Parameterization of EUSES Chemical Fate Model for Israel: EUSES-IL Ella Cohen-Hilaleh Mary Kloc June...

Parameterization of EUSES Chemical Fate Model for

Israel: EUSES-IL Ella Cohen-Hilaleh

Mary Kloc

June 2010

Project Outlines

• Introduction

• Model description – EUSES.

• Data collection.

• Findings – test case, sensitivity analysis.

• Conclusion.

Project outlines• Pollution of natural resources is a main concern of

the developing world.

• Pollution sources:Natural sources – fire, oil leak, saline springs…Man-made sources – industrial spills, agricultural fertilizers and pesticides, domestic sewage, transportation emissions…

Prediction of pollutant concentration in the environment is required.

Project outlines

• Purpose: Adjusting EUSES model to Israel for interface with Eco–Indicator.

• Method: Wide data collection, reprogramming of EUSES, test sample by comparison with local data of spills and residues monitoring, sensitivity analysis.

EUSES – a European model for steady state

pollutant distribution.

Introduction to Mass Balance Models

This represents one environmental compartment (either air, water, soil, etc.)at one spatial location.


Chemical, such as a pesticide, is emitted into thecompartment at a certain rate.


Chemical can move between different environmentalcompartments (e.g., from water to soil)


Chemical can move between different environmentalcompartments (e.g., from water to soil) and betweendifferent spatial compartments.


Chemical can also be formed and degraded throughreactions.


flow in flow out

Mass flow for the single compartment:


flow in flow out

Mass flow for the single compartment:

0=

Steady state approximation

Relevant Output• Concentration in the

compartment:

•Residence Time:

the average time the chemical spends in the box

Extension to Two Compartments

SimpleBox 2.0

• 3 nested spatial scales, each with a set of environmental compartments:

Example from SimpleBox model

Emitted into soil only


Moves between environmental compartments at various rates


Moves between spatial compartments at various rates


Degrades through reaction


Most of the chemical remains in thesoil compartment.

Parameterization for Israel

unchanged

Israel

Element from our partition

Input data to the model–

• Demographic data

• Geophysical data

• Chemical data

Sources:

Direct from literature – Scientific & Governmental sources.

Indirect - Estimations.

Will see some main informative figures..

CBS’ division of Israel -Districts, Sub-Districts and Natural Regimes, 20081


Population density - Israel 20081


Population density - Israel 20081

South - 14400 sk.km

Center – 1300 sk.km

Jerusalem

– 650 sk.km

North – 4600 sk.km

Israel – 22,000 sk.km

Tel Aviv

– 170 sk.km

Hifa – 860 sk.km

Land use distribution in Israel by district2

Yearly rain average map (1990-1961)6

Drainage basins of Israel4,5


Stream flow (MCM) 3Drainage basins of Israel4,5


Cziv - 0.6 Gaaton - 0

Bezet – 0.15

Sorek – 0.5

Taninim - 25

Zipory - 2

Kishon – 0.5

Alexander - 0.5

Yarkon – 3.5

Hadera - 0

Snir (hazbany)- 45

Einan - 0

Dan - 190 Hermon

(Banyas) - 70

Dishon - 0

Amud – 1.5 Zalmon – 0.5

Yavniel - 1Southern

Yarden - 20Tavor - 1

Harodb - 6

Naaman - 15

Soil map of Israel7

Runoff coefficients were estimated according to:

• Soil type

• Land use

Rational Equation Q=ciA

Q = Peak discharge [L3 /T]c = Rational method runoff coefficienti = Rainfall intensity [L/T]A = Drainage area, [L2 [

Runoff determination11

Soil Erosion in literature

)ton/km^2/ year(

Converted Soil Erosion

)mm/year(

Hilly areas under vines9142.80.102

Wheat areas9 17.60.013

Olives90.80.001

Shrubland96.70.005

Yatir 105000.357

Assuming bulk density of 1.4 g/cm3

Conversion via bulk density:

Sandy soils – 1.2-1.8 g/cm3

Fine-textured soils– 1-1.6 g/cm3

Soil erosion degree8

Soil Erosion in literature

)ton/km^2/ year(

Converted Soil Erosion

)mm/year(

Hilly areas under vines9142.80.102

Wheat areas9 17.60.013

Olives90.80.001

Shrubland96.70.005

Yatir 105000.357

Assuming bulk density of 1.4 g/cm3.

Conversion via bulk density:

Sandy soils – 1.2-1.8 g/cm3

Fine-textured soils– 1-1.6 g/cm3

Soil erosion degree8

Color index for soil erosion rate

(Estimated)

soil erosion

(mm/year)Color

0.05green

0.1brown

0.2red

0.05light

green

0.1pink

0.2purple

0.1dark

yellow

0.2yellow

0.3blue

built up areagrey

0.2

Golan, Negev

and Yehuda desert

0.3Wadi

0.2other

Water table12

Minimum Water Table in Israel

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

Locations

wa

ter

tab

le -

he

igh

t a

bo

ve s

ea

leve

l (m

)

Large variation over time – so minimum water tables were taken:

Coastal aquifer

Yarkon-Taninim aquifer

Western Galilee

Test sample – Pesticides in Lake Kinneret

Comparison of EUSES-IL prediction to measured concentration

in the main water compartment.

Input: Estimated amounts that are released to the environment each year, from documented purchase-lists.

Test sample – Pesticides in Lake Kinneret

Comparison of EUSES-IL prediction to measured concentration

in the main water compartment.

Input: Estimated amounts that are released to the environment each year, from documented purchase-lists.

Pesticide use comparison for 1996, 1997 and The Agricultural Extension Service recommendations (SHAHAM) between different crops13:

Pesticide actual application for different crops

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Field crops Deciduous Subtropic Total

Crop

Am

ou

nt

(Kg

-l/d

u)

The Agricultural ExtensionService

1996

1997

No significant differences between crops, years and professional recommendations.

Pesticides bought in 1997

012345678

Active material

Am

ou

nt

us

ed

(to

n/y

ea

r)

4.44

0.93

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Active material

Am

ou

nt

us

ed (

ton

/ye

ar)

0.03

Active material

Commercial nameChemical classGroup

EndosulfanThionexOrganochlorineInsecticide & Acaricide

DiazinonDiazolOrganophosphateInsecticide & Acaricide

AtrazineAtranex TriazineHerbicide

Endosulfan Diazinon Atrazine

Tested chemicals

Pesticide residue concentration (ppb) in lake Kinneret water14

Monitoring data -

Results of Testing

Endosulfan

Diazinon

Atrazine

Comparison with EUSES and measured values

1.E-14

1.E-13

1.E-12

1.E-11

1.E-10

1.E-09

1.E-08

1.E-07

1.E-06


Lo

g C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

in A

ir

EUSES Result

Our Result

Measured


0.93 ton/year0.03 ton/year 4.44 ton/year

Sensitivity Analysis

Sensitivity analysis: Temperature

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

1

Pe

rce

nt

Ch

an

ge

Ours, 0.5x

EUSES, 0.5x

Ours, 2x

EUSES, 2x

Sensitivity analysis

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

123456

Parameter

Pe

rce

nt

Ch

an

ge

Ours, 0.5x

EUSES, 0.5x

Ours, 2x

EUSES, 2xTemperatureWind speedRain RateRiver FlowSea AreaArea Fraction

AgriculturalSoil

Our model is more dependent on geographical information than EUSES.• We divide the regions using mostly geographical data• We also consider the geographical locations of different soil types,

water types, etc., within each region.• Geographical parameters are not distributed throughout large regions

as in EUSES, but are very region-specific.Most other non-geographical parameters had similar sensitivities between models.•Except wind speed (?)

