25 research outputs found

    Limited Occurrence of Denitrification in Four Shallow Aquifers in Agricultural Areas of the United States

    Get PDF
    The ability of natural attenuation to mitigate agricultural nitrate contamination in recharging aquifers was investigated in four important agricultural settings in the United States. The study used laboratory analyses, field measurements, and flow and transport modeling for monitoring well transects (0.5 to 2.5 km in length) in the San Joaquin watershed, California, the Elkhorn watershed, Nebraska, the Yakima watershed, Washington, and the Chester watershed, Maryland. Ground water analyses included major ion chemistry, dissolved gases, nitrogen and oxygen stable isotopes, and estimates of recharge date. Sediment analyses included potential electron donors and stable nitrogen and carbon isotopes. Within each site and among aquifer-based medians, dissolved oxygen decreases with ground water age, and excess N2 from denitrification increases with age. Stable isotopes and excess N2 imply minimal denitrifying activity at the Maryland and Washington sites, partial denitrification at the California site, and total denitrification across portions of the Nebraska site. At all sites, recharging electron donor concentrations are not sufficient to account for the losses of dissolved oxygen and nitrate, implying that relict, solid phase electron donors drive redox reactions. Zero-order rates of denitrification range from 0 to 0.14 ÎŒmol N L−1d−1, comparable to observations of other studies using the same methods. Many values reported in the literature are, however, orders of magnitude higher, which is attributed to a combination of method limitations and bias for selection of sites with rapid denitrification. In the shallow aquifers below these agricultural fields, denitrification is limited in extent and will require residence times of decades or longer to mitigate modern nitrate contamination

    Review of the U.S. Geological Survey\u27s Volcano Hazards Program

    No full text
    The United States has more than 65 active or potentially active volcanoes, more than those of all other countries except Indonesia and Japan. During the twentieth century, volcanic eruptions in Alaska, California, Hawaii, and Washington devastated thousands of square kilometers of land, caused substantial economic and societal disruption and, in some instances, loss of life. More than 50 U.S. volcanoes have erupted one or more times in the past 200 years. Recently, there have been major advances in our understanding of how volcanoes work. This is partly because of detailed studies of eruptions and partly because of advances in global communications, remote sensing, and interdisciplinary cooperation. The mission of the Volcano Hazards Program (VHP) is to lessen the harmful impacts of volcanic activity by monitoring active and potentially active volcanoes, assessing their hazards, responding to volcanic crises, and conducting research on how volcanoes work. To provide a fresh perspective and guidance to the VHP about the future of the program, the Geologic and Water Resources Divisions of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) requested that the National Research Council conduct an independent and comprehensive review. Review of the U. S. Geological Survey\u27s Volcano Hazards Program is organized around the three components of hazards mitigation. Chapter 2 deals with research and hazard assessment. Chapter 3 covers monitoring and Chapter 4 discusses crisis response and other forms of outreach conducted by the VHP. Chapter 5 describes various cross-cutting programmatic issues such as staffing levels, data formats, and partnerships. Chapter 6 offers a vision for the future of the Volcano Hazards Program, and Chapter 7 summarizes the conclusions and recommendations of the preceding chapters. Throughout the report, major conclusions are printed in italics and recommendations in bold type. The committee has written this report for several different audiences. The main audience is upper management within the USGS and the VHP. However, the committee believes that scientists within the VHP will also find the report valuable. The report is written in such a manner as to be useful to congressional staff as well
    corecore