choose clean water 060414
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Stormwater TrendsClean Water Optimiazation Tool
David J. HirschmanProgram Director
Virginia [email protected]
We Work Here….. National non-profit 501(c)3 organization 21 staff Offices in MD, VA, NY, PA
• Distill research into practical tools• Provide local watershed services• Train others to manage watersheds
What we do
BMP
V
Stormwater News & Gazette:Late Breaking Headlines!
Job Duties: Counting Runoff Volume & Pollutant Loads
Want Ads:Needed Immediately: Stormwater Accountants
Stormwater Goes Quantitative
MS4 Wasteload Allocations – TMDLs
Pollutant Removal Rates for BMPs
“Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.”-Albert Einstein
Stormwater part of obesity epidemic
Diet Prescribed –
Volume Must Be Reduced!
Runoff Reduction ProcessesRunoff Reduction is not just infiltration!
InfiltrationCanopy Interception EvaporationTranspiration Rainwater Harvesting Extended Filtration
Center for Watershed Protection
State (and many local) Stormwater Performance Standards & Manuals are Changing*D.C. – 1.2” on-site retentionDE – retain “resource protection event” (2.7”)WV MS4 – retain runoff from 1” rainfallMD – on-site retention using Environmental
Site DesignCoastal GA – reduce runoff from 1.2” stormWI – Infiltration standardsOthers?
*Replacing previous “treat & release” & 80% TSS standards
Stormwater Style Goes Retro
New Wardrope
Prescribed for Old
Streets, Parking
Lots
New BMPs vs. Retrofits (Shenandoah Valley MS4sAverage Cost-Effectiveness ($ per pound of
Phosphorus Removed)New Retrofits = $56,000Retrofits/Conversions of Existing BMPs =
$24,000 (some ½ of this)
Sports: Contractors Roll Over Inspectors in BMP Installation Bowl
Inspectors Fail to Show Up During Critical Match-Up
Drainage Area Stabilized?
Installed too early during construction; fouled with
construction sediment
Inlet blocked temporarily during bioretention installation
Make Sure Water Gets In!
Inlets blocked or small elevation change diverts flow
from inlet
Inlets unimpeded with pretreatment stone strip or inlet
channel
Style: Stormwater BMPs Go Shaggy
Is Clean-Cut A Thing of the Past?
Finance: Investors Rush to Purchase Stormwater Credits
Will This Bubble
Burst?
Stormwater/Pollutant Trading$
Pollutant Reduction
s
Source: nrcs.usda.gov
Impact
Mitigation
Perceived Impacts/Benefits
Not Everyone Thinks It’s a Great Idea!
D.C. (up and coming)MN – Capital Regional Watershed DistrictCity of Fredericksburg, VA (policy stage)Chesapeake BayNeuse River, NCMD Critical AreasMaine sensitive lakes
Some Existing Off-Site Compliance/Trading Programs
Clean Water Optimization Tool for Maryland’s Eastern Shore
funded by Town Creek Foundation
Clean Water Optimization ToolOverview
The Center for Watershed, Inc. is developing a Clean Water Optimization Tool.
• Municipalities can develop the lowest cost implementation strategy possible to meet the Chesapeake Bay TMDL and other local water quality goals
• Use defaults from the EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office and override options
• Develop strategies to optimize by cost, pollutant, or user defined value
Clean Water Optimization ToolOverview
• Pilot areas on the Eastern Shore are Wicomico Co., Talbot Co., Kent Co., and Queen Anne’s Co.– Case studies
• Robust communications strategy will guide widespread dissemination and help increase the credibility of the Bay restoration effort
• Disseminate the Clean Water Optimization Tool– Website, newspaper, emails, etc.
Clean Water Optimization ToolBackground and Importance of This Work
Cost for meeting WIP Targets are all over the place
Source: MDE Nutrient Allocation Files (CBP Model 5.3.2.), MDE prepared 2010 Progress MAST loading decks, and the Core Planning Team Loading Decks
Urban Sector Bar Graphs Representing TN and TP Loads for 2010 Progress, 2017 Interim Strategy and Target, and 2025 Final Strategy and Target.
Clean Water Optimization ToolBackground and Importance of This Work
Innovative BMPs can substantially reduce costsAnnual cost to remove equivalent annual TN
load The cost-effectiveness of stormwater controls for nitrogen removal.
