Predicting Effects of Point Source Controls on Escambia Bay using CMAQ and Watershed Models

Predicting Effects of Point Source Controls on Escambia Bayusing CMAQ and Watershed ModelsbyJo Ellen Brandmeyer, Steve Beaulieu, Randy Dodd, and Michele CutrofelloRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USAJustin T. Walters and John J. JansenSouthern Company, Birmingham, AL, USA Krish VijayaraghavanAtmospheric & Environmental Research, Inc., San Ramon, CA, USA

Presented at the 6th Annual CMAS ConferenceChapel Hill, NC, October 1-3, 2007

OverviewBackground of the studyDescription of modeling domainsDescription of modelsChallenges of multimedia modeling studiesResults and conclusions

Background of the StudyCrist Power Plant located on Escambia River, which flows into Escambia BayBay has ecological problems, including eutrophicationAdditional emission controls are planned for power plantExpects to reduce emissions by 8,600 tpy NOx and 37,000 tpy SO2What is potential reduction in nitrogen load to Escambia Bay from these additional controls?

Multimedia Modeling RequiredNeed to calculate a change in nitrogen loading to Escambia Bay due to a change in emissions from one facilityEmissions are in airEffects of interest are in surface waterNitrogen chemistry is nonlinear in both air and surface water MM5 CMAQ ???

Air Quality Modeling DomainSubdomain of the 1212-km Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS) modeling domain for the southeast US centered on Alabama and Georgia (i.e., the ALGA domain) Calendar year 2002

Watershed Modeling DomainBased on 8-digit hydrologic unitsEight HUCs in modeling domainFive completely in Escambia Bay drainage areaTwo completely in non-Escambia Bay drainage areaOne split between drainage areasEach HUC simulated independentlyWater exiting one HUC routed through downstream HUCs to Bay

Air Quality Model ConfigurationsCMAQ-VISTASBased on CMAQ v4.5.1 with VISTAS-developed modifications to the secondary aerosol module. Does not include coarse sea-salt/HNO3 chemistryCMAQ-MADRIDBased on CMAQ v4.5.1 with EPRI-sponsored improvements including an improved aerosol module, organic chemistry, and sea-salt/HNO3 chemistryCMAQ-MADRID-APTBased on CMAQ-MADRID including advanced plume treatment (plume-in-grid).Included about 40 large power plants, including Crist, as PinG sources.

Additional PresentationsSession 5, Tuesday 11:30 A.M. Modeling of Atmospheric Nitrogen Deposition to the Escambia Bay and Watershed in the Southeastern United StatesKrish Vijayaraghavan, Rochelle T. Balmori, Shu-Yun Chen, Prakash Karamchandani and Christian SeigneurAtmospheric & Environmental Research, Inc.Justin T. Walters and John J. JansenSouthern CompanyEladio M. KnippingElectric Power Research InstituteSession 8, Wednesday 2:30 P.M. Comparative Model Performance Evaluation of CMAQ-VISTAS, CMAQ-MADRID, and CMAQ-MADRID-APT for a Nitrogen Deposition Assessment of the Escambia Bay, Florida WatershedJay L. Haney, Sharon G. Douglas, Tom C. MyersICF InternationalJustin T. Walters, John J. JansenSouthern CompanyKrish VijayaraghavanAtmospheric & Environmental Research, Inc.

Watershed Model ConfigurationsParameters based on land useScreening-level modelExport Coefficient Method (ECM) based on EPAs Pollutant Loading Model (PLOAD)Annual time stepIntermediate-level modelRegional Nutrient Management (ReNuMa) from Cornell UniversityModified for daily depositionRequires calibration

Watershed Model CalibrationAdjusts model parameters to fit model output to monitoring data Fine tune model to study areaEnsure that the model reacts as expected to watershed characteristicsFit hydrology (flow) and nitrogen output2002 Flow from National Water Information System (NWIS) and local precipitation data (MM5 output was inadequate)Adjust flow-related parameters in the model (e.g., recession coefficient, seepage coefficient, land use curve numbers)Water quality data from STORET (EPA and FL-DEP)FLUX model from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for in-stream flux from sample data and flow records

