| |
Records |
Links |
|
Author |
Desmet, N.; Touchant, K.; Seuntjens, P.; Tang, T.; Bronders, J. |
|
| |
Title |
A hybrid monitoring and modelling approach to assess the contribution of sources of glyphosate and AMPA in large river catchments |
Type |
A1 Journal article |
| |
Year  |
2016 |
Publication |
The science of the total environment |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
| |
Volume |
573 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
1580-1588 |
|
| |
Keywords |
A1 Journal article; Sustainable Energy, Air and Water Technology (DuEL) |
|
| |
Abstract |
Large river catchments with mixed land use capture pesticides from many sources, and degradable pesticides are converted during downstream transport. Unravelling the contribution of pesticide source and the effect of degradation processes is a challenge in such areas. However, insight and understanding of the sources is important for targeted managen-lent, especially when water is abstracted from the river for drinking water production. The river Meuse is such a case. A long-term monitoring data set was applied in a modelling approach for assessing the contribution of waste water treatment plants (WWTPs) and tributaries (sub-basins) to surface water contamination, and to evaluate the effect of decay on the downstream concentrations of glyphosate and AMPA at the point of drinking water abstraction. The results show that WWTPs are important contributors for glyphosate and AMPA in large river catchments with mixed land uses. In the studied area, the river Meuse in the Netherlands, the relative contribution of WWTP effluents is above 29% for glyphosate and around 12% for AMPA. Local industries are found to be potentially big contributors of AMPA. Glyphosate entering the river system is gradually converted to AMPA and other degradation-productions, which results in downstream loads that are considerably lower than the sum of all influxes. In summer when the travel time is longer due to lower discharge, the first order decay of glyphosate in the river Meuse is estimated to result in about 50% reduction of the downstream glyphosate concentrations over a river stretch of 250 km. The contribution of glyphosate decay to the observed AMPA concentrations ranges between 2% and 10%. Contributions are sensitive to seasonal variations in discharge that influence the concentrations through dilution and degradation. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Wos |
000390071000153 |
Publication Date |
2016-10-08 |
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0048-9697; 1879-1026 |
ISBN |
|
Additional Links |
UA library record; WoS full record; WoS citing articles |
|
| |
Impact Factor |
|
Times cited |
|
Open Access |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
UA @ admin @ c:irua:140296 |
Serial |
7391 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Beames, A.; Broekx, S.; Lookman, R.; Touchant, K.; Seuntjens, P. |
|
| |
Title |
Sustainability appraisal tools for soil and groundwater remediation : how is the choice of remediation alternative influenced by different sets of sustainability indicators and tool structures? |
Type |
A1 Journal article |
| |
Year |
2014 |
Publication |
The science of the total environment |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
| |
Volume |
470 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
954-966 |
|
| |
Keywords |
A1 Journal article; Sustainable Energy, Air and Water Technology (DuEL) |
|
| |
Abstract |
The state-of-the-science in sustainability assessment of soil and groundwater remediation is evaluated with the application of four decision support systems (DSSs) to a large-scale brownfield revitalization case study. The DSSs were used to perform sustainability appraisals of four technically feasible remediation alternatives proposed for the site. The first stage of the review compares the scope of each tool's sustainability indicators, how these indicators are measured and how the tools differ in terms of standardization and weighting procedures. The second stage of the review compares the outputs from the tools and determines the key factors that result in differing results between tools. The evaluation of indicator sets and tool structures explains why the tools generate differing results. Not all crucial impact areas, as identified by sustainable remediation forums, are thoroughly considered by the tools, particularly with regard to the social and economic aspects of sustainability. Variations in boundary conditions defined between technologies, produce distorted environmental impact results, especially when in-situ and ex-situ technologies are compared. The review draws attention to the need for end users to be aware of which aspects of sustainability are considered, how the aspects are measured and how all aspects are ultimately balanced in the evaluation of potential remediation strategies. Existing tools can be improved by considering different technologies within the same boundary conditions and by expanding indicator sets to include indicators deemed to be relevant by remediation forums. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Wos |
000331415600102 |
Publication Date |
2013-11-14 |
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0048-9697; 1879-1026 |
ISBN |
|
Additional Links |
UA library record; WoS full record; WoS citing articles |
|
| |
Impact Factor |
|
Times cited |
|
Open Access |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
UA @ admin @ c:irua:115827 |
Serial |
8628 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
