scholarly journals Estimating Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in the Great Lakes Basin

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly H. Shaffer ◽  
Rosemary S. Stenback
Keyword(s):  
Great Lakes ◽  
Return Flow ◽  
Great Lakes Basin ◽  
Consumptive Use ◽  
Water Withdrawals

Lake Michigan Water Resources Study

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenguang Sheng ◽  
George Nnanna ◽  
Chandramouli Viswanathan
Keyword(s):  
Water Quality ◽  
Water Use ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Return Flow ◽  
Water Quality Data ◽  
North West ◽  
Consumptive Use ◽  
Public Supply ◽  
Water Withdrawals ◽  
Use Categories

This paper contains an analysis of withdrawal data for North West Indiana to compute consumptive-use coefficients and to describe monthly variability of withdrawals and consumptive use. Concurrent data were available for most water-use categories from 1990 through 2008. Average monthly water withdrawals are discussed for a variety of water-use categories, and average water use per month is depicted graphically. Water quality analysis is presented and historic water quality data of Northwest Indiana, (Lake, Porter and LaPort Counties) were downloaded from USEPA website and they were examined for the trends in different water quality constituents. Individual station based analysis and regional analysis were conducted using MK Test. Water quality data indicated an improvement trend. Water withdrawals data were analyzed using regression and Artificial Neural Network (ANN) models. The ANN model performed a better forecasting while compared to a linear regression model. For most water-use categories, the summer months were those of highest withdrawal and highest consumptive use. For public supply, average monthly withdrawals ranged from 2,193 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) (February) to 3,092 Mgal/d (July). North West Indiana energy production had large increases in average monthly withdrawals in the summer months (17,551 Mgal/d in February to 26,236 Mgal/d in July, possibly because of increased electricity production in the summer, a need for additional cooling-water withdrawals when intake-water temperature is high, or use of different types of cooling methods during different times of the year. Average industrial withdrawals ranged from 31,553 Mgal/d (February) to 36,934 Mgal/d (August). The North West Indiana irrigation data showed that most withdrawals were in May through October for golf courses, nurseries, and crop irrigation. Miscellaneous water withdrawals ranged from 12.2 Mgal/d (January) to 416.3 Mgal/d (October), commercial facilities that have high water demand in Indiana are medical facilities, schools, amusement facilities, wildlife facilities, large stores, colleges, correctional institutions, and national security facilities. Consumptive use and consumptive-use coefficients were computed by two principal methods in this study: the return-flow and withdrawal method and the winter-base-rate method (WBR). The WBR method was not suitable for the industrial and miscellaneous water-use categories. The RW method was not used for public-supply facilities. The public-supply annual average consumptive-use coefficient derived by use of the WBR methods is 8 percent from 1990 to 2008 for North West Indiana; the summer average consumptive-use coefficient was considerably higher with the amount of 20 percent. The energy production annual consumptive-use coefficient was 13 percent by the WBR method, which increased to 28 percent for summer. In terms of maximum accuracy and minimal uncertainty, use of available withdrawal, return-flow, and consumptive-use data reported by facilities and data estimated from similar facilities are preferable over estimates based on data for a particular water-use category or groups of water-use categories. If monthly withdrawal, return flow, and consumptive use data are few and limited, monthly patterns described in this report may be used as a basis of estimation, but the level of uncertainty may be a greater than for the other estimation methods.

scholarly journals Social Vulnerability across the Great Lakes Basin: A County-Level Comparative and Spatial Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (13) ◽  
pp. 7274
Author(s):  
Joshua T. Fergen ◽  
Ryan D. Bergstrom
Keyword(s):  
Great Lakes ◽  
Spatial Patterns ◽  
Social Vulnerability ◽  
Vulnerability Index ◽  
Social Vulnerability Index ◽  
Great Lakes Basin ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
Regional Patterns ◽  
Urban Rural ◽  
Social Vulnerabilities

Social vulnerability refers to how social positions affect the ability to access resources during a disaster or disturbance, but there is limited empirical examination of its spatial patterns in the Great Lakes Basin (GLB) region of North America. In this study, we map four themes of social vulnerability for the GLB by using the Center for Disease Control’s Social Vulnerability Index (CDC SVI) for every county in the basin and compare mean scores for each sub-basin to assess inter-basin differences. Additionally, we map LISA results to identify clusters of high and low social vulnerability along with the outliers across the region. Results show the spatial patterns depend on the social vulnerability theme selected, with some overlapping clusters of high vulnerability existing in Northern and Central Michigan, and clusters of low vulnerability in Eastern Wisconsin along with outliers across the basins. Differences in these patterns also indicate the existence of an urban–rural dimension to the variance in social vulnerabilities measured in this study. Understanding regional patterns of social vulnerability help identify the most vulnerable people, and this paper presents a framework for policymakers and researchers to address the unique social vulnerabilities across heterogeneous regions.

scholarly journals Establishment of Regional Phytoremediation Buffer Systems for Ecological Restoration in the Great Lakes Basin, USA. I. Genotype × Environment Interactions

Forests ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald S. Zalesny ◽  
Andrej Pilipović ◽  
Elizabeth R. Rogers ◽  
Joel G. Burken ◽  
Richard A. Hallett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Great Lakes ◽  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Recurrent Selection ◽  
Lake Michigan ◽  
Great Lakes Basin ◽  
Annual Increment ◽  
Climate Conditions ◽  
The North ◽  
Local Soil

Poplar remediation systems are ideal for reducing runoff, cleaning groundwater, and delivering ecosystem services to the North American Great Lakes and globally. We used phyto-recurrent selection (PRS) to establish sixteen phytoremediation buffer systems (phyto buffers) (buffer groups: 2017 × 6; 2018 × 5; 2019 × 5) throughout the Lake Superior and Lake Michigan watersheds comprised of twelve PRS-selected clones each year. We tested for differences in genotypes, environments, and their interactions for health, height, diameter, and volume from ages one to four years. All trees had optimal health. Mean first-, second-, and third-year volume ranged from 71 ± 26 to 132 ± 39 cm3; 1440 ± 575 to 5765 ± 1132 cm3; and 8826 ± 2646 to 10,530 ± 2110 cm3, respectively. Fourth-year mean annual increment of 2017 buffer group trees ranged from 1.1 ± 0.7 to 7.8 ± 0.5 Mg ha−1 yr−1. We identified generalist varieties with superior establishment across a broad range of buffers (‘DM114’, ‘NC14106’, ‘99038022’, ‘99059016’) and specialist clones uniquely adapted to local soil and climate conditions (‘7300502’, ‘DN5’, ‘DN34’, ‘DN177’, ‘NM2’, ‘NM5’, ‘NM6’). Using generalists and specialists enhances the potential for phytoremediation best management practices that are geographically robust, being regionally designed yet globally relevant.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document