Other Input DataLand use from National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) grouped from 29 categories to 13 general categoriesExport coefficients by land use category from literature reviewMany more parameters including:Septic systemsPoint sources (direct discharge to surface water) from National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitsSoil characteristics by land use and watershedRate of nitrogen from fertilizer applicationErosivity coefficientsRecession coefficient (proportion of groundwater added to stream within a watershed)

Challenges of Multimedia Modeling StudiesSpatial representationGrid cells vs. land use and watershed combinationCreated spatial factorsPrecipitation data for watershed model calibrationTemporal scaleHourly vs. daily or annualGMT vs. local timeChemical speciesChemical mechanism vs. total nitrogenCommunicating results

Sample of Study Results

Total NitrogenCMAQ-VISTASReNuMa watershed modelwith additional controls

Contributions of Source Types by Watershed

ReNuMa Results

HUCyearcalendar yearTotal Dry Atmos DepoTotal Wet Atmos DepoTotal Atmos DepoTotal Atmos Depo FluxPoint SourcesOther Nitrogen InputsTotal NitrogenTotal Atmos DepoTotal Nonpoint SourceTotal Point SourceSeptember Particle Nitrogen LoadDecember Particulate Load

(at start)(kg)(kg)(kg)(kg/ha)(kg)(kg)(kg)(kg)(kg)(kg)

0314010312002149591982880323247226.6082115441170440113721918937411310094204137516

031401041200295189052681914787106.69620490189376925958631615213086144

03140105_PB120023563881495725059596.43060153907502943531663124320175824

03140105_EB_RO120026194429153910976.7411041763918931070152507022959

0314030112002100806760788616159537.56350112280372126815998751865351027267

031403021200275065045238912030407.7753096618811314000720111123500024139

0314030312002121666573027219469377.17901357617414837601138311195344056245232483

0314030412002110974370252518122696.9401796561096709512020961560148862915769749336

031403051200289355255344014469917.1428670685682104133313110612091028249689164183

Direct Deposition:CQSOA_C

Escambia Bay6.2074946207

Other Bays5.2634553704

Escambia WS

Watershed Characteristics (Table X)

HUCWatershed Area (m2)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Flux (kg/ha/yr)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Mass (kg/yr)Average Flow 2002 (m3/s) at Outlet of HUCLong Term Mean Annaul Flow (m3/s) at Outlet of HUCDecay Coefficient (day-1)Distance to outlet (km) [from NHDPlus]Velocity Estimate Based on Jobson Method (m/s)Overall Time of Travel (d)

0314030121365089757.56161595340.6656.40.118156.80.424.4

0314030215472617597.78120304017.2824.30.118212.20.356.9

0314030327119987017.18194693736.648.00.118156.80.424.3

0314030426112998066.941812269111.3154.20.11883.30.501.9

No instream loss:

0314030520258147947.141446991141.4190.70.11800.520.0

03140105_EB_RO1351367396.7491097

Direct Deposition736184516.2145699

ReNuMa - Atmospheric Deposition

HUCTotal Export - Atmospheric Deposition (kg N/yr)Instream Loss 1Instream Loss 2Instream Loss 3Final N Mass per HUC (kg/yr)Final Flux from HUC (kg/ha/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (kg/yr)Total Flux to Bay (kg/ha/yr)Transfer Rate (%)Percent of HUC Contributions to Total Bay LoadTotal Load to Bay - Export Coeff

03140301998757843062358623580.294118950.4515.11227015

0314030272011600174713137473374730.249.1622111

031403031138318955071199711990.2617.3818867

031403041560141240431240430.4830.1874589

No instream loss:

031403051061201061200.5225.81066091

03140105_EB_RO10701107010.792.663208

ReNuMa - Non-Point Source Runoff

HUCTotal Export - NPS (kg N/yr)Instream Loss 1Instream Loss 2Instream Loss 3Final N Mass per HUC (kg/yr)Final Flux from HUC (kg/ha/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (kg/yr)Total Flux to Bay (kg/ha/yr)Transfer Rate (%)Percent of HUC Contributions to Total Bay Load

0314030118653511464830116465611646565.4541644233.75128.0

0314030211235009363767353215846395846393.7814.0

0314030311953449403697476687476682.7618.0

031403048862917046727046722.7016.9

No instream loss:

031403059102829102824.4921.9

03140105_EB_RO52507525073.891.3

ReNuMa - Point SourceSee "PCS_Processed_Data.xls"

HUCTotal Export - Point Discharge (kg N/yr)Instream Loss 1Instream Loss 2Instream Loss 3Final N Mass per HUC (kg/yr)Final Flux from HUC (kg/ha/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (kg/yr)

0314030100000.0095563

03140302000000.00

0314030300000.00

031403045769745874458740.18

No instream loss:

0314030549689496890.25

03140105_EB_RO000.00

Direct Discharge EB24339243393.31

do not change DD EBRO Point Source

Non-Escambia WS

Watershed Characteristics (Table X)

HUCWatershed Area (m2)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Flux (kg/ha/yr)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Mass (kg/yr)Average Flow 2002 (m3/s) at Outlet of HUCLong Term Mean Annaul Flow (m3/s) at Outlet of HUCDecay Coefficient (day-1)Distance to outlet (km) [from NHDPlus]Velocity Estimate Based on Jobson Method (m/s)Overall Time of Travel (d)

0314010335179175306.6232472281.375.89.30.540.2

0314010422082835526.7147871049.748.22.20.490.1

03140105_PB7867949126.4505959


ReNuMa - Atmospheric

HUCTotal Export - Atmospheric Deposition (kg N/yr)Final N Mass per HUC (kg/yr)Final Flux from HUC (kg/ha/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (kg/yr)Total Flux to Bay (kg/ha/yr)Transfer Rate (%)Percent of HUC Contributions to Total Bay LoadTotal Load to Bay - Export Coeff

0314010389374893740.252011710.3544.41224587

0314010458631586310.2729.1673844

03140105_PB53166531660.6826.4365598

ReNuMa - NPS

HUCTotal Export - NPS (kg N/yr)Final N Mass per HUC (kg/yr)Final Flux from HUC (kg/ha/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (kg/yr)Total Flux to Bay (kg/ha/yr)Transfer Rate (%)Percent of HUC Contributions to Total Bay Load

03140103113100911310093.2120586543.24854.9

031401046152136152132.7929.9

03140105_PB3124323124323.9715.2

ReNuMa - Point SourcesSee "PCS_Processed_Data.xls"

HUCTotal Export - Point Discharge (kg N/yr)Final N Mass per HUC (kg/yr)Final Flux from HUC (kg/ha/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (kg/yr)

03140103420442040.014204

03140104000.00

03140105_PB000.00

Direct - Other2414142414146.25

Do Not Change PB Direct Point Source

Entire WS

HUCWatershed Area (m2)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Flux (kg/ha/yr)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Mass (kg/yr)

0314030121365089757.561615953

0314030215472617597.781203040

0314030327119987017.181946937

0314030426112998066.941812269

No instream loss:

0314030520258147947.141446991

03140105_EB_RO1351367396.7491097

0314010335179175306.612324722

0314010422082835526.701478710

03140105_PB7867949126.43505959


Export Coefficient Method

HUCFinal N Mass per HUC - AD (kg/yr)Final N Mass per HUC - NPS (kg/yr)Final N Mass per HUC - Point Discharge (kg/yr)Final N Mass per HUC (kg/yr)Final Flux from HUC (kg/ha/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (kg/yr)Total Flux to Bay (kg/ha/yr)Transfer Rate (%)Percent of HUC Contributions to Total Bay Load

