1 / 24

HydroQual Capabilities for Pathways Analysis in Support of Natural Resource Damage Assessment

HydroQual Capabilities for Pathways Analysis in Support of Natural Resource Damage Assessment. Why Consider Models for Pathways Analysis?. Models link the sources with observed body burdens in organisms Models can add value to data by extending spatial and temporal coverage

cuthbert
Download Presentation

HydroQual Capabilities for Pathways Analysis in Support of Natural Resource Damage Assessment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HydroQual Capabilities for Pathways Analysis in Support of Natural Resource Damage Assessment

  2. Why Consider Models for Pathways Analysis? • Models link the sources with observed body burdens in organisms • Models can add value to data by extending spatial and temporal coverage • Models have predictive capabilities - what will the future of the resource be after remedial action?

  3. Pathways Analysis Model Components

  4. Noted HydroQual Model Component Experts • Hydrodynamic Transport – Nicholas Kim • Organic Carbon Production – James Fitzpatrick • Chemical Fate and Transport – Robin Landeck Miller • Biotic Ligand Model – Robert Santore • Food Chain/Bioaccumulation – Kevin Farley • Toxicity Prediction – Joy McGrath

  5. Hydrodynamic Transport • Rivers, lakes, streams, estuaries, coastal ocean, embayments in 1-D, 2-D, or 3-D • Landside loadings and atmospheric exchanges and fluxes • Several model codes (ECOM, EFDC, RRMP, SWMM) • Accounts for physical movement of the water and dissolved and particulate substances

  6. Selected Hydrodynamic Circulation Studies

  7. Sediment Transport • Directly linked to hydrodynamic model results • Can be used to support contaminant fate and transport with “foc” approach • Addresses both cohesive and non-cohesive sediment types • ECOMSED and GLERL codes • Provides vertical phase transport terms for particulate contaminants (settling, burial, resuspension)

  8. Organic Carbon Production • Directly linked to hydrodynamic model results • May also be linked to sediment transport model results • A refinement over “foc” approaches (particularly for low molecular weight PCB homologs) • RCA code • Provides direct calculation of the phase to which hydrophobic organic contaminants partition with independent checks

  9. Selected Eutrophication Studies

  10. Contaminant Fate and Transport • Directly linked to hydrodynamic transport and organic carbon production model results • Multiple pollutant types (HOC’s, metals, methyl mercury) • Can be modified to support relevant processes (volatilization, photolysis, dechlorination, phase partitioning) • WASTOX, GISTOX, RCATOX codes • Provides for the movement and transformation of dissolved and particulate phases of contaminants

  11. Selected Toxic/Chemical Fate Modeling Housatonic River & NY/NJ Harbor recently completed

  12. The Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) • Uses standard chemical parameters as inputs (pH, DOC, alkalinity, cations, anions) • Can predict metal toxicity to aquatic organisms • BLM predictions can be used to assess potential risk due to environmental metal concentrations • Can be used to look at spatial, temporal trends in a water body or region

  13. H+ Ca+2 Na+ Gill Surface (biotic ligand) Competing Cations Organic Ligand Complexes Free Free Metal Binding Site M - DOC Metal ion Metal ion M+2 M+2 Inorganic Ligand Complexes M OH+ M CO3+ M Cl+ Generalized BLM Framework

  14. ) t 40 p p ( 30 y t i n 20 i l a S 10 0 10 ) L / g 8 m ( 6 C 4 O D 2 0 10 9 8 H p 7 6 5 4 10 PREDICTED AVERAGE AND RANGE 8 R 6 E W 4 2 BAY-WIDE 0 WER = 1.7 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 Distance from Golden Gate Bridge (miles) (Data: S.San Francisco Bay RMP, 1993 - 1996) San Francisco Bay Case Study

  15. BLM Application Status • Applied to Cu, Ag, Zn • Cd, Ni, Pb under development • No Al or Cr • Acute toxicity, aqueous exposures • Mostly freshwater

  16. Where BLM is Heading • Chronic Exposures • Multiple routes of exposure (i.e., particulate metals) • Multiple metals • Include sediment pore water effects in addition to SEM:AVS

  17. Toxicity Prediction • Answer the question, “What level of a contaminant causes an effect?” • Difficult because bioavailability varies over a wide range of contaminant concentrations • Approaches developed: Equilibrium partitioning SEM:AVS Narcosis theory/target lipid model • Has led to sediment quality criteria

  18. Selected Ecological Risk Evaluations

  19. Equilibrium Partitioning (EqP) • Sediment concentrations normalized to correct for varying bioavailability. • Published by EPA ORD as “Sediment Quality Benchmarks” (2000) • - Nonionic Organics (EPA-822-R-00-001, -002) • - Dieldrin, Endrin (EPA-822-R-00-003, -004) • - Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn and Ag as mixtures • (EPA-822-R-00-005) • - Total PAHs as mixtures

  20. Pore Water Normalization

  21. PAH Criteria • Narcotics • Based on Universal Narcosis Slope • Toxicity is Additive • Lipid Based Body Burden

  22. Predicted Toxicity for Single PAHs and PAH Mixtures in Sediments

  23. Contact Information Further information on HydroQual’s Natural Resource Damage Assessment services may be obtained from: Robin Landeck Miller HydroQual, Inc. 1200 MacArthur Boulevard Mahwah, New Jersey 07430 201-529-5151 ext. 7119 rmiller@hydroqual.com

More Related