Chemical properties of tested chemicals

Molecular weight and Vapor Pressure

407

304

216

0.001

0.008

0.000040

100

200

300

400

500


PesticideM

w (

m/m

ole

))

0.000

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.010

Pv

ap

25

(P

a)

MW

Pvap25

Water solubility and Octanol-Water partition coefficient

0.08

60

30

3500

1995

562

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Pesticide

Wat

er

solu

bili

ty

(mg

/l)

05001000150020002500300035004000

Ko

w

Solubility inwater

Kow


Degredation constants in different media

1.E-08

1.E-07

1.E-06

1.E-05

1.E-04


Pesticide

kd

eg

(1

/s)kdeg(air)

kdeg(water)

kdeg(sed)

kdeg(soil)


Chemical properties of tested chemicals

Conclusion

EUSES-IL is a significantly improved model compared to EUSES.

Possible future improvements:• Incorporate more accurate chemical

equations into the model.• More specific information is required for

optimizing results (chemical use, geophysical data).

• Find more measured data for testing and optimizing the model.

References1. Central Bureau of Statistics - Statistical Abstract of Israel 2008 - No.59 .2. Statistical Abstract of Israel 2009-No.60, Table 1.2.3. Perlmutter M. Springs and streams in Israel 2008 - report of the SPNI (1), according to Hydrological Service data.4. Israel Hydrological service. 5. Website of Moto Track: http://www.mototracks.co.il/thematics.htm 6. Gvirtzman, H. 2002. Israel Water Resources, Chapters in Hydrology and Environmental Sciences, Yad Ben-Zvi

Press, Jerusalem, 301 p.7. Ministry of Agriculture – Agricultural research organization & soil conservation and drainage department - 1975. 8. Soil Survey, Ministry of Agriculture, Soil Conservation unit, 1954 9. Kosmasa C et al. The effect of land use on runoff and soil erosion rates under Mediterranean

conditions(1997) Catena, 29 (1), pp. 45-59.10. Laronne J., Lekach J., Cohen H., Alexandrov Y. Experimental Drainage Basins in Israel: Rainfall, Runoff,

Suspended Sediment and Bedload Monitoring American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2002, abstract #H51B-0824.

11. Website of Mountain Empire Community College – Big Stone Gap, Virginia: http://water.me.vccs.edu/courses/CIV246/table2_print.htm

12. Hydrological Representative Date - February 2010, Israel Water Authority, Israel Hydrological Service: elyon1.court.gov.il/heb/mayim/Hodaot/hs_01.pdf

13. Bar-Ilan I., Melman G. Survey of pesticides use in the Northern drainage basin of Lake Kinneret (1998) MIGAL - Galilee Technology Center. Kiryat-Shmona, Israel.

14. Zohary T. et al. Kinneret research and monitoring – lab work report for 2008 (T 9/2009) ) Kinneret Limnonological Laboratory, Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research.

15. Kawamoto K, MacLeod M, Mackay D. Evaluation and comparison of multimedia mass balance models of chemical fate: application of EUSES and ChemCAN to 68 chemicals in Japan. Chemosphere 44 (2001) 599-612.

16. Brandes LJ, den Hollander H, van de Meant D. SimpleBox 2.0: a nested multimedia fate model for evaluating the environmental fate of chemicals. RIVM report no. 719101029, Netherlands.

http://www.mototracks.co.il/thematics.htm

Thank you!!

Parameterization for Israel Units

EUSES Default CIsrael C

Land Areakm2352000021000

Sea Areakm23520000590

Area Fraction Fresh Water 0.030.029

Area Fraction Natural Soil 0.270.76

Area Fraction Agricultural Soil 0.60.18

Area Fraction Other Soil 0.10.052

Average Temperature◦C1220

Average Wind Speedm/s34.5

Rain Ratemm/yr700500

Depth of Fresh Waterm33

River Flow between continent and region 0.0340.02

Runoff Fraction 0.250.25

Infiltration Fraction 0.250.25

Soil Erosionmm/yr0.030.03

Parameterization of EUSES Chemical Fate Model for Israel: EUSES-IL Ella Cohen-Hilaleh Mary Kloc June...

Documents

Transcript of Parameterization of EUSES Chemical Fate Model for Israel: EUSES-IL Ella Cohen-Hilaleh Mary Kloc June...