, leaking sewer pipes are a problem globally and our results suggest that combining stream restoration with restoration of aging sewer pipes can be critical to more effectively minimizing urban nonpoint nutrient sources. The sources, fluxes, and flowpaths of groundwater should be prioritized in management efforts to improve stream restoration by locating hydrologic hot spots where stream restoration is most likely to succeed
-
Stream restoration and Sanitary infrastructure alter sources and fluxes of water, carbon, and nutrients in urban watersheds
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 2015Co-Authors: Michael J Pennino, Paul M Mayer, Sujay S Kaushal, Curtis A CooperAbstract:Abstract. An improved understanding of sources and timing of water and nutrient fluxes associated with urban stream restoration is critical for guiding effective watershed management. We investigated how sources, fluxes, and flowpaths of water, carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) shift in response to differences in stream restoration and Sanitary infrastructure. We compared a restored stream with 3 unrestored streams draining urban development and stormwater management over a 3 year period. We found that there was significantly decreased peak discharge in response to precipitation events following stream restoration. Similarly, we found that the restored stream showed significantly lower monthly peak runoff (9.4 ± 1.0 mm d−1) compared with two urban unrestored streams (ranging from 44.9 ± 4.5 to 55.4 ± 5.8 mm d−1) draining higher impervious surface cover. Peak runoff in the restored stream was more similar to a less developed stream draining extensive stormwater management (13.2 ± 1.9 mm d−1). Interestingly, the restored stream exported most carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus loads at relatively lower streamflow than the 2 more urban streams, which exported most of their loads at higher and less frequent streamflow. Annual exports of total carbon (6.6 ± 0.5 kg ha−1 yr−1), total nitrogen (4.5 ± 0.3 kg ha−1 yr−1), and total phosphorus (161 ± 15 g ha−1 yr−1) were significantly lower in the restored stream compared to both urban unrestored streams (p < 0.05) and similar to the stream draining stormwater management. Although stream restoration appeared to potentially influence hydrology to some degree, nitrate isotope data suggested that 55 ± 1 % of the nitrate in the restored stream was derived from leaky Sanitary Sewers (during baseflow), similar to the unrestored streams. Longitudinal synoptic surveys of water and nitrate isotopes along all 4 watersheds suggested the importance of urban groundwater contamination from leaky piped infrastructure. Urban groundwater contamination was also suggested by additional tracer measurements including fluoride (added to drinking water) and iodide (contained in dietary salt). Our results suggest that integrating stream restoration with restoration of aging Sanitary infrastructure can be critical to more effectively minimize watershed nutrient export. Given that both stream restoration and Sanitary pipe repairs both involve extensive channel manipulation, they can be considered simultaneously in management strategies. In addition, ground water can be a major source of nutrient fluxes in urban watersheds, which has been less considered compared with upland sources and storm drains. Goundwater sources, fluxes, and flowpath should also be targeted in efforts to improve stream restoration strategies and prioritize hydrologic "hot spots" along watersheds where stream restoration is most likely to succeed.
Michael J Pennino - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Stream restoration and Sewers impact sources and fluxes of water, carbon, and nutrients in urban watersheds
Copernicus Publications, 2016Co-Authors: Michael J Pennino, Paul M Mayer, Sujay S Kaushal, R. M. Utz, Curtis A CooperAbstract:An improved understanding of sources and timing of water, carbon, and nutrient fluxes associated with urban infrastructure and stream restoration is critical for guiding effective watershed management globally. We investigated how sources, fluxes, and flowpaths of water, carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) shift in response to differences in urban stream restoration and sewer infrastructure. We compared an urban restored stream with two urban degraded streams draining varying levels of urban development and one stream with upland stormwater management systems over a 3-year period. We found that there was significantly decreased peak discharge in response to precipitation events following stream restoration. Similarly, we found that the restored stream showed significantly lower (p < 0.05) monthly peak runoff (9.4 ± 1.0 mm day−1) compared with two urban degraded streams (ranging from 44.9 ± 4.5 to 55.4 ± 