1 / 19

Impact of the High Park Fire on Water Quality in the Fort Collins Area

Impact of the High Park Fire on Water Quality in the Fort Collins Area. Cristina Tillberry Summer REU 2013 8/8/13. A study in conjunction with Dr. Fernando Rosario-Ortiz, Kaelin Cawley , and Amanda Hohner. High Park Fire. 87, 284 acres 1 fatality 259 homes destroyed

yardan
Download Presentation

Impact of the High Park Fire on Water Quality in the Fort Collins Area

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. Impact of the High Park Fire on Water Quality in the Fort Collins Area Cristina Tillberry Summer REU 2013 8/8/13 A study in conjunction with Dr. Fernando Rosario-Ortiz, KaelinCawley, and Amanda Hohner

  2. High Park Fire 87, 284 acres 1 fatality 259 homes destroyed Burned June 9 to July 1, 2012 Figure: Study area showing burned area and location of proposed sampling locations on the Poudre River

  3. Cache La Poudre Watershed • Poudre River is the main source of drinking water for three major water districts, including Fort Collins, CO • Drinking water intake facility is within burn area • Sampling river water at three different test sites • Control site upstream of burn area • Burn area downstream • Water intake facility in burn area Figure: Filters from control site water sample (left) and burn area site water sample (right)

  4. Motivation • Determine how wild fires affect water quality and drinking water treatment • Characterize dissolved organic matter (DOM) in water • DOM may hinder the treatment facility to efficiently treat the water • Analyze similarities and differences in data between before coagulation and after coagulation samples

  5. What did we do? • Surface water samples were collected from three sites on the Poudre River and filtered • Reference site • Impacted – upstream • Impacted – downstream (water intake facility) • Used different techniques to gather data from samples • Size Exclusion Chromatography • UV-Visible Spectroscopy • Fluorescence Spectroscopy / Excitation and Emission Matrices • Coagulated samples to compare data from before and after

  6. SEC: Size Exclusion Chromatography • Physically separates compounds based on size • Measures hydrodynamic volume, not actual molecular weight • Uses porous particles to separate different sized molecules in the sample • Particles that are smaller than the pores in the column will enter the pores • longer path and longer transit time Figure: Diagram describing process of size exclusion chromatography

  7. UV-Visible Spectroscopy • Measures the absorbance from a sample • Light is shined onto the cuvette • light absorbance for the sample is compared to the light absorbance of the water blank • UV-Vis data used to correct EEMs data Figure: UV-Vis spectroscopy diagram

  8. Fluorescence Spectroscopy • A technique that measures the emission of radiation by a material that has been excited • Once the output is determined, a fluorescence spectrum can be created • From spectrum, fluorescence index (FI) can be used to determine type of DOM in the water • Higher FI: more microbial input • Lower FI: more terrestrial input • Also referred to as excitation and emission matrices (EEMs) Figure: Fluorescence spectroscopy diagram

  9. Coagulation Coagulant added to water to settle impurities Clear water at top is removed and filtered Figure: Coagulant added to water to remove impurities

  10. Results - SEC Ran SEC samples before and after coagulation DOM: dissolved organic matter JT: jar test Figure: SEC data for control site and water intake facility in burn area before (DOM) and after (JT) coagulation

  11. Results - SEC PBR: control site PNF: water intake facility in burn area Date: 130401 (April 1, 2013) Mw: Weight average molecular weight A: absorbance M: molecular weight Table: MW data for control site and water intake facility in burn area before (DOM) and after (JT) coagulation

  12. Results - Molecular Weight Snow melt Snow melt Figure: MW data for control site and water intake facility in burn area before (DOM) and after (JT) coagulation

  13. Results - Fluorescence Excitation and Emission Matrix (EEMs) data Color: intensity Contour lines: peaks Figure: EEMs data for control site before (DOM) and after (JT) coagulation

  14. Results - Fluorescence Higher FI: more microbial input Lower FI: more terrestrial input Table: Fluorescence Index for before (DOM) and after (JT) coagulation samples

  15. Conclusions • Molecular weight • Increased after snow melt for control site • Decreased after snow melt for impacted water intake facility • Intensity of radiation emission wavelengths decreased after coagulation • According to EEMs contour plots • More terrestrial input before coagulation • Coagulants removed most of terrestrial matter • Microbial input is more evident when terrestrial input is removed

  16. What’s next? • Collecting storm samples • Determine differences between storm run off and snow melt • Determine differences between summer and winter samples • Determine if more or less terrestrial input in water • More shrubs growing back in burn area • Stop terrestrial input

  17. Sampling is fun! Gathering water samples from the Poudre River

  18. References [1] Rosario-Ortiz, F. & Summers, R.S. (2013). The impact of the high park fire on the source water quality for utilities in fort collins area: Cache la poudre river watershed. (University of Colorado). [2] Coble, P. G. (1996). Fluorescence contouring analysis of doc intercalibration experiment samples: a comparison of techniques. (University of Washington). [3] International Humic Substances Society. (2007, December). What are humic substances?. Retrieved from http://www.humicsubstances.org/whatarehs.html [4] Iowa State University of Science and Technology. (2008). High performance liquid chromatography (hplc) . Retrieved from http://www.protein.iastate.edu/hplc.html [5] Tissue, B. M. (2000). Size exclusion chromatography (sec). Retrieved from http://www.files.chem.vt.edu/chem-ed/sep/lc/size-exc.html [6] Gullapalli, S. (2010, June 26). Optical characterization of group 12-16 (ii-vi) semiconductor nanoparticles by fluorescence spectroscopy. Retrieved from http://cnx.org/content/m34656/1.1/ [7] Williams, M., McKnight, D., Simone, B., Cory, R., Miller, M., Gabor, R., Hood, E. (2011). PARAFAC workshop spring 2011. (University of Colorado). [8] Maie, N., Watanabe, A., Kimura, M. (2004). Chemical characteristics and potential source of fulvic acids leached from the plow layer of paddy soil. (Nagoya University). [9] Reusch, W. (2013). UV-Visible Spectroscopy. Retrieved from http://www2.chemistry.msu.edu/faculty/reusch/VirtTxtJml/Spectrpy/UV-Vis/uvspec.htm#uv1 [10] Kauffman, J.M. (2005).Water fluoridation: A review of recent research and actions. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 10(2): 38-44. Retrieved from http://www.usaus-h2o.org/modules/treatment-and-distribution/

  19. Questions?

More Related