Water treatment process evaluation of wildfire-affected sediment leachates

Hohner, Amanda K.; Terry, Leigh G.; Townsend, Eli B; Summers, R. Scott; Rosario‐Ortiz, Fernando L.

doi:10.1039/c6ew00247a

Cited by 26 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Assuming an equal probability of burning for each year over the 25-year planning period and a 3% interest rate, discounting would reduce our risk reduction estimates by ,30%. For practical reasons, we used burn probability to represent the spatial and temporal variability in wildfire occurrence (Scott et al 2013), which limits our ability to quantify wildfire consequences that are tied to fire and rainfall event magnitudes, such as exceeding turbidity thresholds for water treatment (Oropeza and Heath 2013;Hohner et al 2017). Simulation-based risk analysis methods (Thompson et al 2016;Haas et al 2017) could be used to better quantify the fuels reduction effects on fire event consequences and probabilities for exceeding thresholds of impact.…”

Section: Model Limitations and Research Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritising fuels reduction for water supply protection

Gannon

Wei

MacDonald

et al. 2019

Int. J. Wildland Fire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns over wildfire impacts to water supplies have motivated efforts to mitigate risk by reducing forest fuels. Methods to assess fuel treatment effects and prioritise their placement are needed to guide risk mitigation efforts. We present a fuel treatment optimisation model to minimise risk to multiple water supplies based on constraints for treatment feasibility and cost. Risk is quantified as the expected sediment impact costs to water supplies by combining measures of fire likelihood and behaviour, erosion, sediment transport and water supply vulnerability. We demonstrate the model’s utility for prioritising fuel treatments in two large watersheds in Colorado, USA, that are critical for municipal water supply. Our results indicate that wildfire risk to water supplies can be substantially reduced by treating a small portion of the watersheds that have dense, fire-prone forests on steep slopes that drain to water supply infrastructure. Our results also show that the cost of fuel treatments outweighs the expected cost savings from reduced sediment inputs owing to the low probability of fuel treatments encountering wildfire and the high cost of thinning forests. This highlights the need to expand use of more cost-effective treatments, like prescribed fire, and to identify fuel treatment projects that benefit multiple resources.

show abstract

Section: Model Limitations and Research Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritising fuels reduction for water supply protection

Gannon

Wei

MacDonald

et al. 2019

Int. J. Wildland Fire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the sake of discussion, the case of a plant that needs to treat water in a high‐source‐water‐turbidity range of 50–100 ntu is considered here. In addition to increased turbidity, the characteristics of both particulate matter and NOM can be adversely altered after a fire in a manner that affects water treatment (Hohner et al , ).…”

Section: Impact Of Post‐fire Water Quality Changes On Unit Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing for Wildfires and Extreme Weather: Plant Design and Operation Recommendations

Becker¹,

Hohner²,

Rosario‐Ortiz³

et al. 2018

Journal AWWA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lower-molecular-weight DOM is generally more challenging to remove by conventional treatment processes (Archer & Singer, 2006a;Quang, Choi, & Hur, 2015;White, Thompson, Harrington, & Singer, 1997), with implications for finished water quality. Furthermore, an increase in nitrogenous DBP (N-DBP) precursors has been observed for postfire river samples , wildfire-affected sediment leachates (Hohner, Terry, Townsend, Summers, & Rosario-Ortiz, 2017), and wildfire detritus extracts (Fernández et al, 1997;Wang, Dahlgren, Erşan, et al, 2015). Although N-DBPs are not regulated, they pose a public health concern due to a potentially higher toxicity compared with the regulated carbonaceous DBPs (C-DBPs), total trihalomethanes (TTHMs), and sum of five haloacetic acids (HAA5) (Plewa, Wagner, & Richardson, 2017;Richardson, Plewa, Wagner, Schoeny, & Demarini, 2007;.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory simulation of postfire effects on conventional drinking water treatment and disinfection byproduct formation

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the present research focus of your group?My research group evaluates the effects of extreme events and watershed disturbances on the resilience of drinking water systems. We study how events such as wildfire, floods, and droughts affect source water quality and treatment process performance, and how utilities can best adapt to address these disruptions in water quality. What motivated the research behind your recent article in AWWA Water Science-that is, what problems are you trying to solve?Our research was motivated by the needs of water utilities across North America, but especially utilities in the West that have experienced wildfires or are concerned about the risk of future wildfires to their water treatment system. The rise in wildfire 24 JOURNAL AWWA T h e o r y a n d P r a c t i c e o f S a f e , S u s t a i n a b l e W a t e r www.awwawaterscience.com Amanda (Mandi) collects water samples from the Naches River in central Washington during a day trip with her research group. The Naches River supplies drinking water to the City of Yakima; upstream drainage areas were burned in 2017 by the Norse Peak fire in the Cascade Mountains.

show abstract

Water treatment process evaluation of wildfire-affected sediment leachates

Abstract: Re-suspension of post-fire sediment deposits challenge conventional water treatment processes during runoff events, impacting DBP formation. Treatment thresholds for a range of unit processes are established.

Cited by 26 publications

References 46 publications

Prioritising fuels reduction for water supply protection

Prioritising fuels reduction for water supply protection

Preparing for Wildfires and Extreme Weather: Plant Design and Operation Recommendations

Laboratory simulation of postfire effects on conventional drinking water treatment and disinfection byproduct formation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About