Bioretention impact on runoff temperature in trout sensitive waters
Abstract
A study was conducted in western North Carolina, along the southeastern extent of the U.S. trout populations, to examine the effect of bioretention areas on runoff temperature. Four bioretention areas were monitored during the summers of 2006 and 2007. It was found that smaller bioretention areas, with respect to the size of their contributing watershed, were able to significantly reduce both maximum and median water temperatures between the inlet and outlet. The proportionately larger bioretention areas were only able to significantly reduce maximum water temperatures between the inlet and outlet; however, these systems showed evidence of substantial reductions in outflow quantity, effectively reducing the thermal impact. Despite temperature reductions, effluent temperatures still posed a potential threat to coldwater streams during the peak summer months. During the summer months, effluent temperatures were generally coolest at the greatest soil depths, supporting evidence of an optimum drain depth between 90 and 120 cm. The ability of bioretention areas to reduce storm-water temperature and flows supports their application to reduce the thermal impacts of urban storm-water runoff.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The depth of the underdrain influences the effluent temperature from GSI, with underdrains at lower depths producing lower temperatures due to the longer infiltration distance for heat transfer.
“To that end, the depth of the underdrain will influence the effluent temperature from GSI, with underdrains at lower depths producing lower temperatures due to the longer infiltration distance for heat transfer (Jones et al., 2009).”
From Review of emerging contaminants in green stormwater infrastructure: antibiotic resistance genes, microplastics, tire wear particles, PFAS, and temperature (2024) · cites this paper as Jones et al., 2009
A system with soil shallower than 90 cm may not allow enough infiltration time and distance to cool runoff sufficiently.
“A system with soil shallower than 90 cm may not allow enough infiltration time and distance to cool runoff sufficiently (Graves, 1998; Jones et al., 2009).”
From Review of emerging contaminants in green stormwater infrastructure: antibiotic resistance genes, microplastics, tire wear particles, PFAS, and temperature (2024) · cites this paper as Jones et al., 2009
A parking lot with no tree shade released higher median runoff temperatures to stormwater control measures (by 0.3 °C) and higher maximum runoff temperatures (by 3.2 °C) than a parking lot with tree shade.
“For example, a parking lot with no tree shade was found to release higher median runoff temperatures to stormwater control measures (SCMs) (by 0.3 ◦ C) and higher maximum runoff temperatures to SCMs (by 3.2 ◦ C) when compared to a parking lot with tree shade (Jones et al., 2009).”
From Review of emerging contaminants in green stormwater infrastructure: antibiotic resistance genes, microplastics, tire wear particles, PFAS, and temperature (2024) · cites this paper as Jones et al., 2009
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Winston, R. J., Dorsey, J. D., & Hunt, W. F. (2016) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.081 · Cited by 229 · see citing works
Self-citationBodus, B., O'Malley, K., Dieter, G., Gunawardana, C., & McDonald, W. (2024) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167195 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jones, M. P., & Hunt, W. F.
- Affiliations
- Former Graduate Student, Dept. of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State Univ., Campus Box 7625, Raleigh, NC 27695.
- Venue
- Journal of Environmental Engineering
- Published
- 2009-08
- Volume
- 135
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 577-585
- ISSN
- 0733-9372
- 1943-7870
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
