Performance Evaluation of a Field‐Scale Surface Barrier

Surface barriers, designed to limit recharge and biointrusion, have been identified as a critical component in long‐term management of buried wastes. However, surface barrier technology remains largely unproven at the field scale. Recently, a prototype of a field‐scale (2.5 ha), vegetated, capillary...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of Environmental Quality 1997-05, Vol.26 (3), p.694-705
Hauptverfasser: Ward, A. L., Gee, G. W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 705
container_issue 3
container_start_page 694
container_title Journal of Environmental Quality
container_volume 26
creator Ward, A. L.
Gee, G. W.
description Surface barriers, designed to limit recharge and biointrusion, have been identified as a critical component in long‐term management of buried wastes. However, surface barrier technology remains largely unproven at the field scale. Recently, a prototype of a field‐scale (2.5 ha), vegetated, capillary surface barrier was constructed over a waste zone at the semiarid Hanford Site in southeast Washington. The barrier is instrumented to measure the components of water balance under ambient and elevated precipitation scenarios on soil and rock‐covered plots. The barrier also allows for the evaluation of two protective side slope configurations, and the monitoring of flow around and under a low permeability asphalt layer. The first 2 yr of testing were unusually wet, with precipitation more than twice the long‐term annual average of 160 mm. Even with an imposed irrigation treatment of 480 mm yr−1, including a simulated 1000‐yr storm event each year, there was no drainage from the soil covered plots. This demonstrates the effectiveness of vegetated capillary barriers in an arid environment. Each year, plants used all available water, independent of precipitation treatment, reducing soil water storage to the same lower limit by the end of summer. The soil was wettest during spring, but water storage never exceeded 450 mm in the 2‐m thick soil layer, which was designed to store 600 mm. The efficiency of ET was consistently higher on the ambient treatment, suggesting a susceptibility of native plant species to high levels of precipitation. No water has penetrated the low‐permeability asphalt layer, although an unprotected section of the toe showed a potential for underflow. While there was no difference in total drainage from the irrigated side slopes over the last 2 yr, the nonirrigated basalt slope drained 55% less water than the gravel. Side slope drainage also showed a seasonal dependence, with the gravel draining more than the basalt in winter and less in the summer. Drainage rates and volumes appear to be controlled by advective airflow.
doi_str_mv 10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600030015x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16111867</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>16111867</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a487X-a5736a85f154c3571f438e0ccf854622c0bdf297b38ed45738babf2741c2b70f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqV0MlKxDAYB_AgCo7LO1RRb9UvS5v24EGHcUNQUUHwENJMghk6jZO0LjcfwWf0SUyZwYN48ZAEwu9b-CO0i2GfYMoOJnqGy5LvAzBOGMkASA4AFABnb0togDPKUxKvZTToTdqjVbQWwiQSAjwfoPJae-P8VDZKJ6MXWXeyta5JnElkcmJ1Pf76-LxVstbJbeeNjOpYem-130ArRtZBby7edXR_MrobnqWXV6fnw6PLVLKCP6Qy4zSXRWZwxhTNODaMFhqUMkXGckIUVGNDSl7F3zGLuKhkZQhnWJGKg6HraGve14XWiqBsq9WTck2jVStYyQiU0ezNzbN3s06HVkxtULquZaNdFwTOMcZFziPc_gUnrvNN3F_gklNOWZFHdDhHyrsQvDbi2dup9O8Cg-iTF4vkxZ_Jx_qdxRAZYnLGx3Bt-GlCeE4xhcge5-zV1vr9fzPExeiGxNOLv8AD_QYloJtU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>197373486</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance Evaluation of a Field‐Scale Surface Barrier</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Full Collection</source><creator>Ward, A. L. ; Gee, G. W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ward, A. L. ; Gee, G. W.</creatorcontrib><description>Surface barriers, designed to limit recharge and biointrusion, have been identified as a critical component in long‐term management of buried wastes. However, surface barrier technology remains largely unproven at the field scale. Recently, a prototype of a field‐scale (2.5 ha), vegetated, capillary surface barrier was constructed over a waste zone at the semiarid Hanford Site in southeast Washington. The barrier is instrumented to measure the components of water balance under ambient and elevated precipitation scenarios on soil and rock‐covered plots. The barrier also allows for the evaluation of two protective side slope configurations, and the monitoring of flow around and under a low permeability asphalt layer. The first 2 yr of testing were unusually wet, with precipitation more than twice the long‐term annual average of 160 mm. Even with an imposed irrigation treatment of 480 mm yr−1, including a simulated 1000‐yr storm event each year, there was no drainage from the soil covered plots. This demonstrates the effectiveness of vegetated capillary barriers in an arid environment. Each year, plants used all available water, independent of precipitation treatment, reducing soil water storage to the same lower limit by the end of summer. The soil was wettest during spring, but water storage never exceeded 450 mm in the 2‐m thick soil layer, which was designed to store 600 mm. The efficiency of ET was consistently higher on the ambient treatment, suggesting a susceptibility of native plant species to high levels of precipitation. No water has penetrated the low‐permeability asphalt layer, although an unprotected section of the toe showed a potential for underflow. While there was no difference in total drainage from the irrigated side slopes over the last 2 yr, the nonirrigated basalt slope drained 55% less water than the gravel. Side slope drainage also showed a seasonal dependence, with the gravel draining more than the basalt in winter and less in the summer. Drainage rates and volumes appear to be controlled by advective airflow.