03140301623581164656012270155.7470059474.05617.5

031403023747358463906221114.028.9

031403037119974766808188673.0211.7

03140304124043704672458748745893.3512.5

031403051061209102824968910660915.2615.2

03140105_EB_RO10701525070632084.680.9

Direct Discharges EB456992433970038

4.18avg. land flux

03140103893741131009420412245873.4817.5

031401045863161521306738443.059.6

03140105_PB5316631243203655984.655.2

Direct Discharges Other203190.637972302241414444605

3.48avg. land flux

Totals861955622307736552074505523.96

EB Only45759341644231199024741918

PB Only404361.63797230220586542456182708633.6379723

Entire WS (tons)

HUCWatershed Area (acres)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Flux (tons/acre/yr)Modeled Atmospheric Deposition Mass (tons/yr)

031403015279310.00341781

031403023823280.00351326

031403036701350.00322146

031403046452520.00311997

No instream loss:

031403055005790.00321595

03140105_EB_RO333920.0030100

031401038692770.00292562

031401045456670.00301630

03140105_PB1944170.0029558


Export Coefficient Method

HUCFinal N Mass per HUC - AD (tons/yr)Final N Mass per HUC - Other (tons/yr)Final N Mass per HUC - Point Loads (tons/yr)Final N Mass per HUC (tons/yr)Final Flux from HUC (tons/acre/yr)Total N Mass to Bay (tons/yr)Total Flux to Bay (tons/acre/yr)Transfer Rate (%)Percent of HUC Contributions to Total Bay Load

03140301691283013520.002677210.00185617.5

031403024164406860.00188.9

031403037882409020.001311.7

03140304137777519640.001512.5

0314030511710035511750.002315.2

03140105_EB_RO12580700.00210.9

Direct Discharges EB50027770.0000

0.0019

03140103981246513490.001617.5

031401046567807430.00149.6

03140105_PB5934404030.00215.2

Direct Discharges Other224266490

0.0016

Totals9506858403821117.67

No Direct Depo67668581107643

No Direct Depo - EB45445891055148

No Direct Depo - PB222226952495

Atmospheric Results

Atmospheric Deposition Flux (kg/ha/yr)1Atmospheric Deposition Rate (kg/yr)Mass Transport from the Watershed (kg/yr)2Instream Mass Losses (kg/yr)Mass Load to the Bay (kg/yr)3Percent Reaching the Bay (transfer rate)Mass Retained by the WatershedMass Load to the Bay - no Direct DepositionIndirect Atmospheric DepositionPercent Exported From the Watershedcheck

Escambia Bay Watershedscheck

HUC 031403017.561,615,95399,87537,51762,3583.86623581,516,0781,615,9536.214.3

HUC 031403027.781,203,04072,01134,53837,4733.11374731,131,0291,203,0406.013.7

HUC 031403037.181,946,937113,83142,63271,1993.66711991,833,1061,946,9375.813.1

HUC 031403046.941,812,269156,01431,971124,0436.841240431,656,2551,812,2698.613.7

HUC 031403057.141,446,991106,1200106,1207.331061201,340,8711,446,9917.317.4

HUC 03140105_EB_RO6.7491,09710,701010,70111.751070180,39691,09711.727.1

Escambia Bay Waterbody6.2145,699NANA45,699100.00

Totals for Escambia BayNA8,161,986558,552146,657457,5935.614575937,603,434411,8958,116,287

Non-Escambia Bay Watersheds

HUC 031401036.62,324,72289,374089,3743.842,235,3482,324,7223.814.9

HUC 031401046.71,478,71058,631058,6313.971,420,0791,478,7104.014.6

HUC 03140105_PB6.4505,95953,166053,16610.51452,793505,95910.523.5

Other Bay Waterbodies45.3203,191NANA203,191100.00

Totals for Non-Escambia BayNA4,512,582201,1710404,3628.964,311,411201,1714,309,391