5.8 mm day−1) draining higher impervious surface cover, and the stream-draining stormwater management systems and less impervious surface cover in its watershed (13.2 ± 1.9 mm day−1). The restored stream exported most carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus at relatively lower streamflow than the two more urban catchments, which exported most carbon and nutrients at higher streamflow. Annual exports of total carbon (6.6 ± 0.5 kg ha−1 yr−1), total nitrogen (4.5 ± 0.3 kg ha−1 yr−1), and total phosphorus (161 ± 15 kg ha−1 yr−1) were significantly lower in the restored stream compared to both urban degraded streams (p < 0.05), but statistically similar to the stream draining stormwater management systems, for N exports. However, nitrate isotope data suggested that 55 ± 1 % of the nitrate in the urban restored stream was derived from leaky Sanitary Sewers (during baseflow), statistically similar to the urban degraded streams. These isotopic results as well as additional tracers, including fluoride (added to drinking water) and iodide (contained in dietary salt), suggested that groundwater contamination was a major source of urban nutrient fluxes, which has been less considered compared to upland sources. Overall, leaking sewer pipes are a problem globally and our results suggest that combining stream restoration with restoration of aging sewer pipes can be critical to more effectively minimizing urban nonpoint nutrient sources. The sources, fluxes, and flowpaths of groundwater should be prioritized in management efforts to improve stream restoration by locating hydrologic hot spots where stream restoration is most likely to succeed
-
Stream restoration and Sanitary infrastructure alter sources and fluxes of water, carbon, and nutrients in urban watersheds
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 2015Co-Authors: Michael J Pennino, Paul M Mayer, Sujay S Kaushal, Curtis A CooperAbstract:Abstract. An improved understanding of sources and timing of water and nutrient fluxes associated with urban stream restoration is critical for guiding effective watershed management. We investigated how sources, fluxes, and flowpaths of water, carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) shift in response to differences in stream restoration and Sanitary infrastructure. We compared a restored stream with 3 unrestored streams draining urban development and stormwater management over a 3 year period. We found that there was significantly decreased peak discharge in response to precipitation events following stream restoration. Similarly, we found that the restored stream showed significantly lower monthly peak runoff (9.4 ± 1.0 mm d−1) compared with two urban unrestored streams (ranging from 44.9 ± 4.5 to 55.4 ± 5.8 mm d−1) draining higher impervious surface cover. Peak runoff in the restored stream was more similar to a less developed stream draining extensive stormwater management (13.2 ± 1.9 mm d−1). Interestingly, the restored stream exported most carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus loads at relatively lower streamflow than the 2 more urban streams, which exported most of their loads at higher and less frequent streamflow. Annual exports of total carbon (6.6 ± 0.5 kg ha−1 yr−1), total nitrogen (4.5 ± 0.3 kg ha−1 yr−1), and total phosphorus (161 ± 15 g ha−1 yr−1) were significantly lower in the restored stream compared to both urban unrestored streams (p < 0.05) and similar to the stream draining stormwater management. Although stream restoration appeared to potentially influence hydrology to some degree, nitrate isotope data suggested that 55 ± 1 % of the nitrate in the restored stream was derived from leaky Sanitary Sewers (during baseflow), similar to the unrestored streams. Longitudinal synoptic surveys of water and nitrate isotopes along all 4 watersheds suggested the importance of urban groundwater contamination from leaky piped infrastructure. Urban groundwater contamination was also suggested by additional tracer measurements including fluoride (added to drinking water) and iodide (contained in dietary salt). Our results suggest that integrating stream restoration with restoration of aging Sanitary infrastructure can be critical to more effectively minimize watershed nutrient export. Given that both stream restoration and Sanitary pipe repairs both involve extensive channel manipulation, they can be considered simultaneously in management strategies. In addition, ground water can be a major source of nutrient fluxes in urban watersheds, which has been less considered compared with upland sources and storm drains. Goundwater sources, fluxes, and flowpath should also be targeted in efforts to improve stream restoration strategies and prioritize hydrologic "hot spots" along watersheds where stream restoration is most likely to succeed.