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0047-2425</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-2537</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600030015x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEVQAA</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America</publisher><subject>05 NUCLEAR FUELS ; Applied sciences ; ATMOSPHERIC PRECIPITATIONS ; BASALT ; BIOINTRUSION ; Buildings. Public works ; CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS ; COVERINGS ; DRAINAGE ; ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES ; Exact sciences and technology ; Geotechnics ; GROUNDWATER RECHARGE ; HANFORD RESERVATION ; Miscellaneous ; Performance evaluation ; PERMEABILITY ; PLANTS ; RADIOACTIVE WASTE FACILITIES ; Sewerage. Sewer construction ; SOILS ; WASTE DISPOSAL</subject><ispartof>Journal of Environmental Quality, 1997-05, Vol.26 (3), p.694-705</ispartof><rights>1997 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America</rights><rights>1997 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Society of Agronomy, Inc. May/Jun 1997</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a487X-a5736a85f154c3571f438e0ccf854622c0bdf297b38ed45738babf2741c2b70f3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2134%2Fjeq1997.00472425002600030015x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2134%2Fjeq1997.00472425002600030015x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,881,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=2763130$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/494209$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ward, A. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gee, G. W.</creatorcontrib><title>Performance Evaluation of a Field‐Scale Surface Barrier</title><title>Journal of Environmental Quality</title><description>Surface barriers, designed to limit recharge and biointrusion, have been identified as a critical component in long‐term management of buried wastes. However, surface barrier technology remains largely unproven at the field scale. Recently, a prototype of a field‐scale (2.5 ha), vegetated, capillary surface barrier was constructed over a waste zone at the semiarid Hanford Site in southeast Washington. The barrier is instrumented to measure the components of water balance under ambient and elevated precipitation scenarios on soil and rock‐covered plots. The barrier also allows for the evaluation of two protective side slope configurations, and the monitoring of flow around and under a low permeability asphalt layer. The first 2 yr of testing were unusually wet, with precipitation more than twice the long‐term annual average of 160 mm. Even with an imposed irrigation treatment of 480 mm yr−1, including a simulated 1000‐yr storm event each year, there was no drainage from the soil covered plots. This demonstrates the effectiveness of vegetated capillary barriers in an arid environment. Each year, plants used all available water, independent of precipitation treatment, reducing soil water storage to the same lower limit by the end of summer. The soil was wettest during spring, but water storage never exceeded 450 mm in the 2‐m thick soil layer, which was designed to store 600 mm. The efficiency of ET was consistently higher on the ambient treatment, suggesting a susceptibility of native plant species to high levels of precipitation. No water has penetrated the low‐permeability asphalt layer, although an unprotected section of the toe showed a potential for underflow. While there was no difference in total drainage from the irrigated side slopes over the last 2 yr, the nonirrigated basalt slope drained 55% less water than the gravel. Side slope drainage also showed a seasonal dependence, with the gravel draining more than the basalt in winter and less in the summer. Drainage rates and volumes appear to be controlled by advective airflow.</description><subject>05 NUCLEAR FUELS</subject><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>ATMOSPHERIC PRECIPITATIONS</subject><subject>BASALT</subject><subject>BIOINTRUSION</subject><subject>Buildings. Public works</subject><subject>CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS</subject><subject>COVERINGS</subject><subject>DRAINAGE</subject><subject>ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Geotechnics</subject><subject>GROUNDWATER RECHARGE</subject><subject>HANFORD RESERVATION</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>PERMEABILITY</subject><subject>PLANTS</subject><subject>RADIOACTIVE WASTE FACILITIES</subject><subject>Sewerage. Sewer construction</subject><subject>SOILS</subject><subject>WASTE DISPOSAL</subject><issn>0047-2425</issn><issn>1537-2537</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqV0MlKxDAYB_AgCo7LO1RRb9UvS5v24EGHcUNQUUHwENJMghk6jZO0LjcfwWf0SUyZwYN48ZAEwu9b-CO0i2GfYMoOJnqGy5LvAzBOGMkASA4AFABnb0togDPKUxKvZTToTdqjVbQWwiQSAjwfoPJae-P8VDZKJ6MXWXeyta5JnElkcmJ1Pf76-LxVstbJbeeNjOpYem-130ArRtZBby7edXR_MrobnqWXV6fnw6PLVLKCP6Qy4zSXRWZwxhTNODaMFhqUMkXGckIUVGNDSl7F3zGLuKhkZQhnWJGKg6HraGve14XWiqBsq9WTck2jVStYyQiU0ezNzbN3s06HVkxtULquZaNdFwTOMcZFziPc_gUnrvNN3F_gklNOWZFHdDhHyrsQvDbi2dup9O8Cg-iTF4vkxZ_Jx_qdxRAZYnLGx3Bt-GlCeE4xhcge5-zV1vr9fzPExeiGxNOLv8AD_QYloJtU</recordid><startdate>199705</startdate><enddate>199705</enddate><creator>Ward, A. L.