Water Quality and Ecosystems Modeling

, Volume 1, Issue 1–4, pp 91–122 | Cite as

Cross-Media Models of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed and Airshed

  • Lewis C. Linker
  • Gary W. Shenk
  • Robin L. Dennis
  • Jeffery S. Sweeney
Article

Abstract

A continuous, deterministic watershed model of the Chesapeake Bay watershed, linked to an atmospheric deposition model is used to examine nutrient loads to the Chesapeake Bay under different management scenarios. The Hydrologic Simulation Program - Fortran, Version 11 simulation code is used at an hourly time-step for ten years of simulation in the watershed. The Regional Acid Deposition Model simulates management options in reducing atmospheric deposition of nitrogen. Nutrient loads are summed over daily periods and used for loading a simulation of the Chesapeake estuary employing the Chesapeake Bay Estuary Model Package. Averaged over the ten-year simulation, loads are compared for scenarios under 1985 conditions, forecasted conditions in the year 2000, and estimated conditions under a limit of technology scenario. Limit of technology loads are a 50%, 64%, and 42% reduction from the 1985 loads in total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and total suspended solids, respectively. Urban loads, which include point source, on-site wastewater disposal systems, combined sewer overflows, and nonpoint source loads have the highest flux of nutrient loads to the Chesapeake, followed by crop land uses.