Practice Type of practice Equivalent Annual cost ($/lb N/IC1 ac)
Bag filter Structural $691
Bioretention (new, suburban) Structural $335-$6342,3
Wet pond (new) Structural $7334
Street sweeping Non-structural $1655
1 Based practice life expectancy of 10-years. 2 Costs for other practices based on King and Hagen (2011) over a 20-year period and an urban loading rate of 14.1 lb TN/acre. 3 Range represents a removal efficiency of 45% and 85% from Simpson and Weammert 2009. 4 20% removal efficiency for TN from Simpson and Weammert 20095 Berretta et al. 2011 expressed as lb N/year
Illicit discharge elimination is a cost effective approach to nutrient management
Common sense housekeeping practices can be extremely cost effective also
36 Urban Practices:• Pavement/Impervious Cover• Rooftop• Bioretention• Filtering/Infiltration• Channels• Ponds/Wetlands• Conservation/Enhancement• Land Use Change• Social/Programmatic
•Also Includes cross-sector trading and user-defined options
Clean Water Optimization ToolCost
BMPs
Clean Water Optimization ToolCost
Cost Components• Initial Costs - design, construction, land costs
• Operation and Maintenance – annual routine maintenance, intermittent maintenance, county implementation cost (inspection and enforcement)
• Annualized life cycle costs are estimated as the annual bond payment required to finance the initial cost of the BMP (20-year bond at 3%) plus average annual routine and intermittent maintenance costs.
Clean Water Optimization ToolCost
User-Adjusted Values
User-Adjusted Input DefaultLand Cost per Developable Acre $100,000 % Project Acres Developable 50%# Years to Project Cost Estimate Over 20County-Specific Cost Adjustment 0.97
Clean Water Optimization ToolCost
• Additional BMP Benefits should be quantified:– Public Health/ Safety– Public Education– Recreation– Neighborhood Beautification– Urban Heat Island – Carbon Footprint– Wildlife Habitat– Stream Habitat– Flood Control
Clean Water Optimization ToolResearch – Pollutant Load and BMP effectiveness
BMP Effectiveness Component
– Structural practices based on Chesapeake Bay Program Expert Panel Recommendations
– Land use changes
– Programmatic practices are based on various sources• IDDE Expert Panel• Watershed Treatment Model (WTM)• Previous CWP publications, research, and experience
Clean Water Optimization ToolSteps to Use the Tool
• Step 1: Desktop Assessment/Informative Exercise
– Use local knowledge
– Accepted data sources• National• State• County• Town Field work in the South Prong, Wicomico
County
Clean Water Optimization ToolSteps to Use the Tool
• Step 2: Entering Practical Estimates
– Apply information gathered to selected/accepted BMPs• This will allow practical maximums to be set
– Practical maximum amount of permeable pavement to be installed, for example
– Apply local knowledge and practical experience• For example, sand filters may not be readily accepted by the
community– This would limit installation of this particular practice
Clean Water Optimization ToolSteps to Use the Tool
• Step 3: Override Default Cost Values & Specify Programmatic Information
– Enter information about local costs, if available• Important for realistic scenario development
– Modify land cost, and length of time to project costs
– Estimate parameters for programs• Quantity of Promotional and education materials for a pet
waste program, for example
Clean Water Optimization ToolSteps to Use the Tool
• Step 4a: Enter Structural Practices Already Installed
– These entries will count towards TMDL goals • For example, over an entire county there may be 20 acres treated
by a bioretention, these can be aggregated and entered as one
Clean Water Optimization ToolSteps to Use the Tool
• Step 4b: Enter High Priority Practices
– Enter information about high priority practices• Practices that are publicly accepted• Practices proven to be effective• High comfort level with installation/maintenance
– These practices will be weighted heavier during optimization
• Estimated costs will not be changed
Outfall net in Talbot County
Clean Water Optimization ToolSteps to Use the Tool
• Step 5: Optimize
– Select optimization goals• Based on cost per pound of nitrogen reduction• Based on cost per pound of phosphorus reduction• Based on cost per pound of sediment reduction• Based on a nitrogen and phosphorus weighting
– 50/50 would equally weight optimization based on cost per pound of N AND cost per pound of P
– Results will show pertinent information• Pounds reduced, if less than goals• Estimated cost• Number of acres requiring treatment for each practice to achieve total
reductions
Center for Watershed Protection
Questions/CommentsSadie Drescher
[email protected] or [email protected]
410.461.8323 xt 215 or 410-267-5717
Bill Stack, [email protected] or [email protected]
410.461.8323 xt 222 or 410-267-5717