</creator><creator>Gee, G. W.</creator><general>American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America</general><general>Crop Science Society of America</general><general>American Society of Agronomy</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199705</creationdate><title>Performance Evaluation of a Field‐Scale Surface Barrier</title><author>Ward, A. L. ; Gee, G. W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a487X-a5736a85f154c3571f438e0ccf854622c0bdf297b38ed45738babf2741c2b70f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>05 NUCLEAR FUELS</topic><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>ATMOSPHERIC PRECIPITATIONS</topic><topic>BASALT</topic><topic>BIOINTRUSION</topic><topic>Buildings. Public works</topic><topic>CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS</topic><topic>COVERINGS</topic><topic>DRAINAGE</topic><topic>ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Geotechnics</topic><topic>GROUNDWATER RECHARGE</topic><topic>HANFORD RESERVATION</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>PERMEABILITY</topic><topic>PLANTS</topic><topic>RADIOACTIVE WASTE FACILITIES</topic><topic>Sewerage. Sewer construction</topic><topic>SOILS</topic><topic>WASTE DISPOSAL</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ward, A. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gee, G. W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Database (Proquest)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Journal of Environmental Quality</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ward, A. L.</au><au>Gee, G. W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance Evaluation of a Field‐Scale Surface Barrier</atitle><jtitle>Journal of Environmental Quality</jtitle><date>1997-05</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>694</spage><epage>705</epage><pages>694-705</pages><issn>0047-2425</issn><eissn>1537-2537</eissn><coden>JEVQAA</coden><abstract>Surface barriers, designed to limit recharge and biointrusion, have been identified as a critical component in long‐term management of buried wastes. However, surface barrier technology remains largely unproven at the field scale. Recently, a prototype of a field‐scale (2.5 ha), vegetated, capillary surface barrier was constructed over a waste zone at the semiarid Hanford Site in southeast Washington. The barrier is instrumented to measure the components of water balance under ambient and elevated precipitation scenarios on soil and rock‐covered plots. The barrier also allows for the evaluation of two protective side slope configurations, and the monitoring of flow around and under a low permeability asphalt layer. The first 2 yr of testing were unusually wet, with precipitation more than twice the long‐term annual average of 160 mm. Even with an imposed irrigation treatment of 480 mm yr−1, including a simulated 1000‐yr storm event each year, there was no drainage from the soil covered plots. This demonstrates the effectiveness of vegetated capillary barriers in an arid environment. Each year, plants used all available water, independent of precipitation treatment, reducing soil water storage to the same lower limit by the end of summer. The soil was wettest during spring, but water storage never exceeded 450 mm in the 2‐m thick soil layer, which was designed to store 600 mm. The efficiency of ET was consistently higher on the ambient treatment, suggesting a susceptibility of native plant species to high levels of precipitation. No water has penetrated the low‐permeability asphalt layer, although an unprotected section of the toe showed a potential for underflow. While there was no difference in total drainage from the irrigated side slopes over the last 2 yr, the nonirrigated basalt slope drained 55% less water than the gravel. Side slope drainage also showed a seasonal dependence, with the gravel draining more than the basalt in winter and less in the summer. Drainage rates and volumes appear to be controlled by advective airflow.</abstract><cop>Madison, WI</cop><pub>American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America</pub><doi>10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600030015x</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0047-2425
ispartof Journal of Environmental Quality, 1997-05, Vol.26 (3), p.694-705
issn 0047-2425
1537-2537
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16111867
source Wiley-Blackwell Full Collection
subjects 05 NUCLEAR FUELS
Applied sciences
ATMOSPHERIC PRECIPITATIONS
BASALT
BIOINTRUSION
Buildings. Public works
CONTAINMENT SYSTEMS
COVERINGS
DRAINAGE
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Exact sciences and technology
Geotechnics
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
HANFORD RESERVATION
Miscellaneous
Performance evaluation
PERMEABILITY
PLANTS
RADIOACTIVE WASTE FACILITIES
Sewerage. Sewer construction
SOILS
WASTE DISPOSAL
title Performance Evaluation of a Field‐Scale Surface Barrier
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T19%3A34%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20Evaluation%20of%20a%20Field%E2%80%90Scale%20Surface%20Barrier&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20Environmental%20Quality&rft.au=Ward,%20A.%20L.&rft.date=1997-05&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=694&rft.epage=705&rft.pages=694-705&rft.issn=0047-2425&rft.eissn=1537-2537&rft.coden=JEVQAA&rft_id=info:doi/10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600030015x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_osti_%3E16111867%3C/proquest_osti_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=197373486&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true