• Aucun résultat trouvé

Surface water diffuse pollution by PPP: focus on runoff & erosion

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Partager "Surface water diffuse pollution by PPP: focus on runoff & erosion"

Copied!
15
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

Surface water diffuse pollution by

PPP: focus on runoff & erosion

B. Bah, L. Vandendael, R. Oger, A. Degré TOPP

S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 1 04/04/2012

Runoff and erosion risks

Erosion

Potential effect on river quality and damages to settelment

Runoff erosion splash

(2)

Some illustrations

of the problems

3

The causes : rain, soil, slope, slope lenght, landuse

(soil cover and watershed organisation)

Modèle EPICgrid : Evolution des précipitations annuelles (1971-2005) dans le sous-bassin hydrographique de la Senne

y = 4.2373x - 7594.2 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 19711972197319741975197619771978197919801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005 P c ipita tions a nnuel le s (mm/ a n)

Précipitations annuelles (mm/an) Linéaire (Précipitations annuelles (mm/an))

Source : IRM et SETHY

An n u al r ai n fal l ( mm/ an ) 4

(3)

The solutions : in-field AND watershed management

Better transfer

Outlet management Less runoff /soil detachment

 Toolbox of mitigation measures 5

Mitigation measures

Watershed management Vegetative buffers Grass strips Edge of field Soil tillage

(4)

Mitigation measures (2)

7 Vegetated filter strip

Vegetated waterways

Soil cover

In field retention

Mid- and downhill protection

8 Temporary dam

Dike and temporary retention zone

Channel restriction and temporary retention zone

(5)

Which measure ??

Where??

When??

9 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

The « ERRUISSOL » Project

A focus on the very beginning of runoff and

erosion phenomenon for risk mapping

ERosion

• Diffuse erosion risk mapping

• Slope, Rain erosivity, Soil erodibility mapping

• Actual land use mapping

« RUISsellement »  Runoff

• Runoff production mapping

• Runoff concentration mapping

« SOL »  Soil

(6)

Diffuse erosion risk map

Calculated for each 10 x10m pixel

A = R.K.C.LS.P

Soil losses

[t/ha.an]

Fixed at a reference level admitted : 10 t/ha.an

Rain erosivity

On the basis of 30 years of daily observation and previous research aiming at R factor adaptation to the Walloon

context

Soil erodibility

Systematic use of Wishmeier abacus and statistical analysis

Crop factor

Fixed for 3 land uses : - Row crop - Other crops

- Grassland

Slope and slope length

Slope mapping on the basis of DTM. Mapping of slope length, all other parameters known

Practices to limit erosion

Fixed to 1

11

Diffuse erosion risk map

Rainfall erosivity

Soil erodibility

Slopes

(7)

Runoff production risk map

Calculated for each 10 x 10 m pixel

Which part of rain will infiltrate?

Thus, which part will stream??

• Soil Hydraulic groups mapping (on the basis of limit infiltration rate)

• Land use map and slope map

•  estimation of CN (SCS abstraction method USDA)

13

Runoff concentration risk map

• Risk definition (given for each pixel

by its catchment area)

< 1 ha : insignificant risk

1< area < 9 ha : low risk

9 < area < 18 ha : intermediate risk

> 18 ha : high risk

(8)

http://cartographie.wallonie.be/NewPortailCarto/index.jsp?page=subMenuERRUISSOL&node=32&snode=321 15

In the field, let’s act!

Agronomical reality Technical constraints Economical objectives 16 « cover crops, vegetated strips, waterways, retention zones,… »

Avoid soil detachment and movment

To slow down and diffuse water Drive and stock water to improve its quality and protect outlets

(9)

Exemple : proposal for in field and watershed management to be discussed with the

municipality and the farmers 17

- the right measures at the right places - at field and watershed levels

PESTICIDES TRANSFERTS BY DIFFUSE

RUNOFF & EROSION

TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

(10)

Surface water transfert model

19 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012 Pesticide module PRZM PPP Properties

Pluviometric data Pedologic & hydrodynamic

parameters

Diffuse runoff simulation SCS method (ERRUISSOL)

Diffuse erosion simulation (MUSLE)

Quantity of PPP transfered to surface water

Kd/Koc/Kom <<  by Runoff Kd/Koc/Kom >>  by Erosion

Jr,i : pesticide runoff loss from compartment i [mg m-2]

DRIi : fraction dissolved-phase chemical present in

compartment i available for runoff [-]

• Cw i : concentration of dissolved pesticide in the water phase

[mg dm-3]

Q : amont of surface runoff [cm]

• 10 : unit correction factor (dm3 to m3 & cm to m)

PRZM : Pesticide runoff loss

Carsel & al (2003) – PPP runoff loss estimation:

20 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

10

.

.

.

, ,

DRI

C

Q

J

ri i wi ERRUISSOL

(11)

PRZM : Pesticide runoff loss

Carsel & al (2003) – PPP runoff loss estimation:

Concentration of dissolved PPP in the topsoil water phase (Cwi)

Retention phenomena (Freundlich adsorption & desorption isotherm) 21 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012 10 . . . , , DRI C Q Jri i wi

Cw

Cs

K

d n f

Cw

K

Cs

.

K

d

K

oc

.

