TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia...
Transcript of TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia...
1
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
Water Quality TeamPortland Oregon, December 9, 2005
Mike SchneiderCE-ERDC-EL
2
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Compilation of TDG data – Bonneville Dam to Wauna Mill (RM 42-146)– Parameters
• TDG, Temp, DO• Flows (Bonneville and tributaries)• Stage• Channel configuration
– Date Sources - COE• Fixed monitoring stations
– BON, CCIW, WRNO, SKAW, CWMW, KLAW, WANO– 1990-2005 hourly frequency
• Research Studies– DGAS program – 3 pool studies– Evaluation of CWMW station– 2002 TDG production in Spill post-deflector– 1999 TDG production in Spill– 2005 KLAW & WANO (2 weeks)
3
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• TDG properties and processes– Bonneville TDG loading
• Spill• B2CC• Powerhouse releases• Auxiliary flows
– Mixing Zone • Extends through the Ives/Pierce Islands reach
– Well mixed open river– Exchange air/water (degassing)
» Wind induced– Temperature– Biological productivity– Tributary inputs
4
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Bonneville Operations– Historical perspective
• 1938 2 units online producing power• 1943 completion of 1st Powerhouse (136 kcfs capacity)• 1957 The Dalles Dam completed• 1976 “flip lips” on 13 of 18 spill bay• 1982 completion of 2nd Powerhouse ( 152 kcfs capacity)• 1984 Revelstroke Dam completed• 1995 spill for fish passage policy adopted• 2002 redesigned “flip lips” added to bays 1-3, 16-18• 2004 Bonneville 2nd powerhouse corner collected operational
5
Columbia River Average Annual Flow and Spill at Bonneville Dam, 1938-2005
0
50
100
150
200
250
30019
38
1940
1942
1944
1946
1948
1950
1952
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
Year
Flow
(kcf
s)
Flow (kcfs) Spill (kcfs)
Mica Dam
Revelstoke Dam
Figure xx Average annual Columbia River Flow and spill at Bonneville Dam 1938-2005
Bonneville2nd PH
AdditionalFlow Deflectors
InvoluntarySpill for fish
Flow DeflectorsBonneville1st PH
Average
6
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Seasonal Bonneville Operations– Involuntary spill April-August
• TDG capacity 115%/120%/125% at tailwater station and Camas/Washougal
– Spring Creek Spill in March– B2CC operation only with spill– Involuntary spill December-July
7Monthly summary of days with spill greater than 10 kcfs at Bonneville Dam from 1990-2005
8
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Tributary Flows– Willamette, Cowlitz, Lewis, Kalama, Sandy, Washougal– Flow Contribution
• 20-22 percent during the summer• 35-41 percent during the winter
– TDG Contribution• Willamette Falls (as high as 120%)• Little TDG data• 4 percent reduction in CR TDG pressure for the following
– TDGBON=120%– TDGtrib=100%– Qtrib/Qcr=0.20
9The Columbia River Tidal Pool Reach below Bonneville Dam
Ives IslandI-205 Bridge
Multnomah Falls
Willamette River
Washougal River
Sandy River
Lewis River
Kalama River
Cowlitz River
Bonneville Dam
SKAW
WANO LOPW
SHNO
VANW
BON
Stage gages
Water quality gages
SKAW
CWMW
CCIW
Depth Basedon CRD
WRNO
KLAW
WAUO
10
Lower Columbia River Average Monthly Flow (kcfs) 1993-2005
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Month
Flow
(kcf
s)
WillametteSandyLewisCowlitzBon
40.4 35.232.9
28.6
23.8
41.6
22.0
20.2
21.1
24.3
34.9
27.2
Figure xx Lower Columbia River Average Monthly Flow Composition, 1993-2005(Percent contribution from tributaries noted on this figure)
11
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Columbia River Stage– Bonneville Tailwater function of total river flow
