Presentation on theme: "Key Topics A. Introduction – Science-based Adaptive Management B.Brief Summaries (30 minutes) 1.Centralized Sewer System 2.Decentralized Wastewater and."— Presentation transcript:
Key Topics A. Introduction – Science-based Adaptive Management B.Brief Summaries (30 minutes) 1.Centralized Sewer System 2.Decentralized Wastewater and Nitrogen Management a. Cluster systems – New Silver Beach etc. b. Waterless & Urine Diverting Toilets c. Home-scale Denitrifying Septic Component d. Surface N management e. Permeable Reactive Barriers 3. Estuary Management – Inlet widening, oyster & quahogs 4. Sample Cost Comparisons, Scheduling and Timing of Impact 5. Article 50 – November 15, 2010 Town Meeting Warrant B.General Discussions (45+ minutes) Overview of Forum
Typical Existing House – Water & Nitrogen Flows 82.5% 6.5% 11.0% N N N
97% of Houses Currently With Septic Tanks or Cesspools
3% of Houses Currently Connected to Existing Sewer
The Good News is: - The Cape is the advantage of being one county, and one bioregion with defined borders. - The Cape has put very few resources into its wastewater infrastructure; thus we can basically start from scratch in our planning and designing our systems. - The Cape has a highly educated population. The Best News is: -There are low tech systems available now that can reduce the N load as well as capture the ‘waste’ resources for reuse. These systems are highly efficient, extremely resilient and adaptive as well as low in installation and maintenance costs, now and into the future. - There is wide agreement about the technical effectiveness of these systems. -The Cape could become a model county in which the citizens can thrive and from which the world can learn. -The Sad News is: - These technologies are not seriously considered because they require, in some cases, human behavior modifications and a higher degree of complexity in the regulatory system. - Instead central sewers are promoted, which waste precious resources every step of the way - in the transportation, treatment and disposal of the nutrient ‘wastes’. Precious becomes putrescent. - Any system that wastes resources will lead to impoverished economies and environments in the future.
“Quick-Fix” to reduce N entering groundwater : in estuaries : - Urine diverting flush toilet - Oysters in estuaries - Urine to composting service - Food wastes to composting service - Rain gardens on streets Estimated Cost /House (2 urine-diverting toilets) $
Urine-Diverting Toilets Waterless Urinals
Home Improvements – To Remove N from Groundwater - Foam-flush toilet & composter - Food wastes to composting service - Home rain garden - Rainwater use for foam-flush toilet To compost services or bury 9 inches deep
Phoenix Waterless Composting Toilet
Home, Land, & Estuary Improvements To Remove N from Groundwater : To Remove N from Estuaries : - Foam flush waterless toilet; - Oysters in estuaries products to composting service - Food wastes to composting service Estimated Cost /House (central sewer) $45,000 /House Estimated Cost / House (2 foam-flush toilets + composter) $12-15,000 /House
Denitrifying Septic Systems Permeable Reactive Barrier Estuary Management
Initial 2005 Massachusetts Estuaries Assessment of Wastewater Management Needs
Areas Designated for Wastewater Management Intervention Including Future Needs -- Circles Represent Amount of Wastewater Nitrogen Reduction to Meet TMDLs --
