Optimal implementation of green infrastructure practices to minimize influences of land use change and climate change on hydrology and water quality: Case study in Spy Run Creek watershed, Indiana

Yaoze Liu; Bernard A Engel; Paris D Collingsworth; Bryan C Pijanowski

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.015

Optimal implementation of green infrastructure practices to minimize influences of land use change and climate change on hydrology and water quality: Case study in Spy Run Creek watershed, Indiana

Sci Total Environ. 2017 Dec 1:601-602:1400-1411. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.015. Epub 2017 Jun 8.

Authors

Yaoze Liu¹, Bernard A Engel², Paris D Collingsworth³, Bryan C Pijanowski⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, 225 South University Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
² Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, 225 South University Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA. Electronic address: engelb@purdue.edu.
³ Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, 195 Marsteller Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA; Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant College Program, 77 West Jackson Blvd, Chicago, IL 60604, USA.
⁴ Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, 195 Marsteller Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.

PMID: 28605858
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.015

Abstract

Nutrient loading from the Maumee River watershed is a significant reason for the harmful algal blooms (HABs) problem in Lake Erie. The nutrient loading from urban areas needs to be reduced with the installation of green infrastructure (GI) practices. The Long-Term Hydrologic Impact Assessment-Low Impact Development 2.1 (L-THIA-LID 2.1) model was used to explore the influences of land use (LU) and climate change on water quantity and quality in Spy Run Creek watershed (SRCW) (part of Maumee River watershed), decide whether and where excess phosphorus loading existed, identify critical areas to understand where the greatest amount of runoff/pollutants originated, and optimally implement GI practices to obtain maximum environmental benefits with the lowest costs. Both LU/climate changes increased runoff/pollutants generated from the watershed. Areas with the highest runoff/pollutant amount per area, or critical areas, differed for various environmental concerns, land uses (LUs), and climates. Compared to optimization considering all areas, optimization conducted only in critical areas can provide similar cost-effective results with decreased computational time for low levels of runoff/pollutant reductions, but critical area optimization results were not as cost-effective for higher levels of runoff/pollutant reductions. Runoff/pollutants for 2011/2050 LUs/climates could be reduced to amounts of 2001 LU/climate by installation of GI practices with annual expenditures of $0.34 to $2.05 million. The optimization scenarios that were able to obtain the 2001 runoff level in 2011/2050, can also reduce all pollutants to 2001 levels in this watershed.

Keywords: Best management practice; Critical area; Low impact development practice; Nonpoint source pollution; Optimization; Urbanization.