Vinícius Arcanjo Da ,silva - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Environmental sustainability assessment of the system of water supply and Sanitary exhaustion in Uberaba MG
Programa de Pós-graduação em Engenharia Civil, 2016Co-Authors: Vinícius Arcanjo Da ,silvaAbstract:This paper analyses the sustainability under the environmental (ecological) perspective of Water Supply and Sanitary Sewers Systems from Uberaba city, MG. It was accomplished in this analysis, An Environmental Sustainability Assessment of those systems, by the means of specific sustainability indicators proposed for Uberaba, but which may be used for other simi-lar cities. To the characterization of the systems, visitations were made to the main units as well as a documental was elaborated. The definition of the level or stage of the sustainability by the indicators was made based on a literature review, on interviews with the technicians and managers of the systems and based on the characterization and observation of the system reality, being attributed to them the following classification: Non Sustainable, Low Sustaina-bility, Medium Sustainability and High Sustainability. It was verified that the indicators that have lower compatibility to the process of sustainability to the studied systems are those rela-ted to the water physical losses, to the water per capita consumption, to the electricity con-sumption and to the sludge from the water treatment plants disposal untreated into a water body, for the Water Supply System. And those ones related to the attendance with sewage treatment, to the electricity consumption and to the usage of the treated sewage, for the Sani-tary Sewers, all of them classified as Non Sustainable.Dissertação (Mestrado)Neste trabalho é analisada a sustentabilidade sob a dimensão ambiental (ecológica) dos Sistemas de Abastecimento de Água (SAA) e Esgotamento Sanitário (SES) da cidade de Uberaba, MG. Nessa análise é feita a Avaliação de Sustentabilidade Ambiental (ASA) desses sistemas por meio de indicadores de sustentabilidade específicos, propostos para Uberaba, mas que podem servir de base para sistemas de saneamento de outras cidades similares. Para a caracterização dos sistemas foram feitas visitas às suas principais unidades e elaborado um levantamento documental. A definição do nível ou estágio de sustentabilidade através dos indicadores foi feita com base em pesquisa de literatura, em entrevistas com os técnicos e gestores dos sistemas e na caracterização e observação da realidade destes, atribuindo-se a seguinte classificação: Não Sustentável, Baixa Sustentabilidade, Média Sustentabilidade e Alta Sustentabilidade. Verifica-se que os indicadores que proporcionam menor compatibilidade com o processo de sustentabilidade para os sistemas estudados são aqueles relacionados às perdas físicas de água, ao consumo de água per capita, ao consumo de energia elétrica e ao lançamento do lodo das estações de tratamento de água sem tratamento em corpo d‟água, para o SAA; e os relacionados ao atendimento com tratamento de esgoto, ao consumo de energia elétrica e à utilização do esgoto tratado, para o SES, todos com a classificação Não Sustentável
-
Environmental sustainability assessment of the system of water supply and Sanitary exhaustion in Uberaba MG
Univerdade Federal de Uberlândia, 2016Co-Authors: Vinícius Arcanjo Da ,silvaAbstract:Neste trabalho é analisada a sustentabilidade sob a dimensão ambiental (ecológica) dos Sistemas de Abastecimento de Água (SAA) e Esgotamento Sanitário (SES) da cidade de Uberaba, MG. Nessa análise é feita a Avaliação de Sustentabilidade Ambiental (ASA) desses sistemas por meio de indicadores de sustentabilidade específicos, propostos para Uberaba, mas que podem servir de base para sistemas de saneamento de outras cidades similares. Para a caracterização dos sistemas foram feitas visitas às suas principais unidades e elaborado um levantamento documental. A definição do nível ou estágio de sustentabilidade através dos indicadores foi feita com base em pesquisa de literatura, em entrevistas com os técnicos e gestores dos sistemas e na caracterização e observação da realidade destes, atribuindo-se a seguinte classificação: Não Sustentável, Baixa Sustentabilidade, Média Sustentabilidade e Alta Sustentabilidade. Verifica-se que os indicadores que proporcionam menor compatibilidade com o processo de sustentabilidade para os sistemas estudados são aqueles relacionados às perdas físicas de água, ao consumo de água per capita, ao consumo de energia elétrica e ao lançamento do lodo das estações de tratamento de água sem tratamento em corpo d‟água, para o SAA; e os relacionados ao atendimento com tratamento de esgoto, ao consumo de energia elétrica e à utilização do esgoto tratado, para o SES, todos com a classificação Não Sustentável.This paper analyses the sustainability under the environmental (ecological) perspective of Water Supply and Sanitary Sewers Systems from Uberaba city, MG. It was accomplished in this analysis, An Environmental Sustainability Assessment of those systems, by the means of specific sustainability indicators proposed for Uberaba, but which may be used for other simi-lar cities. To the characterization of the systems, visitations were made to the main units as well as a documental was elaborated. The definition of the level or stage of the sustainability by the indicators was made based on a literature review, on interviews with the technicians and managers of the systems and based on the characterization and observation of the system reality, being attributed to them the following classification: Non Sustainable, Low Sustaina-bility, Medium Sustainability and High Sustainability. It was verified that the indicators that have lower compatibility to the process of sustainability to the studied systems are those rela-ted to the water physical losses, to the water per capita consumption, to the electricity con-sumption and to the sludge from the water treatment plants disposal untreated into a water body, for the Water Supply System. And those ones related to the attendance with sewage treatment, to the electricity consumption and to the usage of the treated sewage, for the Sani-tary Sewers, all of them classified as Non Sustainable
