CARIWIN Hydrometeorology and Water Quality Field Course October 1St – 12Th, 2007
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CARIWIN Hydrometeorology and Water Quality Field Course October 1st – 12th, 2007 Jointly delivered by: Brace Centre for Water Resources Management, McGill University Caribbean Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology, Barbados Hydrometeorological Service, Min. of Agriculture, Guyana Guyana Water Incorporated CARIWIN Logo Introductions • Field Course Delivery Staff – CIMH – Guyana Ministry of Agriculture – GWI – Brace Centre for Water Resources Management • Attendees – Name – Place of employment – Job title/tasks What do you want to learn from this course? Brace Centre for Water Resources Management Background/Past and Present Projects Outline • History: McGill University • Background: Brace Centre for Water Resources Management • Past and Present Projects McGill University • Oldest university in Montréal (found in 1821) • Two campuses • 11 faculties • Some 300 programs of study • More than 32000 students Macdonald Campus • Located on the western tip of Montréal Island • 650 hectares of facilities and fields • Location for Brace Centre for Water Resources Management Brace Centre for Water Resources Management Mission Statement “The Centre is devoted to the development and promotion of sound economical water management and conservation practices which protect the environment, and land and water resource base, in order to sustain food and fibre production, and enhance quality of life.” Where does the name come from? • Major James Henry Brace (1870-1956): civil engineer who devoted much of his career to water and construction projects in the USA and Canada • Initial goal: use research to find ways to desalinize sea water and bring large quantities of water to arid lands for food production and rural development • Vision for a better quality of life by providing water and food to rural communities History of the Brace Centre Originally Titled • Brace Research Institute (circa 1959) • Centre for Drainage Studies (1987) • Merged in 1999 to form the Brace Centre • Broader focus on all aspects of Integrated Water Resources Management Multi-Disciplinary Research • Approximately 18 researchers from following faculties: – Agricultural and Environmental Sciences – Engineering – Science – Law – Management Activities • National and international research projects • Long term training (undergraduate and postgraduate) • Technical assistance (water quality monitoring, hydrometeorology, irrigation, water management) • Short term specialized training (in Canada and overseas) • Policy studies Areas of Specialization • Drainage and irrigation systems • Water quality assessment in rural areas • Soil and water conservation • Modeling and GIS for water resources and watershed management • Impacts of climate change on water resources and greenhouse gas emissions • Hydraulics and fluid mechanics • Geotechnical engineering and remediation of contaminated soils • Human health impacts associated with irrigation and drainage • Institutional, legal and financial reform of water institutions • Water users associations Brace Projects Water Table Management WTM: Involves managing a steady water table depth, shallow enough that crops may access the available moisture. The water table is managed through drainage and irrigation within subsurface drains. Buildings N 75 m 15 30 m m Block C Block B Block A Legend: Conventional Free Drainage Water Table Management( WTM) Buffer FD Buffer WTM Water table observation pipes Water Table Management (Con’t) Why Study This? • Effect on crop yields • Effect on water quality (N, P) and drain flow • Effect on emissions of N2O gas from soil Water Table Management (Con’t) Results/ Conclusions • N concentrations decreased with WTM • P concentrations increased with WTM – led to increased P loading despite producing less outflow Average P loads (kg P/ha) in tile drainage from May to October 2005 0.120 0.100 0.080 TP 0.060 TDP P loads Orthophosphate 0.040 0.020 0.000 Free drainage WTM Drainage treatment • Field results supported by laboratory column experiments Water Table Management (Con’t) Why did P loss increase under WTM system? Hypothesis Prolonged anaerobic conditions in WTM fields altered Oxidation-Reduction Potential (ORP), therefore affecting the solubility of P Objectives To understand how P is released or broken down into its constituent forms under WTM, and to understand the role that ORP plays Water Table Management (Con’t) Field Results ORP PO4 Al Mn Fe pH (mV) (mg/l) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) WTM 44 7.30 0.085 2.4 19.7 27.4 FD 204 6.91 0.017 2.1 0.6 16.8 Statistic 0.4985 analysis < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 NS P level Lab Results 6.00 400 300 5.00 200 4.00 100 3.00 0 (mg/L) -100 2.00 (mV) (ORP) -200 1.00 -300 