Totals for All of Pensacola BayNA12,674,567759,723146,657861,9556.8011,914,844613,06612,425,678

1. Based on modeled deposition flux predicted by CMAQ 4.5.1 with SOA modifications

2. Calculated by ReNuMa

3. Calculated after accounting for first order losses instream (from USGS SPARROW model) using time-of-travel stream characteristics from 2002

flow data and NHDPlus

4. Other Bay Waterbodies include East Bay, Blackwater Bay, Pensacola Bay, and Santa Rosa Sound

Totals for the bays include direct deposition loads to the water surface as well as indirect loads from the watersheds.

Conversions0.001102 tons/kg

2.471 acres/ha

Atmospheric Deposition Flux (tons/acre/yr)1Atmospheric Deposition Rate (tons/yr)Mass Transport from the Watershed (tons/yr)2Instream Mass Losses (tons/yr)Mass Load to the Bay (tons/yr)3Percent Reaching the Bay (transfer rate)Mass Retained by the WatershedMass Load to the Bay - no Direct DepositionIndirect Atmospheric DepositonPercent Exported From the Watershed

Escambia Bay Watersheds

HUC 031403010.00341,78111041693.871,6711,7816.2

HUC 031403020.00351,3267938413.091,2471,3266.0

HUC 031403030.00322,14612547783.632,0212,1465.8

HUC 031403040.00311,997172351376.861,8251,9978.6

HUC 031403050.00321,59511701177.341,4781,5957.3

HUC 03140105_EB_RO0.00301001201212.008810011.7

Escambia Bay Waterbody0.002850NANA50100

Totals for Escambia BayNA8,9956151615045.604548,3304548,944


HUC 031401030.00292,562980983.832,4642,5623.8

HUC 031401040.00301,630650653.991,5651,6304.0

HUC 03140105_PB0.00295585905910.5749955810.5

Other Bay Waterbodies40.0023224NANA224100

Totals for Non-Escambia BayNA4,97422204468.972224,5282224,749

Totals for All of Pensacola BayNA13,9698371619506.8012,85867613,693

1. Based on modeled deposition flux predicted by CMAQ 4.5.1 with SOA modifications


3. Calculated after accounting for first order losses instream (from USGS SPARROW model) using time-of-travel stream characteristics from 2002

flow data and NHDPlus

4. Other Bay Waterbodies include East Bay, Blackwater Bay, Pensacola Bay, and Santa Rosa Sound

Totals for the bays include direct deposition loads to the water surface as well as indirect loads from the watersheds.

"Other" Results

Non-Point SourcesPoint Discharges

Mass Transport from the Watershed (kg/yr)1Instream Mass Losses (kg/yr)Mass Load to the Bay (kg/yr)2Point Discharge Rate (kg/yr)3Point Discharge After Denitrification Losses (kg/yr)Instream Mass Losses (kg/yr)Mass Load to the Bay (kg/yr)2


HUC 031403011,865,351700,6951,164,6560000

HUC 031403021,123,500538,861584,6390000

HUC 031403031,195,344447,676747,6680000

HUC 03140304886,291181,619704,67279,65657,69711,82345,874

HUC 03140305910,2820910,28267,06849,689049,689

HUC 03140105_EB_RO52,507052,5070000

Escambia Bay Waterbody4NANANA24,33924,339024,339

Totals for Escambia Bay6,033,2751,868,8524,164,423171,063131,72511,823119,902


HUC 031401031,131,00901,131,00911,5444,20404,204

HUC 03140104615,2130615,2130000

HUC 03140105_PB312,4320312,4320000

Other Bay Waterbodies5NANANA241,414241,4140241,414

Totals for Non-Escambia Bay2,058,65402,058,654252,958245,6180245,618

Totals for All of Pensacola Bay8,091,9291,868,8526,223,077424,021377,34311,823365,520


2. Calculated after accounting for first order losses instream using time-of-travel stream characteristics from 2002 flow data and

the NHDPlus; Does not include direct deposition to the bay

3. Calculated using data mined from EPA's Permit Compliance System; Nitrogen and flow measurements recorded for 2002 were used.