• 15 kcfs change ~ 1 ft stage change• Ives Island area responds similarly• Wide range of tailwater elevations (8-36 ft)• Habitat Influences
– Stranding– Depth Compensation for TDG exposure– Water and Temperature exchange
• TDG exchange– Deflector submergence– Available aerated depth
– Tidal influence on river stage increases with decreasing flow and distance from Bonneville Dam
12
13Stage @ ~153 kcfs (weekly avg)
Stag
e (fe
et, N
GVD
)
Tota
l Riv
er D
isch
arge
(kcf
s)
14Stage @ ~313 kcfs (weekly avg)
Stag
e (fe
et, N
GVD
)
Tota
l Riv
er D
isch
arge
(kcf
s)
15
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Columbia River Channel– Channel in the Gorge (rm 122-146)
• Shallow and wide• Narrow and deep• Average depth 24-34 ft at low flow• Channel Width ranges from 900-6200 ft
16Ives Island rm 142
17Multinomah Falls rm 135
18Sand Island rm 130
19Camas/Washougal rm 122
20
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• TDG Saturation– Bonneville Dam Spillway
• 2002 Spillway flow deflectors at El. 7 added bays 1-3, 16-18• Flow deflectors at Bays 4-15 at El. 14 ft• TDG function of specific spillway discharge and tailwater channel
depth• Non-uniform TDG pressures exiting spillway channel at spill > 120
kcfs• Spillway capacity as limited by tailwater fixed monitoring station
CCIW is 150-160 kcfs• Spill capacity can be limited by the 115% criteria measured at the
CWMW fixed monitoring station
21
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Specific Discharge (kcfs/bay)
Tota
l Dis
solv
ed G
as S
atur
atio
n (%
)
1999 Bays 2,3, 16, 172002 Bays 1-3,16-18
Figure 28. Total dissolved gas saturation as a function of specific spill discharge in the Bonneville spillway exit channel. (1999 – No deflectors, 2002 - El. 7 ft deflectors)
22
y = 0.1241x + 106.04R2 = 0.9388
y = 0.105x + 106.84R2 = 0.9536
y = 0.058x + 111.2R2 = 0.8864
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Spillway Discharge (kcfs)
TDG
Sat
urat
ion
(%)
ps-maxBONTWP1ps-avgLinear (ps-max)Linear (ps-avg)Linear (BONTWP1)
Total Dissolved Gas Saturation in the Bonneville spillway exit channel as a function of spillway discharge, April 10-June 5, 2002 (ps-max maximum cross sectional, ps-avg average cross sectional, BONTWP1-Bradford Island station)
23
PH 230 kcfs
120%
135%
130%
125%
Flow duration for Columbia River at Bonneville Dam, Oregon 1 April through 31 August
24
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• TDG Saturation– Voluntary spill
• TDG levels range from 110-120 %– Forced spill
• TDG levels range from 120-130% – TDG Decreases with distance from Bonneville
• Lose from 2-3% by CWMW rm 122• Rate of loss is a function of magnitude of TDG at Bonneville
– First order exchange• Wind events can increase degassing• Temperature induced TDG variation• Biological Productivity DO induced TDG variation
25
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• TDG Saturation– Lateral TDG variation outside mixing zone is small– Temporal and spatial TDG variability is greatest just below the
dam– Day / Night Spill policy generates fronts of elevated TDG
saturation that propagate downstream– TDG content of powerhouse release mimic forebay TDG levels
26
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
12/1/96 12/21/96
1/10/97 1/30/97 2/19/97 3/11/97 3/31/97 4/20/97 5/10/97 5/30/97 6/19/97 7/9/97 7/29/97 8/18/97 9/7/97 9/27/97
TDG
Sat
urat
ion
(%)
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Flow
(kcf
s)
wanoklawcwmwskawwrnobonQtotalQsp
27
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
3/11/97 3/31/97 4/20/97 5/10/97
TDG
Sat
urat
ion
(%)
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Flow
(kcf
s)
wanoklawcwmwskawwrnobonQtotalQsp
28
