Environmental Modeling & Assessment

, Volume 16, Issue 5, pp 441–452 | Cite as

Transport of NOX Emissions from Sugarcane Fertilisation into the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon

  • Clare Paton-Walsh
  • Stephen R. Wilson
  • Travis Naylor
  • David W. T. Griffith
  • O. T. Denmead


The Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area contains highly sensitive ecosystems that are threatened by the effects of anthropogenic activity including eutrophication. The nearby sugarcane plantations of tropical north Queensland are fertilised annually and there has been ongoing concern about the magnitude of the loss of applied nitrogen to the environment. Previous studies have considered the potential of rainwater run-off to deposit reactive nitrogen species into rivers and ultimately into the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon, but have neglected the possibility of transport via the atmosphere. This paper reports the results of a modelling study commissioned by Australia’s National Heritage Trust aimed at assessing whether or not atmospheric deposition of reactive nitrogen from Queensland’s sugarcane plantations posed a potential threat to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon. Atmospheric dispersion modelling was undertaken using The Air Pollution Model, developed by Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. Despite the predominance of onshore southeasterly winds, the dispersion model results indicate that 9% of the time during the sugarcane fertilization season (in the modeled years 2001–2006) the meteorological conditions resulted in emissions from the coastal regions of north Queensland being transported out over the ocean around the Great Barrier Reef. The results suggest that there may be a greater efficiency for transport out over the reef during October than for November and December. For the 2 months that exhibited the greatest potential for transport of coastal pollution to the Great Barrier Reef, the modeled deposition of nitrogen oxides (NOX) into the Great Barrier Reef lagoon was less than 1% of the total emissions from the sugarcane plantations, but was not zero. Our model has a simple chemical scheme that does not cover the full chemistry of all reactive nitrogen compounds and so the results are only indicative of the potential levels of deposition. Nevertheless, our study shows that small amounts of NOX that originate from sugarcane fertilization may be transported and dry deposited into the Great Barrier Reef lagoon. Other pathways not included in the modeling scheme may provide a more efficient transport mechanism. Whilst modern practices for the application of fertilizer to sugarcane plantations have drastically reduced emissions, the potential efficiency of transport of pollutants via the atmosphere may be of concern for other more highly polluting agricultural industries.


Great Barrier Reef NOX Sugarcane Ammonia Atmospheric transport Deposition Modelling TAPM 



The authors would like to thank Dr. Martin Cope and Dr. Peter Hurley of CSIRO for their kind and helpful advice on the use of the TAPM model and the National Heritage Trust and Australian Greenhouse Office for funding this work.