OC

• Cs : concentration of adsorbed PPP in the solid phase [mg kg-1]

• Cw : concentration of dissolved PPP in the water phase [mg dm-3]

• Kf / Kd : Freundlich coef./soil-water adsorption coef. [dm3 kg-1]

• n : Freundlich exponent – affinity index of the PPP to the soil [-]

Carsel & al (2003) – PPP runoff loss estimation:

Concentration of dissolved PPP in the topsoil water phase (Cwi)

Degradation phenomena (temporal first-order kinetics)

PRZM : Pesticide runoff loss

TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012 10 . . . , , DRI C Q Jri i wi C DT C t C 50 2 ln . ) 50 2 ln exp( ) 0 ( ) exp( ) 0 ( ) ( t DT C t µ C t

Ctot tot tot

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 50 100 150 e-µt t (j)

(12)

Carsel & al (2003) – PPP runoff loss estimation:

Concentration of dissolved PPP in the topsoil water phase (Cwi)

Degradation phenomena (integration of the temporal first-order kinetics)

PRZM : Pesticide runoff loss

23 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012 10 . . . , , DRI C Q Jri i wi ) 50 2 ln exp( ) 0 ( ) exp( ) 0 ( ) ( t DT C t µ C t

Ctot tot tot

) . 50 2 ln exp( ). 0 ( . 2 ln 50 ) . 50 2 ln exp( ). 0 ( ) ( t DT C DT dt t DT C t

Ctot tot tot

t : [0 – 365 j]

.365) 1 50 2 ln exp( ). 0 ( . 2 ln 50 . 365 1 DT C DT

Ctot mean tot

• Ctot-mean : Average predicted total concentration in the soil layer

before the rainfall event

Carsel & al (2003) – PPP runoff loss estimation:

Concentration of dissolved PPP in the topsoil water phase (Cwi)

PRZM : Pesticide runoff loss

24 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012 10 . . . , , DRI C Q Jri i wi

.

.

,i i i tot

Cw

Cs

C

C

tot,i

Cw

i

.

Cw

i

.

K

d

.

.

, d i tot i

K

C

Cw

• Ctot,i : total concentration of PPP in the

soil layer i [mg dm-3]

• θ : volumetric soil moisture at field capacity [dm3 dm-3] • ρ : bulk density [kg dm-3]

Cw

Kd

Cs

.

OC

K

K

d oc

.

(13)

PRZM : Diffuse erosion

25 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

Carsel & al (2003) – PPP erosion loss estimation:

A

C

r

X

J

e e om si

.

10

.

.

,

• Je : Pesticide erosion loss [mg m-2]

• Xe : Event soil loss [t]

• A : Field size [ha]

• Csi : Concentration of adsorbed PPP in the solid phase in the top soil layer i [mg kg-1]

• rom : Enrichment ratio for organic matter of sediments eroded from the topsoil surface [-]

• 10 : Unit correction factor (t to kg & ha to m2)

MUSLE

PRZM : Diffuse erosion

TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

Xe : Event soil loss (MUSLE ; Williams, 1975):

P

C

LS

K

q

Q

X

e

11

,

8

.(

.

p

)

0,56

.

.

.

.

• Xe : Event soil loss [t]

• Q : Volume of event runoff

• qp : peak storm runoff rate

• K : Soil erodibility

• C : Soil cover factor / crop management factor

• LS : Length-slope factor

(14)

Total Pesticide loss by diffuse

runoff & erosion

27 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

Example for Isoproturon (DT50 : 23 d ; Koc : 36 dm³ kg-1)

Rainfall of 34 mm

Total Pesticide loss by diffuse

runoff & erosion

28 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

Example for Mancozeb (DT50 : 5 d ; Koc : 174 dm³ kg-1)

Rainfall of 34 mm

Agricultural plot at Baisy-Thy

(15)

Laurent Vandendael Walloon Agricultural Research Center

Agriculture and Natural Environment

Soil Fertility & Water Protection PESTEAUX project [email protected]

http://www.cra.wallonie.be

Aurore Degré Ulg Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech

Soil – Water Systems ERRUISSOL project GISER project (www.giser.be)

[email protected] http://www.gembloux.ulg.ac.be/ha publications : http://orbi.ulg.ac.be 29 TOPP S-PRO W AD IS St ak eh o ld er w o rk sh o p 04/04/2012

Références

Documents relatifs

Using the well-known Hultèn’s model coupled to two ungrounded NESs, Bergeot et al. [1] showed that the use of NES appears to be an interesting way to control mode-coupling

après la principale ; les autres la suivent habituellement. Le temps employé dans ce cas est le passé à valeur durative avec le prédicatoïde que le morphème

Unit´e de recherche INRIA Lorraine, Technopˆole de Nancy-Brabois, Campus scientifique, ` NANCY 615 rue du Jardin Botanique, BP 101, 54600 VILLERS LES Unit´e de recherche INRIA

Methane, nitrous oxide and ammonia emissions during storage and after application of dairy cattle slurry and influence of slurry treatment.. Ammonia and greenhouse gas emissions from

Avec les mots je vois Tant que savait personne Grâce au pouvoir des lettres Pouvant fabriquer des lois L’homme est sensé déjà Que le langage du poète est là Avec son

A possible mechanism of edge localized modes (ELMs) mitigation by resonant magnetic perturbations (RMPs) is proposed based on the results of nonlinear resistive

However, future CO 2 emissions from land use change are very uncertain due to the lack of knowledge on future trends in tropical forest clearing, degradation rates, and the

The influence of the stiffness of the trench filling material is analyzed by considering E = 10 MPa instead of 5 MPa in the reference case (note that 10 MPa is the value recommended