Summary of street sweeping tracking methodologies

Summary of street sweeping tracking methodologies

Link to this table

Tracking method	Advantages	Disadvantages	Data collected	Relative TP load reduction credit potential1
Distance Swept: Manual Logging	Inexpensive Low-tech	Low accuracy, reliant on self-reporting	Miles swept	Low potential
Distance Swept: GPS Records	Automated tracking	More expensive than manual logging (hardware, software, data interpretation)	Miles swept	Low potential
Debris Collected: Mass Measurement	Once method is established, easy to track	Requires special equipment (scale)	Wet mass of swept materials	High potential
Debris Collected: Mass Measurements with Lab Analysis	More representative of actual material swept	Pilot study may be initially time intensive and costly	Wet mass of swept materials plus initial lab work for dry basis moisture content, and optionally organic matter content, TP content	High potential and high accuracy
Debris Collected: Volume Measurement	Inexpensive Low-tech	Not currently applicable for TP load reduction credit by MPCA	Count of hopper dumps	No potential
Debris Collected: Volume-Mass Relationship	Provides pathway for TP load reduction credit based on a low-tech measurement	Pilot study may be initially time intensive and costly	Count of hopper dumps plus initial lab work in developing volume/mass relationship	High potential
1Relative TP Load Reduction Credit Ratings based on the MPCA Street Sweeping Credit Calculator: High Credit: high accuracy, research-based and site-specific correlations between lab measurements and TP load Moderate Credit: moderate accuracy in tracking method that can be improved upon with lab analyses Low Credit: low accuracy and/or lack of strong research-based relationships No Current Credit: currently pending MPCA approval of data-derived volume-mass relationship No Credit: no crediting option or plan to develop such a method based on research to date