eRAMSeRAMS AWeb‐Technology for ConservationA Web Technology for Conservation

Planning and Watershed Management

Mazdak Arabi Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering

   

Watershed Management

• Water quality (environmental)q y ( ) – Sediment – Nutrients – Pesticides – Pathogens

• Economic Criteria – Cost – Benefits

• Institutional Criteria

    

Nonpoint Source Pollution Control

• Implementation of conservation practices / BMPs p p / – Prevent or minimize pollution rather than retrospectivelyrespond to it.

• Current Approaches – Cost‐sharing – Targeting

 

               

             developing sound resource management alternatives

set of management actions

– Planning: scenario analysis and system optimization forPlanning: scenario analysis and system optimization for

Overall Goal

• Develop a decision support system to p pp y – Establish baseline conditions for a field/watershed

– Assessment: costs and environmental benefits of a givenAssessment: costs and environmental benefits of a given

     

 

   

        

        

      

    

  

    

        

      

 

 

Integrated Modeling & Optimization SystemSystem

Develop a New

Evaluate Cost

p

Conser. Plan

Is Cost greater than Budget?

NO

YES Evaluate Objectives Reject the plan

Evaluate Water Quality Benefits

Run Watershed

Model

NO

mination

a been

hed?

YES

YES Are water quality standards violated?

NOReject the plan H

ave term

criteria

reach END

Y

NO

     

 

   

        

        

      

    

  

    

        

      

 

 

Integrated Modeling & Optimization SystemSystem

Implementation

Develop a New

Evaluate Cost

p

Conser. Plan

Is Cost greater than Budget?

NO

YES Evaluate Objectives Reject the plan

Evaluate Water Quality Benefits

Run Watershed

Model

NO

mination

a been

hed?

YES

YES Are water quality standards violated?

NOReject the plan H

ave term

criteria

reach END

Y

NO

     

     

 

   

        

        

      

    

  

    

        

      

 

 

Integrated Modeling & Optimization System Reduced crop Productivity: System Reduced crop Productivity:

• Land out of production, • Reduction of fertilizer application

Develop a New

Evaluate Cost

p

Conser. Plan

Is Cost greater than Budget?

NO

YES Evaluate Objectives Reject the plan

Evaluate Water Quality Benefits

Run Watershed

Model

NO

mination

a been

hed?

YES

YES Are water quality standards violated?

NOReject the plan H

ave term

criteria

reach END

Y

NO

          

 

   

        

        

      

    

  

    

        

      

 

 

Integrated Modeling & Optimization System for Watershed ManagementSystem for Watershed Management

Develop a New

Evaluate Cost

p

Conser. Plan

Is Cost greater than Budget?

NO

YES Evaluate Objectives Reject the plan

Evaluate Water Quality Benefits

Run Watershed

Model

NO

mination

a been

hed?

YES

C 10 /

YES Are water quality standards violated?

NOReject the plan H

ave term

criteria

reach END

Y

CNO3-N ≤ 10 mg/L NO

   

        

        

      

    

        

  

        

      

   

 

 

Integrated Modeling & Optimization SystemSystem

Evaluate Cost

Develop a New

Watershed Plan

Is Cost greater than Budget?

Evaluate Water Quality Benefits

Run Watershed

Model

NO 

YES Evaluate Objectives Reject the plan

tion n

GA_2D_sinc_func

YES Are water quality standards violated?

NOReject the plan H

ave terminat

criteria

been

reached?

NO

ENDYES

Watershed Planning: Tradeoffs & Targets

1

A B: Cost Sharing

onst

rain

t

C

Water Quality Target

Optimal

Budg

et C

oOptimal Tradeof f Curve

D

0.6

0.8

0 2

0.4

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0

0.2

Cost (Million $) Cost (Million $)

NNor

mal

ized

Polllu

tant

Loa

ds

 

eRAMS: Participatory GIS

• Facilitate collection, organization and sharing of , g ggeospatial data – Identify problems – Determine stakeholders’ objectives, preferences and values – Location and type of practices

 

eRAMS: Participatory GIS

• Facilitate automation of complex modeling and p gsystem analysis processes – Conservation assessment and planning: natural resource models, e.g., APEX /SWAT and MODFLOW

– Plug‐in applications for diverse set of problems “D t li d” f– “Decentralized” group of users

 

Technology Drivers

• No specific hardware or software requirements p q – Reduce training requirements – Eliminating the collection of duplicate data across agencies – Reduce long‐term development and maintenance costs – Mobile system accessible, end‐to‐end, on the web

• Compatibility with existing databases/GIS technologiestechnologies – Take advantage of readily available data 

           

         

Technology Drivers

• Benefit from Google products and other commonly‐g p yused internet technologies – Common “look and feel” interface – High resolution aerial photos, etc.

• Compatibility with long‐term vision of institutions Compatibility with long term vision of institutions involved with management of natural resources

• Working across scales: field to watershed • Working across scales: field to watershed

Data

User Login

Field

Digitization

Assessment

Watershed

Scenario Anal.