Richard G Bribiescas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
septic systems but not Sanitary sewer lines are associated with elevated estradiol in male frog metamorphs from suburban ponds
General and Comparative Endocrinology, 2016Co-Authors: Max R Lambert, Geoffrey S J Giller, David K Skelly, Richard G BribiescasAbstract:Suburban neighborhoods are a dominant type of human land use. Many housing regions globally rely on septic systems, rather than Sanitary Sewers, for wastewater management. There is evidence that septic systems may contaminate waterbodies more than sewer lines. There is also mounting evidence that human activities contaminate waterways with endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), which alter wildlife sexual development. While endocrine disruption is often associated with intense activities such as agriculture or wastewater treatment plant discharges, recent evidence indicates that endocrine disruption is pervasive in frogs from suburban neighborhoods. In conjunction with other putative EDC sources, one hypothesis is that wastewater is contaminating suburban waterways with EDCs derived from pharmaceuticals or personal care products. Here, we measure estradiol (E2) in metamorphosing green frogs (Rana clamitans) from forested ponds and suburban ponds adjacent to either septic tanks or Sanitary Sewers. We show that E2 is highest in male frogs from septic neighborhoods and that E2 concentrations are significantly lower in male frogs from forested ponds and from ponds near Sewers. These results indicate that septic tanks may be contaminating aquatic ecosystems differently than sewer lines. This pattern contrasts prior work showing no difference in EDC contamination or morphological endocrine disruption between septic and sewer neighborhoods, implying that suburbanization may have varying effects at multiple biological scales like physiology and anatomy.
J. Alex Mccorquodale - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Discussion of “Tractive Force Design for Sanitary Sewer Self-Cleansing” by LaVere B. Merritt
Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2012Co-Authors: Guillermo J. Rincón, Enrique J. La Motta, J. Alex MccorquodaleAbstract:In the original paper, Merritt presents a detailed summary ofChapter 5 of the 2007 edition of the joint ASCE MOP 60-WaterEnvironment Federation (WEF) FD-5 Manual, Gravity SanitarySewer Design and Construction (ASCE-WEF 2007). He endorsesthe manual’s recommendation to use the unit tractive force (TF)method to calculate the minimum slope of Sanitary Sewers carryingthe minimum flow at the beginning of the design period. He alsoreproduces the method to calculate such a flow, by using criteriapresented in Chapter 3 (ASCE-WPCF 1970, 1982; ASCE-WEF2007).In Merritt’s literature review, he fails to mention that the TFmethod to attain self-cleansing in Sewers carrying settleableparticles was proposed as early as 1954 by Fair and Geyer,who suggested that to have self-cleansing conditions at all flowrates, the unit tractive force must be equal to that generated in asewer running full at a minimum velocity of 0:6m∕s(Fair andGeyer 1954). This minimum velocity was considered for manyyears sufficient to provide self-cleansing in a Sanitary sewer run-ning full, without regard to particle size. The unit tractive force,in this case, can be calculated by using the following equation(La Motta 1996):T ¼ 0:571464γn
-
Discussion of "Tractive Force Design for Sanitary Sewer Self-Cleansing" by
2012Co-Authors: Lavere B. Merritt, Guillermo J. Rincón, Enrique J. La Motta, J. Alex MccorquodaleAbstract:In the original paper, Merritt presents a detailed summary ofChapter 5 of the 2007 edition of the joint ASCE MOP 60-WaterEnvironment Federation (WEF) FD-5 Manual, Gravity SanitarySewer Design and Construction (ASCE-WEF 2007). He endorsesthe manual’s recommendation to use the unit tractive force (TF)method to calculate the minimum slope of Sanitary Sewers carryingthe minimum flow at the beginning of the design period. He alsoreproduces the method to calculate such a flow, by using criteriapresented in Chapter 3 (ASCE-WPCF 1970, 1982; ASCE-WEF2007).In Merritt’s literature review, he fails to mention that the TFmethod to attain self-cleansing in Sewers carrying settleableparticles was proposed as early as 1954 by Fair and Geyer,who suggested that to have self-cleansing conditions at all flowrates, the unit tractive force must be equal to that generated in asewer running full at a minimum velocity of 0:6m∕s(Fair andGeyer 1954). This minimum velocity was considered for manyyears sufficient to provide self-cleansing in a Sanitary sewer run-ning full, without regard to particle size. The unit tractive force,in this case, can be calculated by using the following equation(La Motta 1996):T ¼ 0:571464γn