watershed model airshed model watershed management water pollution control water quality Chesapeake Bay HSPF 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. M. Beaulac and K. Reckhow, “An examination of land use-nutrient export relationships”, Water Resour. Bull., 18, 1013–1024 (1982).Google Scholar
  2. B. Bicknell, J. Imhoff, J. Kittle, A. Donigian Jr., R. Johanson, and T. Barnwell, “Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran user's manual for release 11”, Rep., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, GA (1996).Google Scholar
  3. J. Brook, P. Samson, and S. Sillman, “Aggregation of selected three-day periods to estimate annual and seasonal wet deposition totals for sulfate, nitrate, and acidity-part I: a synoptic and chemical climatology for eastern North America”, J. Appl. Meteor., 34, 297–325 (1995a).Google Scholar
  4. J. Brook, P. Samson, and S. Sillman, “Aggregation of selected three-day periods to estimate annual and seasonal wet deposition totals for sulfate, nitrate, and acidity-part II: selection of events, deposition totals, and source-receptor relationships”, J. Appl. Meteor., 34, 326–339 (1995b).Google Scholar
  5. J. Chang, R. Brost, I. Isaksen, S. Madronich, P. Middleton, W. Stockwell, and C. Walcek, “A three-dimensional eulerian acid deposition model-physical concepts and formulation”, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 14681–14700 (1987).Google Scholar
  6. J. Chang, P. Middleton, W. Stockwell, C. Walcek, J. Pleim, H. Lansford, S. Madronich, F. Binkowski, N. Seaman, and D. Stauffer, “The Regional Acid Deposition Model and Engineering Model, NAPAP SOS/T report 4”, In National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program: State of Science and Technology, 1, National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, Washington, D.C. (1990).Google Scholar
  7. Chesapeake Bay Program. “Chesapeake Bay Program technical studies: a synthesis”, Rep., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1982).Google Scholar
  8. Chesapeake Bay Program. “Chesapeake Bay: a framework for action”, Rep., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1983).Google Scholar
  9. R. Dennis, F. Binkowski, T. Clark, J. McHenry, S. Reynolds, and S. Seilkop, “Selected applications of the Regional Acid Deposition Model and Engineering Model”, appendix 5F (Part 2) of NAPAP SOS/T report 5. In National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program: State of Science and Technology, 1, National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, Washington, D.C. (1990).Google Scholar
  10. R. Dennis, Using the Regional Acid Deposition Model to determine the nitrogen deposition airshed of the Chesapeake Bay watershed, in Atmospheric Deposition to the Great Lakes and Coastal Waters, edited by Joel Baker, (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 1996).Google Scholar
  11. A. Donigian Jr., B. Bicknell, A. Patwardhan, L., Linker, C. Chang, and R. Reynolds, Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Model application to calculate bay nutrient loadings. Rep., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1994).Google Scholar
  12. K. Greene and L. Linker, Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model application and calculation of nutrient and sediment loadings-phase IV Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model-appendix a: model hydrology calibration results. EPA 903-R-98-004, CBP/TRS 196/98, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1998).Google Scholar
  13. J. Hartigan, Chesapeake Bay basin model-final report. Rep., Northern Virginia Planning District Commission for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, MD (1983).Google Scholar
  14. C. Hunsaker, C. Garten, and P. Mulholland, Nitrogen outputs from forested watersheds in the Chesapeake Bay drainage basin. Rep., Environmental Protection Agency Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN (1994).Google Scholar
  15. M. Langland, P. Lietman, and S. Hoffman, Synthesis of nutrient and sediment data for watersheds within the Chesapeake Bay drainage basin. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 95–4233 (1995).Google Scholar
  16. L. Linker, C. Stigall, C. Chang, and A. Donigian, Jr., “Aquatic accounting: Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model quantifies nutrient loads. Water Environment and Technology”, 8(1), 48–52 (1996).Google Scholar
  17. L. Linker, “Models of the Chesapeake Bay. Sea Technology”, 37(9), 49–55 (1996).Google Scholar
  18. L. Linker, G. Shenk, P. Wang, and J. Storrick, Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model application and calculation of nutrient and sediment loadings-phase IV Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model-appendix b: water quality calibration results. EPA 903-R-98-003, CBP/TRS 196/98, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1998).Google Scholar
  19. M. Maizel, G. Muehlbach, P. Baynham, J. Zoerker, D. Monds, T. Iivari, P. Welle, J. Robbin, and J. Wiles, The potential for nutrient loadings from septic systems to ground and surface water resources and the Chesapeake Bay. Rep., Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1995).Google Scholar
  20. M. Palace, J. Hannawald, L. Linker, G. Shenk, J. Storrick, and M. Clipper, Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model application and calculation of nutrient and sediment loadings appendix h: tracking best management practice nutrient reductions in the Chesapeake Bay Program. EPA 903-R-98-009, CBP/TRS 201/98, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1998).Google Scholar
  21. T. Schueler, Controlling urban runoff: a practical Manual for planning and designing urban BMPs. Publication #87703, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Washington, D.C. (1987).Google Scholar
  22. R. Thomann, J. Collier, A. Butt, E. Casman, and L. Linker, Response of the Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Model to loading scenarios. CBP/TRS 101/94, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1994).Google Scholar
  23. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Chesapeake Bay watershed pilot project. EPA/620/R-94. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program Center, Research Triangle Park, NC (1994).Google Scholar
  24. R. Valigura, W. Luke, R. Artz, and B. Hicks, Atmospheric nutrient input to coastal areas-reducing the uncertainties. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 9, Silver Spring, MD (1996).Google Scholar
  25. P. Wang, L. Linker, and J. Storrick, Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model application and calculation of nutrient and sediment loadings-Phase IV Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model-appendix d: precipitation and meteorological data development and atmospheric nutrient deposition. EPA 903-R-97-022, CBP/TRS 181/97, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1997).Google Scholar
  26. A. Wiedeman and A. Cosgrove, Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model application and calculation of nutrient and sediment loadings-Phase IV Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model-appendix f: point source loads. EPA 903-R-98-014, CBP/TRS 207/98, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD (1998).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lewis C. Linker
    • 1
  • Gary W. Shenk
    • 2
  • Robin L. Dennis
    • 3
  • Jeffery S. Sweeney
    • 4
  1. 1.Chesapeake Bay Program Modeling Subcommittee CoordinatorU.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program OfficeAnnapolis
  2. 2.Environmental ScientistU.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program OfficeAnnapolis
  3. 3.Atmospheric Modeling DivisionSenior Program Manager, U.S. EPA National Exposure Research Laboratory
  4. 4.Environmental Management FellowChesapeake Research Consortium, Inc.Edgewater

Personalised recommendations