Impact of BMP Allocation on Discharge and Avoided Costs in an Urbanized Watershed
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Urbanized environments are constructed to estimate peak flow and cost savings in response to possible BMP allocation at a watershed scale. The main goal is to explore the proper allocation of sub-watershed level BMPs for peak flow attenuation at a watershed scale. Since several individual site scale BMPs work as a form of aggregated BMPs at a sub-watershed scale, it is a question as to how to properly allocate the sub-watershed level BMPs at a watershed scale. The Hydrological Simulation Program-FORTRAN (HSPF) is set up for a hypothetically urbanized watershed. A peak flow is determined to be the primary variable of interest and targeted to characterize the spatial distribution of aggregated BMPs. Construction cost of a regional pond forms the basis of the economic valuation. The results indicate that when total size of BMPs is constant in the entire watershed, (1) it is most effective to have aggregated BMPs in some upper sub-watersheds while the BMPs in either the mainstem sub-watershed or a single sub-watershed are the least effective choices for peak flow attenuation at a watershed scale; (2) savings exist between allocation differences and reduced peak flow increases cost savings. The largest saving is found in the strategy of aggregated BMPs in some upper sub-watersheds. These findings, however, call for follow-up site specific case studies revisiting the watershed scale impacts of BMP allocation. Then, it will be argued that location and extent of decentralization are considerable policy variables for an alternative stormwater management policy at a watershed scale.
Abstract
Urbanized environments are constructed to estimate peak flow and cost savings in response to possible BMP allocation at a watershed scale. The main goal is to explore the proper allocation of sub-watershed level BMPs for peak flow attenuation at a watershed scale. Since several individual site scale BMPs work as a form of aggregated BMPs at a sub-watershed scale, it is a question as to how to properly allocate the sub-watershed level BMPs at a watershed scale. The Hydrological Simulation Program-FORTRAN (HSPF) is set up for a hypothetically urbanized watershed. A peak flow is determined to be the primary variable of interest and targeted to characterize the spatial distribution of aggregated BMPs. Construction cost of a regional pond forms the basis of the economic valuation. The results indicate that when total size of BMPs is constant in the entire watershed, (1) it is most effective to have aggregated BMPs in some upper sub-watersheds while the BMPs in either the mainstem sub-watershed or a single sub-watershed are the least effective choices for peak flow attenuation at a watershed scale; (2) savings exist between allocation differences and reduced peak flow increases cost savings. The largest saving is found in the strategy of aggregated BMPs in some upper sub-watersheds. These findings, however, call for follow-up site specific case studies revisiting the watershed scale impacts of BMP allocation. Then, it will be argued that location and extent of decentralization are considerable policy variables for an alternative stormwater management policy at a watershed scale.
참고문헌 (34)
- Beven, K., "Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modeling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology", Journal of Hydrology, 249, pp.11~29 (2001)
- Bicknell, B. R., "Modeling water quality and the effects of agricultural best management practices in the Iowa River basin", Journal of Water Science Technology, 17, pp.1141~1153 (1985)
- Bicknell, B. R., "Hydrological Simulation Program‐FORTRAN, Version 12, user’s manual" (2001), USEPA
- Braden, J. B., "The downstream economic benefits of storm water management", Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 130(6), pp.498~505 (2004)
- Bradford, A., "Evolution of Ontario’s stormwater management planning and design guidance", Journal of Water Quality, 39(4), pp.343~355 (2004)
- Center for Watershed Protection (CWP), "Better site design: a handbook for changing development rules in your community" (1998), CWP
- Center for Watershed Protection (CWP), "An examination of the real cost of providing stormwater control. The economics of stormwater BMPs in the Mid Atlantic region" (1997), CWP
- Coffman, L., "Low impact development design: a new paradigm for stormwater management mimicking and restoring the natural hydrologic regime. USEPA‐625‐R‐00‐001" (2000), USEPA
- Donigian, A. S. Jr., "Modeling of nonpoint source water quality in urban and non‐urban areas. EPA‐600‐3‐91‐039" (1991), USEPA
- Dunne, T., "Water in environmental planning" (1978), W. H. Freeman and Company
- Duru, J. O., "Evaluating HSPF for simulating sediment yield from a Claypan agricultural watershed in Central Missouri. The Society for Engineering in Agricultural, Forest, and Biological Systems", International Meeting (1999)
- Least cost design of urban drainage systems, "Han, J.", Water Resources Research Center, ~, pp.Report No. 138 (1980)
- Hanley, N., "Cost benefit analysis and the environment" (1994), Edward Elgar Publishing Limited
- Heaney, J. P., "Costs of urban stormwater control. EPA‐600‐R‐02‐021" (2002), USEPA
- Jacomino, V. M. F., "A critical approach to the calibration of a watershed model", Journal of American Water Resources Association, 33, pp.143~154 (1997)
- Johnson, M. S., "Application of two hydrologic models with different runoff mechanisms to a hillslope dominated watershed in the Northeastern US: a comparison of HSPF and SMR", Journal of Hydrology, 284, pp.57~76 (2003)
- Johnston, D.M., "Downstream economic benefits of conservation development", Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 132(1), pp.35~43 (2006)
- 강상준, "소유역의 토지이용 변화에 따른 하천 유량과 수질 변화에 관한 연구", 국토연구, 50, pp.3~18 (2006), 국토연구원
- Moore, L. W., "Modeling of best management practices on North Reelfoot Creek, Tennessee", Journal of Water Environmental Resource, 64(3), pp.241~247 (1992)
- Moss, T., "What type sewer pipe is best? Life cycle cost analysis yields answer", Journal of Civil Engineering, 52, pp.75~76 (1982)
- Paterson, R. G., "Costs and benefits of urban erosion and sediment control: the North Carolina experience", Journal of Environmental Management, 17(2), pp.167~178 (1993)
- Prince Georgeʹs County, "Design manual for use of bioretention in stormwater management" (1993), Prince Georgeʹs County
- Roesner, L. A., "Are BMP criteria really environmentally friendly?", Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 127(33), pp.150~154 (2001)
- Sample, D. J., "Costs of best management practices and associated land for urban stormwater control", Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 129, pp.59~68 (2003)
- Stahre, P., "Stormwater detention" (1993), Prentice‐Hall
- Stephenson, K., "Watershed based effluent trading: the nonpoint source challenge", Journal of Contemporary Economic Policy, 16(4), pp.412~421 (1998)
- Thurston, H. W., "Controlling stormwater runoff with tradable allowances for impervious surfaces", Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 129(5), pp.409~418 (2003)
- U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), "Retention, detention, and overland flow for pollutant removal from highway stormwater runoff, volume I" (1996), USDOT
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), "Functions and values of wetlands. EPA‐843‐F‐01‐002C" (2002), USEPA
- "BASINS flow calibration tutorial"[URL]
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), "Vegetated roof cover, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. EPA‐841‐B‐00‐005D" (2000), USEPA
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), "Low impact development (LID). EPA‐841‐B‐00‐005" (2000), USEPA
- "BASINS training materials"[URL]
- Wurbs, R. A., "Water resources engineering" (2002), Prentice Hall