Daniel Moore Mathew Taylor

17
NATURAL BACKGROUND TOPSOIL ARSENIC CONCENTRATIONS AND SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR APPLYING SGVs (HEALTH) Daniel Moore Mathew Taylor Ministry for the Environment Environment Waikato

description

NATURAL BACKGROUND TOPSOIL ARSENIC CONCENTRATIONS AND SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR APPLYING SGVs (HEALTH). Daniel Moore Mathew Taylor Ministry for the Environment Environment Waikato. Introduction. Acknowledgements - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Daniel Moore Mathew Taylor

Page 1: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

NATURAL BACKGROUND TOPSOIL ARSENIC CONCENTRATIONS

AND SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR APPLYING SGVs(HEALTH)

Daniel Moore Mathew Taylor

Ministry for the Environment Environment Waikato

Page 2: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Introduction

• Acknowledgements

• Policy : toxicological vs. natural

• Limited published arsenic data

• Regional council data request

Page 3: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Timber Treatment Guidelines 1997

“The nominated criterion should not be less than a reasonable background concentration of arsenic. In this regard a value of, say, 30 mg/kg may be appropriate (Spier, 1997) notes that typically background concentrations of arsenic in New Zealand soils range from 2 to 30 mg/kg)”

Page 4: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Arsenic dataset

• Collate existing data

• Sample density, variability, confidence

• Identification of data limitations

• Assess key drivers of landscape-scale

variation

Page 5: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Regional data summary Region Total Number of

SamplesNumber of Background

SamplesSampling Depth

(cm)No of cores per sample

Auckland 96 96 0-15 4

CD Auckland 40 0 0-7.5 10

CD Tasman 25 0 0-7.5 10

Marlborough 14 0 0-7.5 25

Marlborough 46 6 0-10 15

CD Waikato 44 7 0-7.5 10

Waikato 267 32 0-10 4

Hawke’s Bay 22 22 0-10 ?

Hawke’s Bay 4 4 0-15 ?

Wellington 110 25 0-10 20

URS Wellington 59 55 0-15 4

Canterbury 90 73 0-15 4

Bay of Plenty 98 17 0-10 50

NZ wide Longhurst et. al., (2004) 398 86 0-2.5 and 2.5-7.5 16

Page 6: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Data analysis

• Data quality

• Standardised land use

• Standardised soil type

• Data desk

• Pooled t-test

Page 7: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 8: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 9: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 10: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 11: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 12: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 13: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 14: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor
Page 15: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Data limitations

• Variation in the sampling and

analysis methodology

• Poor land use classification

• Representative Background data

• Variation due to soil type

• The effect of soil bulk density

Page 16: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Conclusions

• Bush, indigenous forest, native = background

• National As average 6.0 mg/kg

• Background As average 4.5 mg/kg

• Cropping, horticulture and urban land uses higher

concentrations than background.

• Waikato region statistical significance

Page 17: Daniel Moore                                      Mathew Taylor

Upcoming

• Cadmium

• Publish SGV comparisons

• Data email: [email protected]

• Questions?