4. Point discharges that flow directly into Escambia Bay are included as direct sources. Non-point sources from the lands

surrounding the bay are included in HUC 03140105_EB_RO totals.

5. Other Bay Waterbodies include East Bay, Blackwater Bay, Pensacola Bay, and Santa Rosa Sound. Point discharges that flow directly into these

bay waters are included as direct sources.

Non-Point SourcesPoint Discharges

Mass Transport from the Watershed (tons/yr)1Instream Mass Losses (tons/yr)Mass Load to the Bay (tons/yr)2Discharge Rate (tons/yr)3Point Discharge After Denitrification Losses (tons/yr)Instream Mass Losses (tons/yr)Mass Load to the Bay (tons/yr)2


HUC 031403012,0567721,2830000

HUC 031403021,2385946440000

HUC 031403031,3174938240000

HUC 0314030497720077788641351Total Load Checks

HUC 031403051,00301,0037455055

HUC 03140105_EB_RO580580000NPS & PD:w/ Atmos

Escambia Bay Waterbody4NANANA2727027allno directallno direct

Totals for Escambia Bay6,6492,0594,589189146131334,7224,6955,2265,149

Non-Escambia Bay Watershedscheck5,226

HUC 031401031,24601,24613505

HUC 0314010467806780000

HUC 03140105_PB34403440000NPS & PD:w/ Atmos

Other Bay Waterbodies5NANANA2662660266allno directallno direct

Totals for Non-Escambia Bay2,26802,26827927102712,5392,2732,9852,495

Totals for All of Pensacola Bay8,9172,0596,85746841713404

1. Calculated by ReNuMasum8,2117,644

2. Calculated after accounting for first order losses instream using time-of-travel stream characteristics from 2002 flow data andcheck8,211

the NHDPlus; Does not include direct deposition to the bay

3. Calculated using data mined from EPA's Permit Compliance System; Nitrogen and flow measurements recorded for 2002 were used.

4. Point discharges that flow directly into Escambia Bay are included as direct sources. Non-point sources from the lands

surrounding the bay are included in HUC 03140105_EB_RO totals.

5. Other Bay Waterbodies include East Bay, Blackwater Bay, Pensacola Bay, and Santa Rosa Sound. Point discharges that flow directly into these

bay waters are included as direct sources.

Combined Results

Percent Atmospheric DepositionPercent Non-Point SourcesPercent Point DischargesTotal Load From All Sources Reaching the Bay (kg/yr)Check


HUC 031403015.194.901,227,015100.0

HUC 031403026.094.00622,111100.0

HUC 031403038.791.30818,867100.0

HUC 0314030414.280.65.2874,589100.0

HUC 0314030510.085.44.71,066,091100.0

HUC 03140105_EB_RO16.983.10.063,208100.0

Escambia Bay Waterbody65.2NA34.870,038100.0

Totals for Escambia Bay9.687.82.54,741,918100.0


HUC 031401037.392.40.31,224,587100.0

HUC 031401048.791.30673,844100.0

HUC 03140105_PB14.585.50365,598100.0

Other Bay Waterbodies45.7NA54.3444,605100.0

Totals for Non-Escambia Bay14.976.09.12,708,634100.0

Totals for All of Pensacola Bay11.683.54.97,450,552100.0

Percent Atmospheric DepositionPercent Non-Point SourcesPercent Point DischargesTotal Load From All Sources Reaching the Bay (tons/yr)


HUC 031403015.194.90.01,352

HUC 031403026.094.00.0686

HUC 031403038.791.30.0902

HUC 0314030414.280.65.2964

HUC 0314030510.085.44.71,175

HUC 03140105_EB_RO16.983.10.070

Escambia Bay Waterbody65.2NA34.877

Totals for Escambia Bay9.687.82.55,226


HUC 031401037.392.40.31,349

HUC 031401048.791.30.0743

HUC 03140105_PB14.585.50.0403

Other Bay Waterbodies45.7NA54.3490

Totals for Non-Escambia Bay14.976.09.12,985

Totals for All of Pensacola Bay11.683.54.98,211

Majority NPS

September Non-Point Source Transport from Watershed (kg/month)Percent of Total Non-Point Load Transport

Escambia Bay WatershedsThis worksheet tracks the loads from September 2002.

HUC 0314030127,2671During this month there was record precipitation according

HUC 0314030224,1392to the NCDC gages used as weather inputs to the ReNuMa

HUC 0314030356,2455model.

HUC 0314030449,3366

HUC 03140305164,18318Because of this record rainfall and the way ReNuMa uses

HUC 03140105_EB_RO22,95944weather input, there are very high non-point source runoff in

Non-Escambia Bay Watershedsthe form of particulate nitrogen during this month. Often, the

HUC 03140103137,51612runoff in this month plays a significant role in the non-point

HUC 0314010486,14414source totals for nitrogen for the year for the watershed.

HUC 03140105_PB175,82456

This table was made for this reason. It highlights the fact

that the much higher non-point source loads are due to storm

September Non-Point Source Transport from Watershed (tons/month)Percent of Total Non-Point Load Transportrunoff from a specific storm (Hurricane Isidore).


HUC 03140301301

HUC 03140302272

HUC 03140303625

HUC 03140304546

HUC 0314030518118

HUC 03140105_EB_RO2544


HUC 0314010315212

HUC 031401049514

HUC 03140105_PB19456

Mass Tracking

8944.1482748330615161504

4748.94888245282220446

13693.09715612858837161950

Indirect Atmospheric Deposition

Retained by Watershed

Transport from Watershed

Instream Losses

Net Load to Bay (Direct + Indirect)

Mass Rate (tons/yr)

Contributions_EB

68.71880703141283.45126823280

41.2947656504644.2719752290

78.4617286823.92983028880

136.6959314842776.548090626950.5528039717

116.944241003.13076454.757278

11.79250257.8627140

50.35987247026.821578

Atmospheric Deposition

Non-Point Sources

Point Discharges

Mass Loading Rate (tons/yr)

Contributions_Other

98.4901481246.3719184.632808

64.611362677.9647260

58.588932344.3000640

223.9160830455Direct Discharges Other266.038228

Atmospheric Deposition

Non-Point Sources

Point Discharges

Mass Loading Rate (tons/yr)

LandUsePercents

LULand Use DescriptionPercentage of Land Area Per Land Use by HUC

031401030314010403140105_PB03140105_EB_RO0314030103140302031403030314030403140305PassThrough

11Open Water1.00.71.32.31.20.60.40.60.80.9

21Developed, Open Space6.16.215.522.64.23.93.73.05.50.2

22Developed, Low Intensity0.90.711.411.10.60.30.40.51.40.3

23Developed, Medium Intensity0.20.24.42.50.20.10.10.10.30.4

24Developed, High Intensity0.10.12.00.90.10.00.00.00.10.5

30Barren0.30.25.43.70.00.00.10.40.50.8

40Forest51.356.725.019.560.258.463.562.735.90.1

52Scrub/Shrub11.58.47.22.511.312.211.111.510.50.15

71Grassland/Herbaceous3.44.66.04.50.10.10.11.03.80.15

81Pasture/Hay10.72.90.73.59.910.810.17.46.20.2

82Crop4.99.60.40.64.94.82.84.717.50.3

90Woody Wetlands9.39.517.615.97.38.87.57.716.50.1

95Emergent Herbaceous Wetland0.40.33.110.40.20.20.20.31.10.7

Forest + Woody Wetland + Grassland + Scrub/Shrub75.579.155.842.478.879.482.282.966.7