Deleted from Phase 2 Phase 1 & 2 Areas Construction Direction South Coast Area Proposed for Phase 1 & 2 Sewer Development -- Estimated Cost $310 million ( $43,000 for 7,350 Units) --
Little Pond Great Pond Green Pond Bournes Pond Falmouth Wastewater Management Area Four Estuaries -- Phase 1 & 2 26 October2010R Zweig
Total Load = kg-N/day Sources of Nitrogen Entering Estuaries -- Sources from Septic Systems Pulled Out --
Oyster Nitrogen Management** 0.52 g-N – shell and flesh (41%) 0.50 g-N – denitrified to air from bio-deposits (39%) 0.25 g-N – accumulated bio-deposits (21%) 1.27 g-N – total removed from water Oyster Nitrogen Management** 0.52 g-N – shell and flesh (41%) 0.50 g-N – denitrified to air from bio-deposits (39%) 0.25 g-N – accumulated bio-deposits (21%) 1.27 g-N – total removed from water Person – Annual N Wastes* 4,380 g-N -- toilet 912 g-N -- gray water 5,292 g-N – total Person – Annual N Wastes* 4,380 g-N -- toilet 912 g-N -- gray water 5,292 g-N – total Oysters per Person 4,170 oysters/person/year Oysters per Person 4,170 oysters/person/year * Hazen & Sawyer 2009 ** Newell et al 2005 How can oysters do what’s needed? Converted to basic nitrogen compounds consumed by micro-algae and bacteria – nutrients for filter-feeding shellfish Converted to basic nitrogen compounds consumed by micro-algae and bacteria – nutrients for filter-feeding shellfish
Estuary Water Quality Management Using Only Oyster Culture Estuary Water Quality Management With Oyster Culture Using Up To 10% of Pond Area with Balance Via Dilution by Widening Inlets to Ponds Notes: 1. Objective to Control Nitrogen Levels in Impacted Estuaries (Increase Water Clarity) with Least Cost 2. Submerged Oyster Culture - Primary (out of sight): Opening Inlets – Secondary 3. One oyster on average removes 0.68 g-N/l/year in Flesh, Shell and Bio-deposits year growth 4. Residual Nitrogen Available for Natural Shellfish, Fish and Aquatic Plant (Eel Grass) Productivity 5. Oyster Culture Flexible – Can Be developed/ Leased Incrementally Depending on Need. 6. Town Revenue from Leasing Oyster Culture Areas to Offset Navigation, Landing Site & Admin Cost TMDLSubmerged Baseline MidTarget MidOyster AreaRequired AreaN LoadNitrogen for Target NPercentMooringOysters/Year Pond (acres)(kg/year)*(mg-N/l)* (acres)Pond AreaDensity(Tons) Bournes152 14, %Very Few 192 Great258 22, %Moderate 333 Green128 21, %Highest 188 Little**45.5 8, %None 166 All , % 880 * From Massachusetts Estuaries Project Study ** Shellfishing now prohibited in Little Pond TMDL Submerged Baseline MidTarget MidDilution byOyster Area AreaN LoadNitrogen Inlet Openingfor Target NMooringOysters/Year Pond (acres)(kg/year)*(mg-N/l)* Increase(acres)Density(Tons) Bournes152 14, % 14.71Very Few 192 Great258 22, % 25.48Moderate 333 Green128 21, % 13.43Highest 175 Little**45.5 8, % 5.81None 76 All , * From Massachusetts Estuaries Project Study ** Shellfishing now prohibited in Little Pond 350, 310
Oyster & Quahog Factors 1. Local Knowledge -- Cape Cod growers, shellfishers and Town specialists 2. Flexible – can be adjusted to meet needs of different estuary conditions 3. Low Cost -- oysters farming by private produces – northern areas -- quahog seeding by town – southern areas 4. Clean Up Estuaries Fast – can be combined with other options 5. Complex Permitting – constraints on area usage -- need to engage Town Departments, state and abutters -- possibility of doing as pilot -- All of Falmouth?
