TET: An automated tool for evaluating suitable check-dam sites based on sediment trapping efficiency

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION

卷:266

Article

Rahmati, Omid^1,2  Ghasemieh, Hoda³  Samadi, Mahmood⁴  Kalantari, Zahra^5,6  Tiefenbacher, John P.⁷  Nalivan, Omid Asadi⁸  Cerda, Artemi⁹  Ghiasi, Seid Saeid⁴  Darabi, Hamid¹⁰  Haghighi, Ali Torabi¹⁰  Dieu Tien Bui¹¹ 

[1] Ton Duc Thang Univ, Geog Informat Sci Res Grp, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

[2] Ton Duc Thang Univ, Fac Environm & Labour Safety, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

[3] Univ Kashan, Fac Nat Resources & Earth Sci, Dept Range & Watershed Management, Esfahan, Iran

[4] Univ Tehran, Fac Nat Resources, Karaj, Iran

[5] Stockholm Univ, Dept Phys Geog, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden

[6] Stockholm Univ, Bolin Ctr Climate Res, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden

[7] Texas State Univ, Dept Geog, San Marcos, TX 78666 USA

[8] Gorgan Univ Agr Sci & Nat Resources, Dept Watershed Management, Gorgan, Golestan, Iran

[9] Univ Valencia, Dept Geog, Soil Eros & Degradat Res Grp, Blasco Ibanez 28, Valencia 46010, Spain

[10] Univ Oulu, Water Energy & Environm Engn Res Unit, Oulu, Finland

[11] Duy Tan Univ, Inst Res & Dev, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam

关键词: Sediment;    Trap efficiency;    Water quality;    Watershed management;    Python language;    GIS;   

DOI  :  10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122051

来源: Elsevier

【 摘 要 】

Sediment control is important for supplying clean water. Although check dams control sediment yield, site selection for check dams based on the sediment trapping efficiency (TE) is often complex and time-consuming. Currently, a multi-step trial-and-error process is used to find the optimal sediment TE for check dam construction, which limits this approach in practice. To cope with this challenge, we developed a user-friendly, cost- and time-efficient geographic information system (GIS)-based tool, the trap efficiency tool (TET), in the Python programming language. We applied the tool to two watersheds, the Hableh-Rud and the Poldokhtar, in Iran. To identify suitable sites for check dams, four scenarios (S1: TE >= 60%, S2: TE >= 70%, S3: TE >= 80%, S4: TE >= 90%) were tested. TET identified 189, 117, 96, and 77 suitable sites for building check dams in S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, in the Hableh-Rud watershed, and 346, 204, 156, and 60 sites in S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, in the Poldokhtar watershed. Evaluation of 136 existing check dams in the Hableh-Rud watershed indicated that only 10% and 5% were well-located and these were in the TE classes of 80-90% and >= 90%, respectively. In the Poldokhtar watershed, only 11% and 8% of the 207 existing check dams fell into TE classes 80-90% and >= 90%, respectively. Thus, the conventional approach for locating suitable sites at which check dams should be constructed is not effective at reaching suitable sediment control efficiency. Importantly, TET provides valuable insights for site selection of check dams and can help decision makers avoid monetary losses incurred by inefficient check-dam performance. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

【 授权许可】

Free