chesapeake bay tmdl primer: chesapeake bay watershed and bay water quality models the economics of...
TRANSCRIPT
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Primer: Chesapeake Bay Watershed and Bay Water Quality Models
The Economics of Water Quality Improvements in Chesapeake Bay Workshop
October 31 and November 1, 2011
Rich Batiuk, Associate Director for ScienceChesapeake Bay Program Office
U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyRegion 3
2
3
4
Can you say m_o_d_e_l?
5
VERY GOOD!
Chesapeake Bay Airshed Model Chesapeake Bay Land Change Model
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model Chesapeake Bay Water Quality and Sediment Transport Model
Chesapeake Bay Filter Feeder Model
Chesapeake Bay Scenario Builder
7
For Our Beloved Economists…
• Access to suite of state of science, fully independent scientifically peer reviewed, fully documented models and tools available NO WHERE else for a single great waterbody
• Access to two+ decades of input data and model scenario outputs
• Model outputs stated in management applicable terms—pounds of pollution delivered to impaired waters, percentage of water quality standards attainment, etc.
Role of the Bay Models In Decision-Making
9
For Our Beloved Economists…
• Access to decision making processes developed and blessed by the partnership1
– Water criteria attainment assessment– Load allocations to major river basin by jurisdiction– 3 year critical period, etc.
• Where applicable, computer programming available to apply the agreed to decision making process
• All decision making processes fully documented within the Bay TMDL document
1. Ok, so NY told us otherwise on the allocation methodology….
10
Farmland and Forest Land Loss (2000 to 2030)
Source: Chesapeake Bay Land Change Model Version 3
11
For Our Beloved Economists
• Extent of development by county and modeling segment
• Fraction of development impacting farmland and forest lands
• Fraction of future population on sewer and septic systems
• Changes in land uses for input into watershed model
12
Scenario Builder
13
For Our Beloved Economists…
• Access to the full suite of data, inputs, conservation practices, BMPs,….ok go back to the previous slide and pick your favorite data, application rate, and its yours!
1414
Calibration sites = 296Land Segments = 308
River Segments= 1,063Land uses = 25
Simulation Years = 21 (’85-’05)
Phase 5 Calibration Sites
Phase 5 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model
Phase 5 Segmentation
15
Annual, monthly, or daily values of anthropogenic factors:
Land Use AcreageBMPsFertilizerManureTillageCrop typesAtmospheric depositionWaste water treatmentSeptic loads
Hourly or daily values of Meteorologicalfactors:
PrecipitationTemperatureEvapotranspirationWindSolar RadiationDew pointCloud Cover
Daily flow, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment comparedto observationsover 21 years
How the Watershed Model Works
HSPF
1616
Each segment consists of 25 separately-modeled land uses:
• Developed– High Density Pervious Urban– High Density Impervious Urban– Low Density Pervious Urban– Low Density Impervious Urban– Construction– Extractive – Combined Sewer System
• Natural– Wooded / Open– Disturbed Forest
• Agriculture– Corn/Soy/Wheat rotation– Other Row Crops– Hay– Alfalfa– Pasture– Livestock production– Nursery
– Plus specialized versions of the above for a total of 15 agricultural land uses
Plus: Point Source andSeptic Loads, and
Atmospheric Deposition Loads
How the Watershed Model Works
17
Precipitation FertilizerManureAtmospheric deposition
Runoff
How the Watershed Model Works
Hydrologysubmodel
Management filter
RiverSedimentsubmodel Phosphorus
submodel
Nitrogensubmodel
}hourly
18
19
For Our Beloved Economists…
• Access to the nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment loads – End of stream – Delivered to the Bay– Yield (pounds/area)– Model segment, county, major river basin, jurisdiction
and basinwide scales
• BMPs—acreages, linear feet, animal units
• Practice efficiency/effectiveness measures
20
Bay Water Quality Model• 57,000 cells• Predicts changes in water quality
due to changes in nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment loads– Dissolved Oxygen– Water clarity– Chlorophyll a
• Also simulates algae, underwater Bay grasses, bottom dwelling worms and clams,
• Linked with filter feeders (oysters, menhaden) model
Developed by scientists at the US Army Corps of Engineers, University of Maryland, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, HydroQual, Versar, and Rutgers University
Bay Dissolved Oxygen Criteria
Minimum Amount of Oxygen (mg/L) Needed to Survive by Species
Migratory Fish Spawning & Nursery Areas
Hard Clams: 5
Striped Bass: 5-6
Worms: 1
Shallow and Open Water Areas
Deep Water
Deep Channel
6
5
3
2
1
4
0
Crabs: 3
Spot: 2
White Perch: 5
American Shad: 5
Yellow Perch: 5
Alewife: 3.6
Bay Anchovy: 3
22
Scenario→
2010 No Action N-Based
Scenario 371 TN, 37.6 TP,
10630TSS
'91 -'00 Base Scenario 318 TN, 20.3 TP,
9440 TSS
2007 Scenario 269 TN, 19.5 TP, 8770 TSS
2009 Scenario 262TN, 18.8 TP, 8510 TSS
200 Scoping Scenario 200 TN, 14.7 TP,
6810 TSS
196 Scoping Scenario 196TN, 14.9TP 6680 TSS
195 Scoping Scenario 195 TN, 14.8 TP,
6660 TSS
194 Scoping Scenario 194 TN, 14.7 TP,