Concentration of soluble PConcentration 0.00 -400 potential Oxidation-reduction 0 10 20 30 40 50 Duration of Incubation (days) PO4 ORP Water Table Management (Con’t) • Fe and Mn correlated with soluble P loss 7000 6000 5000 R2 = 0.8945 Fe 4000 Mn μg/L 3000 Linear (Fe) Linear (Mn) 2000 R2 = 0.9675 1000 0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 Concentration of soluble P (mg/L) Conclusions • Anaerobic conditions caused by WTM reduce the ORP resulting in the transformation of Fe & Mn bound P to soluble PO4 Field-Scale Water Quality Monitoring & Modeling Purpose Limit eutrophication of lakes and streams Objectives • Monitor nutrient and sediment loading from surface runoff and subsurface drainage waters • Identify factors that result in nutrient loss • Identify BMP’s that are effective at reducing nutrient loading Field-Scale Water Quality Monitoring & Modeling (Con’t) Instrumentation Depth Sensor H - Flume Composite Auto-Sampler Datalogger Weather Water Table Subsurface Station Measurement Flow meter Field-Scale Water Quality Monitoring & Modeling (Con’t) Results • Subsurface drainage is the main pathway for water transport from the field (80%) • On average P and sediment losses occurred mostly through surface runoff • Majority of N loss is through the subsurface drainage system • Soil P concentration and saturation is an important factor governing P loss, however soil texture and structure appear to be more important Field-Scale Water Quality Monitoring & Modeling (Con’t) Seasonal Phosphorus Loads • SWAT model results were Spring Summer Fall Winter 1.75 reliable across all seasons 1.50 for both dissolved and 1.25 1.00 particulate phosphorus – it 0.75 Load (kg/ha) Load underestimated sediment 0.50 0.25 and N loading 0.00 Measured Simulated Measured Simulated Measured Simulated Measured Simulated Site #1 Site #2 Site #1 Site #2 Particulate P Dissolved P Site | Season • According to SWAT, the BMP Simulation Results: Crop Rotation and Tillage Scenarios Mean Annual Total Phosphorus Loads (kg/ha) recommended BMP Conventional Conservation No Till Pasture scenario for reducing non- 4.0 CornMono 3.5 Alfalfa 3.0 point phosphorus pollution 2.5 2.0 1.5 CornSoyGrnPast Corn2Past2 was a 5 year rotation of 1.0 0.5 corn with 2-3 years of 0.0 pasture Corn2SoyGrn Corn2Alfalfa2 Corn2Soy2 Corn3Past Actual Modification to the P-Index P Index: An assessment of the source and transport factors for P on agricultural landscapes – used to determine the risk of P loss Objective • To develop an easy to use software based P-Index for Quebec farmers based on local field data **The software is currently being developed** Constructed Wetland for P Removal Objective • Study the P removal efficiency of constructed wetlands Design • 0.12-ha • Inflow (5 L/s) • Analyze N and P Constructed Wetland for P Removal (Con’t) Walbridge Wetland - 2003 : Average Annual TP concentration Results 140 120 2003 – 33% P reduction 100 80 Stream Inlet 60 Sed 40 Walbridge Wetland - 2004 : Basin Zig-zag Average Annual TP concentration (µg/l) TPconcentration 20 90 Outlet 80 0 70 Sampling Point 60 Stream 50 2004 – 40% P reduction 40 Inlet 30 Sed Walbridge Wetland- 2005 Basin Average Annual TP concentration (µg/l) 20 Zig-zag TP concentration (µg/l) TPconcentration 10 120 Outlet 0 100 Sampling Point 80 Stream 60 Intake Sed 40 Basin 2005 – 44% P reduction TP Concentration (µg/l) Zig Zag 20 Outlet 0 Stream Intake Sed Basin Zig Zag Outlet Sampling Point Solar Power Drip Irrigation • Meteorological data (Tmax, Tmin, & precipitation) used to predict solar radiation, photovoltaic (PV) electrical output, and water output • Model predictions are compared with observed data 30.00 • Good correlation between 25.00 observed and calculated 20.00 15.00 radiation and electrical output 10.00 5.00 Calculated RsCalculatedm-2(MJ d-1) 0.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 Observed Rs (MJ m-2 d-1) Adaptation to Climate Change – Tender Fruits Goal To derive future methods of efficient water application and water conservation • Estimate crop water Projected Changes in Temperature (C) requirements for St. Catharines, Ontario peaches and grapes 35 under different climate 30 25 scenarios 20 • Predict irrigation needs 15 10 Maximum Temp (C) Temp Maximum under a range of future 5 0 climate scenarios April May June July Aug Sep Growing Period • Develop mechanisms to Base Climate (1971-2000) SDSM-HADCM3 A2 2020s(2010-2039) SDSM-HADCM3 A2 2050s(2040-2069) assist producers in adapting to these changes Adaptation to Climate Change – Tender Fruits (Con’t) • Predicted changes between Wet days (frequency) now and 2020: 40 35 • Increase in temperature 30 25 observed (approx. 1.5°C) 20 2020 %days 15 • Increase in total monthly 10 5 precipitation 0 Apr May June July Aug Sep • Decrease in precipitation days but increase in the intensity of Simple Daily Intensity Index (SDII) precipitation