  1. 1.
    Brodie, J. E., Mitchell A. W., (2004). Nutrients in Australian tropical rivers: changes with agricultural development and implications for receiving environments, paper presented at Sustainable Futures for Australias Tropical Rivers Conference, Darwin, Australia, Feb 01–03.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cooper, T. F., Uthicke, S., Humphrey, C., et al. (2007). Gradients in water column nutrients, sediment parameters, irradiance and coral reef development in the Whitsunday Region, central Great Barrier Reef. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 74(3), 458–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haynes, D., Brodie, J., Waterhouse, J., et al. (2007). Assessment of the water quality and ecosystem health of the Great Barrier Reef (Australia): Conceptual models. Environmental Management, 40(6), 993–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Luick, J. L., Mason, L., Hardy, T., et al. (2007). Circulation in the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon using numerical tracers and in situ data. Continental Shelf Research, 27(6), 757–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smith, J., Douglas, G. B., Radke, L. C., et al. (2008). Fitzroy River Basin, Queensland, Australia. III. Identification of sediment sources in the coastal zone. Environmental Chemistry, 5(3), 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wooldridge, S., Brodie, J., & Furnas, M. (2006). Exposure of inner-shelf reefs to nutrient enriched runoff entering the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon: Post-European changes and the design of water quality targets. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 52(11), 1467–1479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Devlin, M. J., and J. Brodie (2004) Terrestrial discharge into the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon: nutrient behavior in coastal waters, paper presented at Conference for Reef Research, Townsville, Australia,Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alongi, D. M., & McKinnon, A. D. (2005). The cycling and fate of terrestrially-derived sediments and nutrients in the coastal zone of the Great Barrier Reef Shelf. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 51, 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Freney, J. R., Denmead, O. T., Wood, A. W., et al. (1992). Factors controlling ammonia loss from trash covered sugarcane fields fertilized with urea. Fertilizer Research, 31(3), 341–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Prammanee, P., Saffigna, P. G., Wood, A. W., et al. (1989), Loss of nitrogen from urea and ammonium sulphate applied to sugar cane crop residues, Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, edited. pp. 76–84.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Prasertsak, P., Freney, J. R., Denmead, O. T., et al. (2002). Effect of fertilizer placement on nitrogen loss from sugarcane in tropical Queensland. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 62, 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freney, J. R., Denmead, O. T., Wood, A. W., Saffigna, P. G. (1994). Ammonia loss following urea addition to sugar cane trash blankets. Paper presented at Proceedings of Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Denmead, O. T., Chen, D., Griffith, D. W. T., et al. (2008). Emissions of the indirect greenhouse gases NH3and NOx from Australian beef cattle feedlots. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 48(1–2), 213–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Asman, W. A. H., & van Jaarsveld, J. A. (1992). A variable resolution transport model applied for NHx in Europe. Atmospheric Environment, 26A, 445–464.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dragosits, U., Theobald, M. R., Place, C. J., et al. (2002). Ammonia emission, deposition and impact assessment at the field scale: a case study of sub-grid spatial variability. Environmental Pollution, 117, 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fowler, D., Pitcairn, C. E. R., Sutton, M. A., et al. (1998). The mass budget of atmospheric ammonia in woodland within 1 km of livestock buildings. Enviromental Pollution, 102(S1), 343–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sutton, M. A., Burkhardt, J. K., Guerin, D., et al. (1998). Development of resistance models to describe measurements of bi-directional ammonia surface–atmosphere exchange. Atmospheric Environment, 32, 473–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Asman, W. A. H., Sutton, M. A., & Schoerring, J. K. (1998). Ammonia emission, atmospheric transport and deposition. The New Phytologist, 139, 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Loubet, B., Asman, W. A. H., Theobald, M., et al. (2006). Ammonia deposition near hot spots: Processes, models and monitoring methods. Background document, in Working Group 3: UNECE Expert Workshop on Ammonia, edited, Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Galperin, M. V., & Sofiev, M. A. (1998). The long-range transport of ammonia and ammonium in the northern hemisphere. Atmospheric Environment, 32, 373–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pearson, J., & Stewart, G. R. (1993). Tansley Review no. 56. The deposition of atmospheric ammonia and its effects on plants. The New Phytologist, 125, 283–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wilson, S. R., Naylor, T., Denmead, O. T., et al. (2008). Volatilised nitrogen losses from crops and agricultural practices to reduce losses. Report Griffith-NHT-2A, Australian Greenhouse Office.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Macdonald, B. C. T., Denmead, O. T., White, I., et al. (2009). The missing nitrogen gases: emissions of indirect greenhouse gases from sugarcane agriculture, paper presented at Australian Society of Sugarcane Technologists.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hurley, P. J., Physick, W. L., & Luhar, A. K. (2005). TAPM: a practical approach to prognostic meteorological and air pollution modelling. Environmental Modelling and Software, 20(6), 737–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Edwards, M., Hurley, P., & Physick, W. (2004). Verification of TAPM meteorological predictions using sodar data in the Kalgoorlie region. Australian Meteorological Magazine, 53(1), 29–37.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hurley, P. (2000). Verification of TAPM meteorological predictions in the Melbourne region for a winter and summer month. Australian Meteorological Magazine, 49(2), 97–107.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hurley, P., Manins, P., Lee, S., et al. (2003). Year-long, high-resolution, urban airshed modelling: verification of TAPM predictions of smog and particles in Melbourne, Australia. Atmospheric Environment, 37(14), 1899–1910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hurley, P. J., Blockley, A., & Rayner, K. (2001). Verification of a prognostic meteorological and air pollution model for year-long predictions in the Kwinana industrial region of Western Australia. Atmospheric Environment, 35(10), 1871–1880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Luhar, A. K., & Hurley, P. J. (2003). Evaluation of TAPM, a prognostic meteorological and air pollution model, using urban and rural point-source data. Atmospheric Environment, 37(20), 2795–2810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Luhar, A. K., & Hurley, P. J. (2004). Application of a prognostic model TAPM to sea-breeze flows, surface concentrations, and fumigating plumes. Environmental Modelling and Software, 19(6), 591–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wesely, M. L. (1989). Parameterization of surface resistances to gaseous dry deposition in regional-scale numerical models. Atmospheric Environment, 23(6), 1293–1304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Harley, R. A., Russell, A. G., McRae, G. J., et al. (1993). Photochemical modeling of the Southern California Air-Quality Study. Environmental Science & Technology, 27(2), 378–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Devlin, M. J., & Brodie, J. (2005). Terrestrial dischsrge into the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon: nutrient behaviour in coastal waters. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 51, 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Denmead, T., Macdonald, B. C. T., Bryant, G. W., et al. (2005). Gaseous nitrogen losses from acid sulfate soils producing sugarcane on the coastal lowlands, paper presented at 27th Conference of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists. Bundaberg, Qld: Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Veldkamp, E., & Keller, M. (1997). Fertilizer-induced nitric oxide emissions from agricultural soils. Nutrient Cycling In Agroecosystems, 48(1–2), 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Warneck, P. (2000). Chemistry of the natural atmosphere (2nd ed.). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Poor, N., Pribble, R., & Greening, H. (2001). Direct wet and dry deposition of ammonia, nitric acid, ammonium and nitrate to the Tampa Bay Estuary, FL, USA. Atmospheric Environment, 35(23), 3947–3955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clare Paton-Walsh
    • 1
  • Stephen R. Wilson
    • 1
  • Travis Naylor
    • 1
  • David W. T. Griffith
    • 1
  • O. T. Denmead
    • 2
  1. 1.School of ChemistryUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia
  2. 2.CSIRO Land and WaterCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations