Manual Riverspill

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Riverspill file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Riverspill book. Happy reading Riverspill Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Riverspill at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Riverspill Pocket Guide.
RiverSpill (Samuels and others, ) is a geographic-information-system-based application that can be used to estimate the real-time transport of contaminants.
Table of contents

• Site Information Navigation
• Urgent clean-up after KwaZulu-Natal river spill - Averda South Africa
• Riverspill Response Canada Ltd | Vancouver, BC
• Account Options
• Why We Should Remember The Elk River Spill

Samuels1, Rakesh Bahadur1, David E.

Site Information Navigation

Grayman Consulting Engineer Cincinnati, OH ABSTRACT To assist in delineating source water protection areas based on stream flow, a tool has been developed to calculate the time of travel based on real-time stream flow measurements , decay, and dispersion of a pollutant introduced into surface waters.

The Arcview Network Analyst extension is used to integrate the databases and to provide the user with a tool to quickly assess the consequences of the introduction of a chemical or biological contaminant to the source waters surface water of a public water supply. Four hours is thought to be the emergency response time needed to alert a water supplier of a contaminant spill in time for the supplier to respond.

These enhancements can assist states in defining "segments" for management actions. The tool can be used to provide for better protective measures; and assess and manage consequences of emergency incidents. It can also be used to predetermine the ranges upstream from a treatment plant that would require physical protection from an anticipated deliberate contamination event.

The prototype system, RiverSpill, has been developed and is operational for Ohio and Utah. The Arcview Network Analyst extension is used to integrate the databases and to provide the user with a tool to quickly assess the consequences of the introduction of a chemical or biological contaminant to the source waters surface water of a public water supply see figure 1.

The RF1 stream flow data consist of mean annual flow and 7Q10 low flow estimates made at the downstream ends of more than 60, transport reaches. ERF1 was designed to be a digital data base of river reaches capable of supporting regional and national water-quality and river-flow modeling and transport investigations in the water-resources community.

The stream-gauging program of the USGS is an aggregation of networks and individual stream flow stations that originally were established for various purposes. Approximately 5, of the 6, U. Geological Survey sampling stations are equipped with telemetry to transmit data on stream flow, temperature, and other parameters back to a database for real-time viewing via the World Wide Web. RiverSpill Model The integrated system calculates, locates, and maps the population at risk from the introduction of contaminants to the public water supply see figure 2. The Real Time River Spill Model calculates the time of travel based on real time stream flow measurements, decay, and dispersion of a contaminant introduced into surface water.

Prototype systems have been set up and tested for Ohio and Utah. The databases and software are directly extensible to the rest of the US. Watershed becomes one of determining parameters "a" and "b" for the relationship. Gates and Associates, and Maidment, After examining the literature and fitting relationships to the flow-velocity data in the original study by Gates , it appears that a reasonable range of values for parameter b runs from 0.

With this value of "b" and the mean Q and V data in ERF1, values of "a" were computed for each reach. Given the Enhanced Reach File see figure 3 , for each reach we know: Qmean mean flow , Vmean mean velocity , Tmean mean travel time , and Length. Figure 2. Watershed Figure 3. Schematic of the Enhanced Reach File and RiverSpill Network The steps to calculate the time of travel, based on real time flow data are as follows: 1.

Find nearest gage - retrieve real-time flow Qrt 2. Calculate time-of-travel TOT to intake - sum Trt for all reaches between input location and intake Time decay of the constituent based on time-of-travel to the intake The initial mass Mo of substance will be reduced to a secondary mass M using the temporal decay parameters assigned to that substance.

Watershed Dispersion of the constituent based on convective-diffusion equations for turbulent flow The distribution of a substance introduced to a river is governed by the convection-diffusion equations for turbulent flow Taylor, The equations are simplified by assuming the molecular diffusion to be negligible, the density gradients are small compared with the concentration gradients, and the mass flux is proportional to the mean concentration and in the direction of decreasing concentration.

The remaining terms represent the change in concentration of the substance with time, the convective mass transfer associated with the fluid velocity, and the turbulent mass transfer. Further assumptions can be made by considering the concentration of substance to be a function only of time and along the stream dimension. The along stream velocity is considered constant the average flow over the uniform cross section. These simplifying assumptions are wholly consistent with making use of the available data from the stream gauging stations.

The task is challenging because there are to few observations to support the equations representing the involved physics. Observations are lacking largely because of the complex stream geometries and variations in streambed characteristics. The difficulties in modeling river flow are summarized in several references Novak, Watershed Model results were compared to field observations to test the validity of the flow- velocity relationship and the predicted travel times from contaminant source to water supply intake.

Velocity-Flow Relationship The skill of the flow-velocity relationship was tested by accessing real-time flow date for a USGS gage on the Colorado River and calculating the resulting velocity using the power function described previously.

• Mapping the other threats to the Animas and San Juan Rivers.!
• Precious Freedom!
• Lightboxes?
• Data Protection Choices!
• The Animas River Spill and the Myth of Mine Safety.

The velocity factor was calculated as described previously and this factor was used to scale the mean velocity associated with a downstream reach where another USGS real-time gage was located. This results in an estimate of the real-time velocity at that gage. This value was input to the power function to calculate the real-time flow.

A comparison was then made between this predicted flow and the measured flow at the gage. The difference was less than 8 percent see figure 4 Figure 4. Comparison of predicted and observed flow for the Colorado River.

• River Spill Response Co-op.
• Live recording for VOD;
• Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Water Science Center?
• P.C..
• The Gentleman Cowboy: 50 of my most powerful poems Including: The story behind each poem.

Watershed Time-of-Travel Validation The analytical model we use characterizes one-dimensional turbulent diffusion in constant density flow. The concentration is considered to be a function only of time and the distance along the longitudinal axis. Average velocities, calculated from real-time values reported from river gauging stations, are applied over the uniform cross sections. The initial condition specifies that a finite mass of substance is released instantaneously and uniformly over the cross section. Mathematically the initial release is from a Dirac delta function.

The boundary condition specifies that the concentration remains zero for all time after release at infinite distances along the longitudinal axis Ippen, We can compare the model with the findings of a few carefully conducted dye studies and with documented pollution events.

Account Options

Results from the present model could also be compared with those from numerical models, where numerical models have been applied. Numerical models are finely tuned to the specific stretch of river to which they are applied. Therefore, one should not expect our generic model, which is being applied to all rivers, to yield results which agree in detail with the numerical models. If the models did agree then we would conclude that the numerical model was very likely not needed in the first place. Selection of Rivers Because the proposed model is to be applied throughout the United States, its skill must be assessed in the broadest sense.

To accomplish this we selected rivers with a wide geographic distribution and with a variety of flow conditions. It is recognized of course that no single model will thoroughly address all of these circumstances. Nevertheless, our analysis was aimed at determining just how well or how poorly the model performed. The US Geological Survey has assembled a large set of river observations Jobson, which reflect the broad geographic distribution and widely varying flow conditions desired for model skill assessment.

The data however, do not represent the most western and southwestern states. River observations reported by Jobson are tabulated in Appendices to the report and include original references. The observations represent cases where dye was injected in 38 rivers.

Multiple dye injections were made at the same, and in some cases, differing river locations. Dye injections were also made under varying flow conditions. From the variety of rivers investigated, 11 were selected for the model skill assessment study. A recent pipeline rupture in the Red Deer River might have relatively short term environmental damage, but a larger concern is the vast number of older pipeline locations at river crossings and their vulnerability to floods, according to a leading expert in floodplain and river bank ecosystems. Stewart Rood, a University of Lethbridge Environmental Science researcher and member of the Water Institute for Sustainable Environments, has already started on a study of the Red Deer River oil spill, looking at more than 30 km of river shoreline downstream from the spill site.

He and his colleagues are looking for opportunities to learn from this particular spill, and then turn their research findings into a set of guidelines for developing oil pipelines near, over or under waterways. The release coincided with flood flows of the river and consequently the floating oil wove through the riparian or streamside vegetation, leaving what Rood describes as a 'bathtub ring' of oil deposits on the floodplain plants photographs attached.

Despite decades of pipeline construction and occasional ruptures, Rood's team found there has been remarkably little scientific study on the environmental impacts of oil spills on river floodplains. Checking back almost 50 years the researchers found only 10 relevant journal papers. Their new study sites have been positioned 'tagged' through GPS monitoring at numerous locations within the spill zone to enable the detailed monitoring of the consequence of the oil spill on the trees and vegetation along the banks of the river called the riparian zone.

As well, there will also be coordinated study of invertebrates in the shoreline zone, as well as investigation of impacts on fish. The study group involves Rood and two colleagues, Dr.