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
2/24/98 3/16/98 4/5/98 4/25/98 5/15/98 6/4/98 6/24/98 7/14/98 8/3/98 8/23/98 9/12/98
TDG
Sat
urat
ion
(%)
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Flow
(kcf
s)
wanoklawcwmwskawwrnobonQtotalQsp
29
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
4/5/98 4/25/98 5/15/98 6/4/98
TDG
Sat
urat
ion
(%)
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Flow
(kcf
s)
wanoklawcwmwskawwrnobonQtotalQsp
30
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
River Mile
TDG
Pre
ssur
e (m
m H
g)
199719941995199619982005
Columbia River Mile 42-145 Monthly Average TDG Saturation for June 1994-2005
31
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
River Mile
TDG
Pre
ssur
e (m
m H
g)
septAugJulyJuneMayApril
Columbia River Mile 42-145 average monthly TDG saturation for 1998
32
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
River Mile
TDG
Pre
ssur
e (m
m H
g) AugJulyMayAprilJuneseptMarch
Columbia River Mile 42-145 average monthly TDG saturation for 1997
33
y = 0.7987x + 20.838R2 = 0.9309
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
100 105 110 115 120 125 130
TDG Saturation at CWMW (%)
TDG
Sat
urat
ion
at K
LAW
(%)
Monthly Average TDG Saturation at CWMW vs KLAW
34
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Water Temperature – Gas Laws
• 1 C change in Temperature can cause a 2-3% change in TDG pressure– Temperature of CR does respond to daily thermal inputs
– Daily temperature range can be 2-3 C
– Water Temperature change is small from Bonneville to Wauna Mill (monthly trends)
– Tributary temperatures were not reviewed
35
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
6/8 6/9 6/10 6/11 6/12 6/13 6/14 6/15 6/16 6/17 6/18 6/19 6/20 6/21 6/22
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
Flow
(kcf
s)
CWP3 CWP4 CWP6B CWP6M CWP6S BON
CORBETT CWP1 CWP2 Qspill Qtotal
36
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
River Mile
Wat
er T
empe
ratu
re (F
)
MarAprMayJuneJulyAugustSept
Columbia River Mile 42-145 monthly average temperatures from March-September 2005
37
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Dissolved Oxygen – Gas Laws
• 1 mg/l change in DO can cause a 2% change in TDG pressure– Typical daily DO variation is from 0.4-0.8 mg/l– DO content in spill is under represented compared to atmospheric
ratios
38
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
6/8 6/9 6/10 6/11 6/12 6/13 6/14 6/15 6/16 6/17 6/18 6/19 6/20 6/21 6/22
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n C
once
ntra
tion
(mg/
l
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
Flow
(kcf
s)
CWP3 CWP6M G49 CR46 CCWP6B CORBETT Qtotal Qspill
39
40
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• TDG Habitat – Depth Compensation
• TDG pressure = Total Pressure=Patm+Phydrostatic• Substrate below compensation depth is protected
– Shallow habitat is at greater risk• Compare percent habitat exposed to supersaturated conditions
– 115 % saturation = 5 ft of depth – CR near CWMW 21% river is above depth of compensation– CR upstream Bon 8% river isl above depth of compensation
– TDG Hazard Delineation• Channel configuration• River stage• TDG pressure• Map of substrate dewatered, above depth of compensation, below depth of
compensation
41Camas/Washougal rm 122
42TDG hazard map for TDG=115% near Camas/Washougal Blue-below CD Yellow-dewatered Red-above CD
43
TDG Characterization of the Lower Columbia River
• Conclusions
• Recommendations– Develop better understanding of TDG management in critical
habitat areas• Powerhouse 2 versus 1 operation• Spill pattern modification to generate less TDG• Water stage, Bathymetry, TDG interaction