Approximate Pass Through Rate14.914.623.527.114.313.713.113.717.4

nhd Parameters

HUCCOMIDGRID_CODESTREAMLEVESTREAMORDEFROMNODETONODEHYDROSEQLEVELPATHIPATHLENGTHTERMINALPACUMDRAINAGMAFLOWUMAFLOWVMAVELUMAVELVINCRFLOWUMAXELEVRAWMINELEVRAWMAXELEVSMOMINELEVSMOSLOPE

0314010389799916020431681262016708126201783812620006981262000049.31481262000043485.42676.32265.81.71.74.9-9998.00.20.20.20.00000

0314010479399615999331681268009738126800975812680000981268000012.18781268000012234.81700.31588.71.61.66.8-9998.00.01.20.00.00038

0314030123787611638871158475501252847470070484755000018290200031156.78482902000313683.71992.52006.01.61.61.9-9998.025.926.625.90.00023

0314030223788751638928248475501320847550132684755002428475500240212.23882902000311554.4858.2855.71.41.40.8-9998.051.251.851.80.00000

0314030324027071640323258475101375847470070484751000018475100001156.78482902000312713.91693.71594.51.51.52.2-9998.025.826.525.90.00023

031403042418508164224616847470181284747018168474700010829020003183.32182902000319008.65446.65241.42.02.00.1-9998.011.016.716.70.00000

03140305448560159808916829020089282902008228290200094829020003119.221829020003110761.36732.76377.82.12.11.2-9998.03.35.55.50.00000

m3/s flow

0314010375.7914322848

0314010448.1521507792

0314030156.4284201472

0314030224.3030807216

0314030347.9666570448

03140304154.2463036464

03140305190.6690051152

HUCCOMIDDistance to outlet (km) [from NHDPlus]Velocity Estimate Based on Jobson Method (m/s)Overall Time of Travel (d)

031403012378761156.80.41534.4

031403022378875212.20.35476.9

031403032402707156.80.63072.9

03140304241850883.30.49611.9

0314030544856019.20.51850.4

Overall Loadings to Escambia Bay

Nitrogen Deposited, Retained, and Transferred Within the System

Sample of Study Results

CMAQ-VISTASReNuMa watershed modelDifference due to additional controls

Results of Implementing ControlsReNuMa predicts a smaller decrease in load due to controls compared to the ECM Reductions for the Escambia Bay WS and Non-Escambia Bay WS similar between the models Higher transfer rate for Non-Escambia Bay system (~18%) compared to Escambia Bay system (~13%)* Change in Mass to Bay is due only to change in Atmospheric Deposition load to the bay for the ECM but due to both Atmospheric Deposition and Non-Point Source load changes for ReNuMa

Transfer Rates Due to Controls

As you add text, the rectangle's height increases. Vary the width by stretching a side.

Transfer Rates for Change in Atmospheric LoadEscambia Bay12%Non-Escambia Bay17%Pensacola Bay14%

Conclusions and RecommendationsThis study demonstrated how cross-media modeling can simulate impacts from air emission changes on water quality. By using the one-atmosphere approach of CMAQ combined with watershed models and routing between watersheds, fate and transport across media can be examined.The methods developed here are transferable to other locations, but the results are not directly applicable. The study was constrained by using a single year of meteorology. Abnormal precipitation (e.g., tropical systems) can have significant effects on watershed modeling results. All efforts such as this project will benefit greatly from additional, site-specific data, both atmospheric and watershed.

we had a different set of species for MADRID (and MADRID-APT) than for the VISTAS configurations of CMAQ Reductions for the Escambia Bay WS and Non-Escambia Bay WS similar between the models ~15-16 tpy with ECM; ~11.5 tpy with ReNuMaSimilar decrease in both systems, yet input to Escambia Bay almost double the input to Non-Escambia Bay system

Predicting Effects of Point Source Controls on Escambia Bay using CMAQ and Watershed Models

Documents

Transcript of Predicting Effects of Point Source Controls on Escambia Bay using CMAQ and Watershed Models