6640 TSS
193 Scoping Scenario 193 TN, 14.6 TP,
6610 TSS
192 Scoping Scenario 192 TN, 14.6 TP,
6590 TSS
191 Scoping Scenario 191 TN, 14.5 TP,
6570 TSS
Year → '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95 '93-'95
Cbseg State DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water DO Deep Water
CB3MH MD 4% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
CB4MH MD 27% 20% 17% 16% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
CB5MH both 6% 4% 3% 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0%
CB6PH VA 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
CB7PH VA 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
CHSMH MD 34% 26% 21% 19% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
EASMH MD 34% 6% 4% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
MAGMH MD 51% 51% 51% 43% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17%
MD5MH MD 12% 9% 7% 7% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1%
PATMH MD 26% 13% 11% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
PAXMH MD 23% 7% 4% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
POMMH MD 8% 4% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
POTMH both 8% 4% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
RPPMH VA 13% 6% 3% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SBEMH VA 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SEVMH MD 19% 6% 6% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SOUMH MD 36% 19% 19% 19% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
VA5MH VA 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
YRKPH VA 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1985 Base 2009 Target Tributary Loading Loading Loading E3 All
Scenario Calibration Scenario Load A Strategy Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Forest
342TN 309TN 248TN 200TN 191TN 190TN 179TN 170TN 141TN 58TN
24.1TP 19.5TP 16.6TP 15.0TP 14.4TP 12.7TP 12.0TP 11.3TP 8.5TP 4.4TP
Nu
mb
er o
f S
egm
ents
in D
O V
iola
tio
n
Open Water Violations
Deep Water Violations
Deep Channel Violations
Bay Water Quality Model Results
24
For Our Beloved Economists…
• Model simulated water quality standards attainment values for each unique designated use segment– Dissolved oxygen– SAV acreage– Water clarity – Chlorophyll a (tidal James, DC waters only)
• Estimates of pollutant load reductions on ecosystem processes e.g., filter feeding
• Relationships between pounds reduced and water quality standards attainment
25
Allocations Based on Relative Effect of a Pound of Pollution on Bay WQ
26
For Our Beloved Economists…
• Access to ‘water quality impact per pound of pollution’ information for any location within the watershed and any of the 92 tidal Bay segments
• Tool that illustrates ‘relative effect’ of each basin on each of the 92 segments
• Essentially provides a common currency—relative effect on dissolved oxygen per pound of pollutant reduced across the entire watershed
27
Relative effectiveness (Riverine * Estuarine Delivery)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UpE
S, M
DU
pES,
DE
Mid
ES, M
DSu
sq, M
DLo
wES
, MD
Wsh
, MD
UpE
S, P
ALo
wES
, DE
Susq
, PA
PxtB
, MD
EshV
A, V
APo
tB, D
CM
idES
, DE
PotA
, DC
PotB
, MD
PotB
, VA
Susq
, NY
RapB
, VA
PotA
, MD
YrkB
, VA
PotA
, VA
Wsh
, PA
PotA
, WV
PotA
, PA
PxtA
, MD
JmsB
, VA
RapA
, VA
YrkA
, VA
JmsA
, VA
JmsA
, WV
Developing a Bay Pollution Diet in Six Easy Steps
Step 1: Quantify per pound impact on Bay water quality.
Step 2: Array major river basins by jurisdiction by their relative impact on Bay water quality.
Step 3. Determine allocation for the major river basins and jurisdictions by applying the agreed to allocation methodology.
Step 4: Jurisdictions further allocate to 92 segment watersheds.
Step 5: Jurisdictions allocate to sources.
28
Relative effectiveness (Riverine * Estuarine Delivery)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UpE
S, M
DU
pES,
DE
Mid
ES, M
DSu
sq, M
DLo
wES
, MD
Wsh
, MD
UpE
S, P
ALo
wES
, DE
Susq
, PA
PxtB
, MD
EshV
A, V
APo
tB, D
CM
idES
, DE
PotA
, DC
PotB
, MD
PotB
, VA
Susq
, NY
RapB
, VA
PotA
, MD
YrkB
, VA
PotA
, VA
Wsh
, PA
PotA
, WV
PotA
, PA
PxtA
, MD
JmsB
, VA
RapA
, VA
YrkA
, VA
JmsA
, VA
JmsA
, WV
Developing a Bay Pollution Diet in Six Easy Steps
Step 1: Quantify per pound impact on Bay water quality.
Step 2: Array major river basins by jurisdiction by their relative impact on Bay water quality.
Step 3. Determine allocation for the major river basins and jurisdictions by applying the agreed to allocation methodology.
Step 4: Jurisdictions further allocate to 92 segment watersheds.
Step 5: Jurisdictions allocate to sources.
Step 6. EPA based the TMDL allocations on jurisdictions’ WIPs, with adjustments as needed for reasonable assurance.
29
For Our Beloved Economists…
• Access to a comprehensive load allocation methodology that formed the basis for the December 2010 Bay TMDL
• Incorporation of ‘reasonable assurance’ into the final allocations, again, following a documented evaluation process
• Allocation process is completely scalable….can be applied at the basinwide down to the county or small watershed scales
Rich Batiuk
Associate Director for Science
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program
Office
410-267-5731
www.chesapeakebay.net