Sampling Layout Permanent Wells and Wellpoints Preliminary Nitrex TM Permeable Reactive Barrier Locations 20 meters Wellpoint Sampling transects downgradient from barrier and control Multidepth sampling wells perpendicular to barrier upgradient, through and downgradient Waquoit Bay NERR Boat Houste Barrier Permeable Reactive Barriers
July 2009, algal growth along seepage face inhibited down-gradient from barrier Photo by Chris Weidman, WBNERR; K. Foreman MBL, Woods Hole, MA Approx. location of barrier subsurface
Barrier Transect Location (meters ) Nitrate Concentration ( molar) Wellpoint sampling clearly shows NO 3 removal downgradient from barrier Data of Ken Foreman, MBL Woods Hole
Change in Annual Cost by Assessed Home Value for Next Phase Wastewater Management Based on Equal Cost Sharing Per FCWMPRC's Proposals on Financing -- Comparative Example for Little and Bournes Pond -- Assessed Home Value ($000s) a/ 520 b/ 750 1,000 Current Property Tax ($6.08/$1,000) 1,520 2,250 3,162 4,560 6,080 Sewer System Total Cost per Year on Sewer ($) c/ ,689 4,601 5, Percent Cost Increase on Sewer 95%64%46%32%24% Total Cost per Year off Sewer ($) d/ 1,835 2,565 3,344 4,743 6,263 Percent Cost Increase off Sewer 21%14%10%7%5% Denitrifying Septic System + Inlet Widening System Total per Year with Improvement ($) e/ 2,333 3,063 3,975 5,373 6,893 Percent Increase with Improvement54%36%26%18%13% Total per Year without Improvement ($) d/ 1,654 2,384 3,296 4,9646,893 Percent Increase without Improvement9%6%4%3%2% Notes a/ Assessed median home value d/ Total property taxes only b/ Assessed average home value e/ Betterment, property tax, monitoring & electricity c/ Betterment, total property tax and sewer bill 12% --8%
Estimated Implementation Schedule, Costs and Timing of Impact of Several Options
Finance, Implementation and Impact Issues 1. Analysis of Alternatives Incomplete – combining options can improve effectiveness and reduce costs 2. Long delay after investment to realize objective for some options 3. Equity – betterment fixed per house & not based on value 4. Cost Recovery via Property Tax Base?
To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen to petition the General Court for a special act of legislation regarding sewer betterment assessments to be assessed in the Town and which will a)authorize the term of borrowing for sewer projects and the term to pay betterments assessed for the project to have different termination dates, b) authorize the Board of Selectmen to adopt fixed annual sewer betterment payment schedules, c)authorize the equal division of annual sewer assessment payments on property tax bills, d) authorize an interest rate of 2.5% on apportioned sewer betterments payments effective January 1, 2015, and e) authorize such other provisions regarding sewer betterment assessments as will enable or enhance the purposes of this article. ARTICLE 50: Town Meeting Warrant – November 15, 2010 Issues: 1. Inadequate Analysis of Alternatives – main analysis of sewer system only 2. Cost Recovery Plan – 2.5% interest on betterments over 50 years 3. Fairness and Equitability – regardless of home value assigned same betterment 4. Uncertainty of Funding Incentives – dependent upon initial SRF 0% interest loan(s) Issues: 1. Inadequate Analysis of Alternatives – main analysis of sewer system only 2. Cost Recovery Plan – 2.5% interest on betterments over 50 years 3. Fairness and Equitability – regardless of home value assigned same betterment 4. Uncertainty of Funding Incentives – dependent upon initial SRF 0% interest loan(s)
CWMPRC’s Proposed $15 million Debt Exclusion Appropriation
What Next? Where to From Here?
Water & Nutrient Audit
How to recycle food nutrients back to plants ?
Waquoit Bay EelpondBournes Pond Green Pond Great Pond Due to sub-urbanization and restricted tidal circulation, all these salt ponds adjacent to Vineyard Sound are experiencing significant eutrophication and declines in water quality PRB Two test barriers installed in Waquoit Bay & Childs River
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” Mahatma Gandhi
November 2005, ~ 3.5 months after installation Groundwater Nitrate Removal in Waquoit Bay PRB W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 RelativeDistance(m) R e l a t i v e E l e v a t i o n ( m ) NO 3 - ( M) PRB Grade Waquoit Bay K. Foreman MBL, Woods Hole, MA 02543