Planning

Optimization

Visualization

 

www.erams.com

User

(www Browser)

M t d t /

NRCS ,USGS, NWS Data Resources

eRAMS Web Portal equipped with

Google Zoom & Maps / High Resolution Aerial Photos

Spatial Extent

Metadata / Data

Data

User Login

User Upload Data

Standardization Module

Storage Resource

Field

Location/Attribute of BMPs Digitization

Assessment Digitize Field Boundary

Specify Watershed Outlet(s)

Watershed Watershed Delineation /

Model Input Creation Module

Scenario Anal.

Specify Watershed Outlet(s)

Planning

Optimization

Visualization

Field Scale

Watershed Scale

Distributed Computing

eRAMS Architecture for Conservation Planning and Assessment

Spatial Extent, Data Identification, Extraction and Upload 

 

www.erams.com

User

(www Browser)

Metadata /

NRCS ,USGS, NWS Data Resources

eRAMS Web Portal equipped with

Google Zoom & Maps / High Resolution Aerial Photos

Spatial Extent

Metadata / Data

User Login

Standardization Module

Storage Resource

Data User Upload Data

Module Resource

Identification – What relevant data are available? Semantically rich metadatay – CLIPS, SWEET, GeoSemantic Extraction /Transformation: different sources, different formats and scales 

Data

User Login

Field

Digitization

Assessment

Watershed

Scenario Anal.

Planning

Optimization

Visualization

 

www.erams.com

User

(www Browser)

M t d t /

NRCS ,USGS, NWS Data Resources

eRAMS Web Portal equipped with

Google Zoom & Maps / High Resolution Aerial Photos

Spatial Extent

Metadata / Data

Data

User Login

User Upload Data

Standardization Module

Storage Resource

Field

Location/Attribute of BMPs Digitization

Assessment Digitize Field Boundary

Specify Watershed Outlet(s)

Watershed Watershed Delineation /

Model Input Creation Module

Scenario Anal.

Specify Watershed Outlet(s)

Planning

Optimization

Visualization

Field Scale

Watershed Scale

Distributed Computing

eRAMS Architecture for Conservation Planning and Assessment

   

Storage Resource

Digitization

Field

W t h dWatershed Delineation /

d l i

Assessment Digitize Field Boundary

Specify Watershed Outlet(s)

Visualization

WatershedModel Input Creation Module

Fi ld W t h dField Scale

Watershed Scale

Representation of Practices

Assessment Module: Costs and Environmental Benefits

         

Storage Resource

Watershed Delineation / Model Input Creation

Module

Planning

Optimization

Scenario Anal.

Field Scale

Watershed Scale

Distributed Computing

Planning Module: Scenario Analysis / Optimization

Visualization

Planning Module: Scenario Analysis / Optimization

Biomass Energy

Biomass Energy

Biomass Energy

Biomass Energy

t t t t

se e

dec s o o eac co u a d ca be a

Efficient Communication / Outputs Economic Conservation Practice Placement to Reduce Atrazine Concentration Levels in the Wildcat Creek Watershed

Wildcat Creek Watershed Objective: reduction of atrazine loads into the Kokomo reservoir by 10% (Concentration reduction target from average 3.31 µg/L to 3.0 µg/L, EPA MCL).

Atrazine Concentrations and Targets

Source of Pollutant in Drinking Water Runoff from herbi­cide used on row crops Baseline

Finding a balance between cost and environmental improvements. Thi d i h

p

Maximum Contami-nant Level (MCL) 0.003 milligrams per Liter (mg/L) or 3 parts per billion (ppb)

Maximum Contami-nant Level Goal This recommendation on where to target con­

servation implementation (provided in the map to the right) is based on the above cost / benefit placement. As demonstrated by the curve, reducing pesticide concentration gener­ally requires the increased cost of conserva­tion practices installation. Choosing how to address water quality concerns is a unique decision for each community, and can be af­

nant Level Goal (MCLG) 0.003 mg/L or 3 ppb

Health Effects Some people who drink water containing atrazine in excess of the MCL over many years could experience problems ty,

fected by a water quality improvement goal, or the budgetary resources available.

Cost Breakdown of Recommendation

with their cardiovascular sys­tem or reproductive difficulties.

More information http://epa.gov/ogwdw/ contaminants/ basicinformation/ atrazine.html#one

Practice Cost ($)

Targeted Conservation Practice Influences on Water Quality

Practice Cost ($)

Pesticide Management

Filter Strips

Residue Management

Tillage– No Till

Practice Influence Estimated Benefit(s) Across Watershed Pesticide Management Reduces application rates, etc. xxx ug/L Filter Strips Filters surface xxx ug/L Residue Management/No Till Reduces erosion xxx ug/L TOTAL COST ($) $ xxxx.xx

    

    

 

�US EPA M d k A bi �US EPA

�NRCS

Mazdak Arabi Assistant Professor

Civil and Environmental EngineeringColorado State University

�USDA CSREES Colorado State UniversityMazdak.Arabi@ColoState.Edu

Funding Agencies

Voice: (970) 491‐4639

�USDA AES

�NSF�NSF