m |
m |
||
Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
===Land use=== | ===Land use=== | ||
{{alert|Using an emc for the specific land use being considered is highly recommended. See [[Stormwater event mean concentrations and pollutant loading/export rates for different land uses]] for emcs for different pollutants and land uses.|alert-warning}} | {{alert|Using an emc for the specific land use being considered is highly recommended. See [[Stormwater event mean concentrations and pollutant loading/export rates for different land uses]] for emcs for different pollutants and land uses.|alert-warning}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Because of the variability in emcs across different land uses, it is beneficial to consider different land uses when calculating pollutant loads. Compositing emcs across land uses is generally not recommended. | ||
Some generalizations about pollutant loading as a function of land use include the following. | Some generalizations about pollutant loading as a function of land use include the following. | ||
Line 118: | Line 120: | ||
*Pollutant concentrations in open, forested, and park areas are lower, primarily due to reduced impervious surface. | *Pollutant concentrations in open, forested, and park areas are lower, primarily due to reduced impervious surface. | ||
*There is limited information on many of the newer chemicals, such as commercial-consumer compounds, veterinary and human pharmaceuticals, lifestyle and personal care compounds, and others. These chemicals, generically labeled as contaminants of emerging concern (CEC), have variable sources, including industry, sediment, and atmospheric deposition. For more information, see [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Richard_Kiesling/publication/326916617_Contaminants_of_emerging_concern_in_urban_stormwater_Spatiotemporal_patterns_and_removal_by_iron-enhanced_sand_filters_IESFs/links/5b85452192851c1e12372f0f/Contaminants-of-emerging-concern-in-urban-stormwater-Spatiotemporal-patterns-and-removal-by-iron-enhanced-sand-filters-IESFs.pdf Fairbairn et al.] (2018), [https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/45895946/An_adaptive_comprehensive_monitoring_str20160523-5773-8srpfw.pdf?response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DAn_Adaptive_Comprehensive_Monitoring_Str.pdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=ASIATUSBJ6BAPKX5XEDF%2F20200408%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20200408T195551Z&X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjENP%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEaCXVzLWVhc3QtMSJGMEQCIGSCyrrMYy%2BuVHdyQfJPgZjqxxFH5Rs1ctKGA2tQmHKsAiAhlXJZSRibwYsi8yZ2%2FsxXMLv47nl4uVZjgEVnKwAnZCq9Awjc%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F8BEAAaDDI1MDMxODgxMTIwMCIMgFAXNG4YnXqBODmoKpEDa3c1Z56IvbZSbxrH8zcWtbG1u072FjwEYCv%2FcqJtf5dI3DCCe5NBPE0v3VHAb%2BcFs9qpmkuPsNCnYWoHsNsanczc%2FnjW5b24lEEOFzBNaeZGF5Z3bJ0SsIBpUXT1%2FDZuqw%2B5PHtfF2Q1KsvWUBaRehz%2FKGkH74W4adiUFWE3hLXxF%2FbrUaUMRdS0GgY%2F3fU0scSMyInNZwIp%2F0kGBpn83nfRp0Y2MT2HDZSzGIla8%2FCDcRGMFJYP1mElttYs9ifnoFaRggTSmEGaGiTDQIswM0W9Tg7HBn207L11%2Fro09PcCX4UXxF6ZFa6I7RuqUqMzQQTs42Hjq46AzQtSZv1DubBFyTCo4VSWJMBx93nZXgNAu%2FwBwrds1Vdwn%2FGvZQxQznVudl3iB7L02fhu97qhTWFq3IsiTacYLIp8u3MTjIdVMTsDCIeVoB2QOELo0BT0eo%2BposdUDYE3c286OlbEOtEyhi%2B2R07JM0fuFeU17fW50MDLCl5vu1tBDaaeHHEIGLWmGrCkGmeV5o8Ftq5gRNswn6%2B49AU67AFIO6wbpOn4syV%2Fhug5bJ%2Fv4tuMmGGEwXN%2FW7TL2PNzxR%2Bh%2BlB%2BPMkm06N4t%2Fs7ZbElqZxqZz3i2%2Brv2BlPkcLRXbY43saLMtXNvLVh1nzDfsXLC88wa1Bb0IZAD8bWNIg9kaP9GU4FD%2FcgpEWnP6apnVDf4NcX268aP9Cn%2FcJyrde46MVHoKdVujCDlcgmNrbCLKTa1YijzBxfUzYoqSsULblGCExoiEeCiJwEcFaQxPK9X8ZVAWq2l8R%2BlQIdfAefcdqWaUkGu79vVwQ0qrV95J3rN%2BM1orfsHKBR7cuvKeQIOOe2AtxDsm1FuA%3D%3D&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=904eb30b3d400616844158aba10b05631e15d16763c052c274ac43849adf0e11 Maruya] (2013), [https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.9b02867 Masoner et al.] (2019), and [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969718336465 Kiesling et al.] (2019). | *There is limited information on many of the newer chemicals, such as commercial-consumer compounds, veterinary and human pharmaceuticals, lifestyle and personal care compounds, and others. These chemicals, generically labeled as contaminants of emerging concern (CEC), have variable sources, including industry, sediment, and atmospheric deposition. For more information, see [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Richard_Kiesling/publication/326916617_Contaminants_of_emerging_concern_in_urban_stormwater_Spatiotemporal_patterns_and_removal_by_iron-enhanced_sand_filters_IESFs/links/5b85452192851c1e12372f0f/Contaminants-of-emerging-concern-in-urban-stormwater-Spatiotemporal-patterns-and-removal-by-iron-enhanced-sand-filters-IESFs.pdf Fairbairn et al.] (2018), [https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/45895946/An_adaptive_comprehensive_monitoring_str20160523-5773-8srpfw.pdf?response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DAn_Adaptive_Comprehensive_Monitoring_Str.pdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=ASIATUSBJ6BAPKX5XEDF%2F20200408%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20200408T195551Z&X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjENP%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEaCXVzLWVhc3QtMSJGMEQCIGSCyrrMYy%2BuVHdyQfJPgZjqxxFH5Rs1ctKGA2tQmHKsAiAhlXJZSRibwYsi8yZ2%2FsxXMLv47nl4uVZjgEVnKwAnZCq9Awjc%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F8BEAAaDDI1MDMxODgxMTIwMCIMgFAXNG4YnXqBODmoKpEDa3c1Z56IvbZSbxrH8zcWtbG1u072FjwEYCv%2FcqJtf5dI3DCCe5NBPE0v3VHAb%2BcFs9qpmkuPsNCnYWoHsNsanczc%2FnjW5b24lEEOFzBNaeZGF5Z3bJ0SsIBpUXT1%2FDZuqw%2B5PHtfF2Q1KsvWUBaRehz%2FKGkH74W4adiUFWE3hLXxF%2FbrUaUMRdS0GgY%2F3fU0scSMyInNZwIp%2F0kGBpn83nfRp0Y2MT2HDZSzGIla8%2FCDcRGMFJYP1mElttYs9ifnoFaRggTSmEGaGiTDQIswM0W9Tg7HBn207L11%2Fro09PcCX4UXxF6ZFa6I7RuqUqMzQQTs42Hjq46AzQtSZv1DubBFyTCo4VSWJMBx93nZXgNAu%2FwBwrds1Vdwn%2FGvZQxQznVudl3iB7L02fhu97qhTWFq3IsiTacYLIp8u3MTjIdVMTsDCIeVoB2QOELo0BT0eo%2BposdUDYE3c286OlbEOtEyhi%2B2R07JM0fuFeU17fW50MDLCl5vu1tBDaaeHHEIGLWmGrCkGmeV5o8Ftq5gRNswn6%2B49AU67AFIO6wbpOn4syV%2Fhug5bJ%2Fv4tuMmGGEwXN%2FW7TL2PNzxR%2Bh%2BlB%2BPMkm06N4t%2Fs7ZbElqZxqZz3i2%2Brv2BlPkcLRXbY43saLMtXNvLVh1nzDfsXLC88wa1Bb0IZAD8bWNIg9kaP9GU4FD%2FcgpEWnP6apnVDf4NcX268aP9Cn%2FcJyrde46MVHoKdVujCDlcgmNrbCLKTa1YijzBxfUzYoqSsULblGCExoiEeCiJwEcFaQxPK9X8ZVAWq2l8R%2BlQIdfAefcdqWaUkGu79vVwQ0qrV95J3rN%2BM1orfsHKBR7cuvKeQIOOe2AtxDsm1FuA%3D%3D&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=904eb30b3d400616844158aba10b05631e15d16763c052c274ac43849adf0e11 Maruya] (2013), [https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.9b02867 Masoner et al.] (2019), and [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969718336465 Kiesling et al.] (2019). | ||
− | |||
− | |||
{{:Curve numbers for antecedent mositure condition 2}} | {{:Curve numbers for antecedent mositure condition 2}} |
Because of the expense and difficulty of monitoring stormwater runoff, we often rely on published information to estimate pollutant loading associated with runoff. Models or other tools are often used to predict pollutant loading. These models and tools require information on the pollutant concentration in runoff. For example, the Simple Method, which is commonly used to estimate pollutant loading, utilizes the following equation
\(L = 0.227 P P_j R_v C A\)
where
This page provides a discussion of pollutant concentrations in stormwater runoff, including a review of literature and recommended values to use
The actual concentration of a pollutant in stormwater runoff varies with several factors, including but not limited to
In addition, the measured concentration varies with these factors and factors related to measurement, including but not limited to
This variability presents challenges in estimating pollutant loading, but having accurate estimates of pollutant concentrations is necessary to accurately calculate pollutant loading and reductions in loading associated with implementation of stormwater practices and to accurately select and design appropriate practices to treat runoff.
In the absence of monitoring data for a specific study or location, we often use event mean concentrations (emc). The emc represents the average pollutant concentration for a given stormwater event, expressed in units of mass per volume (e.g., mg/L). Given the number of factors affecting pollutant concentration, determining an appropriate emc is challenging.
Despite challenges in accurately determining emcs, they are widely used in stormwater applications. Emcs are used in many stormwater water quality models and calculations of pollutant loading. They are therefore fundamental to understanding pollutant loads and how to address reducing pollutant loads in stormwater runoff.
Emcs should represent the flow proportional concentration of a given pollutant parameter during storm events. The simplest way to calculate and emc is therefore to divide the total mass of a pollutant by the total runoff volume. Emcs can also be calculated as the sum, over multiple discrete time intervals within an event, of volume times the concentration for the time interval, divided by the total volume for the event
\( emc = (∫^t_0 C_tQ_td_t) / (∫^t_0 Q_td_t) ≅ (Σ C_tQ_tΔt) / (ΣQ_tΔt) \)
where Ct and Qt are the concentration and flow volume over a discrete time interval dt (Δt).
Erickson et al. provide detailed discussion and examples for calculating pollutant loading from stormwater runoff. The emc calculated for a specific event is a function of the sampling method. Erickson et al. discuss the following methods for sampling.
The sampling method affects the resulting calculation of emc. For example, in the adjacent image, emcs were calculated for the same runoff event. In the top portion of the image, sampling occurred every 30 minutes and the overall emc is 69.1 mg/L. In the lower portion of the image, the first two time intrvals were combined and Q and C averaged over the 60 minute time interval, while the remaining time intervals were 30 minutes each. The overall emc is 76.0 mg/L. The difference is a result of a bias toward higher concentrations in the early portion of the runoff event for the lower graph. This tendency toward higher pollutant concentrations in the early part of a runoff event is called the first flush.
Many factors affect the emc. The most important factors and how to address them are dicussed below.
First flush is a phenomenon in which pollutant concentrations in stormwater runoff are greater in the early portion of a runoff event. First flush is common for relatively uniform land use settings, for winter and early spring runoff events, and for runoff events during fall leaf-drop. During dry periods between runoff events, pollutants build-up on impermeable surfaces. For Type 2 rain events, initial rain intensity is low and increases through a storm before decreasing near the end of the storm. The initial runoff is therefore highly concentrated with pollutants that have accumulated on impermeable surfaces. As runoff volume increases during an event and pollutants become more resistant to being washed off, concentrations decrease and typically reach steady state. First flush is not universally applicable to stormwater runoff, however. For example, if higher pollutant buildup on impermeable surfaces occurs in upper portions of a watershed, as might occur in an area with variable land uses, the peak concentration may be delayed as those higher pollutant loads take time to reach a receiving point. Similarly, some pollutants may be resistant to transport in early stages of an event. In other situations, concentrations in runoff may be uniform throughout an event, particularly if rainfall intensities are uniform and pollutants are soluble (e.g. chloride). |
Because of the variability in emcs across different land uses, it is beneficial to consider different land uses when calculating pollutant loads. Compositing emcs across land uses is generally not recommended.
Some generalizations about pollutant loading as a function of land use include the following.
Curve numbers for antecedent moisture condition II (Source USDA-NRCS).
Link to this table
A | B | C | D | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Meadow - good condition | 30 | 58 | 72 | 78 |
Forest | ||||
Poor | 45 | 66 | 77 | 83 |
Fair | 36 | 60 | 73 | 79 |
Good | 30 | 55 | 70 | 77 |
Open space | ||||
Poor | 68 | 79 | 86 | 89 |
Fair | 49 | 69 | 79 | 84 |
Good | 39 | 61 | 74 | 80 |
Commercial 85% impervious | 89 | 92 | 94 | 95 |
Industrial 72% impervious | 81 | 88 | 91 | 93 |
Residential | ||||
1/8 acre lots (65% impervious) | 77 | 85 | 90 | 92 |
1/4 acre lots (38% impervious) | 61 | 75 | 83 | 87 |
1/2 acre lots (25% impervious) | 54 | 70 | 80 | 85 |
1 acre lots (20% impervious) | 51 | 68 | 79 | 84 |
Impervious areas | 98 | 98 | 98 | 98 |
Roads (including right of way) | ||||
Paved | 83 | 89 | 92 | 93 |
Gravel | 76 | 85 | 89 | 91 |
Dirt | 72 | 82 | 87 | 89 |
Row crops | ||||
Straight row - good | 67 | 78 | 85 | 89 |
Contoured row - good | 65 | 75 | 82 | 86 |
Pasture - good | 39 | 61 | 74 | 80 |
Open water | 99 | 99 | 99 | 99 |
As a result of our literature review we developed recommended emc values. These are summarized in the following table.
For phosphorus and total suspended solids, we developed a broader discussion of emcs. We suggest you read these sections if using emcs for your stormwater applications.
Data from the following studies was used to generate emcs for total phosphorus.
The following table summarizes results from our literature review. The table includes a range of values observed in the literature. Note this range does not represent a statistically-derived range but instead is based on a combination of data analysis and best professional judgement. For example, we did analyze the data for outliers, but also omitted entire studies if we felt the data were not representative of typical conditions likely to be encountered in Minnesota. To see the full range of values compiled from the literature, open the Excel spreadsheet containing the data.
Event mean concentrations for total phosphorus.
Link to this table
Land cover/land use | Range (mg/L) | Recommended value (mg/L) | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Commercial | 0.20 - 0.34 | 0.200 | If applicable to models being used, adjust curve numbers/runoff coefficients when calculating loads |
Industrial | 0.23 - 0.55 | 0.235 |
|
Residential | 0.26 - 0.38 | 0.325 | Concentrations vary widely depending on local conditions |
High-density/Multi-family residential | 0.28 - 0.40 | Calculate1 |
|
Medium density residential | 0.18 - 0.40 | Calculate1 |
|
Low density residential | 0.24 - 0.40 | Calculate1 |
|
Freeways/transportation | 0.25 - 0.45 | 0.280 |
|
Mixed | 0.16 - 0.84 | 0.290 |
|
Parks and recreation | Use value for open space or calculate |
|
|
Open space | 0.12 - 0.31 | 0.190 | |
Conventional roof | 0.01 - 0.20 | 0.030 | |
Institutional | 0.14 - 0.422 | See note |
|
Forest/shrub/grassland | 0.03 - 0.45 | 0.090 | Concentrations are likely to vary with season in areas with fall leaf drop |
Open water and wetlands | see Notes (next column) |
|
|
Cropland (row crops) | 0.126-1.348 | 2 | Median from our review = 0.533 |
Pasture | 0.35-0.45 | 2 |
1The link takes you to information on calculating event mean concentrations for areas with multiple land uses.
2Our literature review was not extensive enough to warrant a specific recommend emc for this land use
In many places in this manual and in the MIDS calculator, we assume that particulate phosphorus accounts for 55 percent of total phosphorus and dissolved phosphorus for 45 percent of total phosphorus.
Below are data we've compiled during our literature review.