IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v318y2015icp177-183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of BMP to urban runoff control using SUSTAIN model: Case study in an industrial area

Author

Listed:
  • Gao, Jie
  • Wang, Rusong
  • Huang, Jinlou
  • Liu, Min

Abstract

Flooding and stormwater pollution by urban runoff owing to the effects of urbanization and industrialization on both hydrology and water quality have become a serious issue. Best management practices (BMP) are proposed to mitigate floods and reduce pollutants, the performance of which can be quantitatively assessed by the System for Urban Stormwater Treatment and Analysis Integration (SUSTAIN) model. A factory in the city of Ma’anshan, China was selected as a case study for planning and analysis of BMP. First, surface runoff pollution was identified as being caused by different land uses at this site. BMP such as permeable pavements, vegetated swales, green roofs, wet ponds, and bioretention basins were planned for this site. After BMP planning, system performance was evaluated using SUSTAIN. Sizes of the implemented BMP were further adjusted using the optimization module of SUSTAIN. Quantitative analyses of pollutant purification and flood mitigation ecosystem services after optimization were conducted. The results indicate that pollution caused by urban surface runoff in the study area was serious and required treatment. Compared with the developed condition, the BMP plan would reduce total runoff volume, total suspended solid load, dissolved zinc load, total nitrogen load, total phosphorus load and chemical oxygen demand load by 41%, 62%, 55%, 57%, 55% and 60%, respectively. This research result is of practical importance for urban nonpoint source pollution caused by industrial activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Gao, Jie & Wang, Rusong & Huang, Jinlou & Liu, Min, 2015. "Application of BMP to urban runoff control using SUSTAIN model: Case study in an industrial area," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 177-183.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:318:y:2015:i:c:p:177-183
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.06.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380015002677
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.06.018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Posthumus, H. & Rouquette, J.R. & Morris, J. & Gowing, D.J.G. & Hess, T.M., 2010. "A framework for the assessment of ecosystem goods and services; a case study on lowland floodplains in England," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1510-1523, May.
    2. Jenkins, W. Aaron & Murray, Brian C. & Kramer, Randall A. & Faulkner, Stephen P., 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services from wetlands restoration in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1051-1061, March.
    3. Logsdon, Rebecca A. & Chaubey, Indrajeet, 2013. "A quantitative approach to evaluating ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 257(C), pages 57-65.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Abdul Naser Majidi & Zoran Vojinovic & Alida Alves & Sutat Weesakul & Arlex Sanchez & Floris Boogaard & Jeroen Kluck, 2019. "Planning Nature-Based Solutions for Urban Flood Reduction and Thermal Comfort Enhancement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-27, November.
    2. Mao, Xuhui & Jia, Haifeng & Yu, Shaw L., 2017. "Assessing the ecological benefits of aggregate LID-BMPs through modelling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 353(C), pages 139-149.
    3. Arunima Sarkar Basu & Francesco Pilla & Srikanta Sannigrahi & Rémi Gengembre & Antoine Guilland & Bidroha Basu, 2021. "Theoretical Framework to Assess Green Roof Performance in Mitigating Urban Flooding as a Potential Nature-Based Solution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-34, November.
    4. Shi Qiu & Haiwei Yin & Jinling Deng & Muhan Li, 2020. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Green–Gray Stormwater Control Measures for Non-Point Source Pollution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-13, February.
    5. Suphicha Muangsri & Wendy McWilliam & Gillian Lawson & Tim Davies, 2022. "Evaluating Capability of Green Stormwater Infrastructure on Large Properties toward Adaptive Flood Mitigation: The HLCA+C Methodology," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    6. Chunlin Li & Miao Liu & Yuanman Hu & Rongqing Han & Tuo Shi & Xiuqi Qu & Yilin Wu, 2018. "Evaluating the Hydrologic Performance of Low Impact Development Scenarios in a Micro Urban Catchment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-14, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nedkov, Stoyan & Campagne, Sylvie & Borisova, Bilyana & Krpec, Petr & Prodanova, Hristina & Kokkoris, Ioannis P. & Hristova, Desislava & Le Clec'h, Solen & Santos-Martin, Fernando & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2022. "Modeling water regulation ecosystem services: A review in the context of ecosystem accounting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    2. Crossman, Neville D. & Burkhard, Benjamin & Nedkov, Stoyan & Willemen, Louise & Petz, Katalin & Palomo, Ignacio & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Martín-Lopez, Berta & McPhearson, Timon & Boyanova, Kremena & A, 2013. "A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 4-14.
    3. Matzek, Virginia & Wilson, Kerrie A. & Kragt, Marit, 2019. "Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 79-86.
    4. Han-Shen Chen & Wan-Yu Liu & Chi-Ming Hsieh, 2017. "Integrating Ecosystem Services and Eco-Security to Assess Sustainable Development in Liuqiu Island," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-14, June.
    5. Boerema, Annelies & Schoelynck, Jonas & Bal, Kris & Vrebos, Dirk & Jacobs, Sander & Staes, Jan & Meire, Patrick, 2014. "Economic valuation of ecosystem services, a case study for aquatic vegetation removal in the Nete catchment (Belgium)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 46-56.
    6. Tomasz Tymiński & Tomasz Kałuża & Mateusz Hämmerling, 2022. "Verification of Methods for Determining Flow Resistance Coefficients for Floodplains with Flexible Vegetation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Pinke, Zsolt & Kiss, Márton & Lövei, Gábor L., 2018. "Developing an integrated land use planning system on reclaimed wetlands of the Hungarian Plain using economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 299-308.
    8. Nina Zarrineh & Karim C. Abbaspour & Ann Van Griensven & Bernard Jeangros & Annelie Holzkämper, 2018. "Model-Based Evaluation of Land Management Strategies with Regard to Multiple Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Zhang, Da & Huang, Qingxu & He, Chunyang & Wu, Jianguo, 2017. "Impacts of urban expansion on ecosystem services in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration, China: A scenario analysis based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 115-130.
    10. Günther, Anke & Böther, Stefanie & Couwenberg, John & Hüttel, Silke & Jurasinski, Gerald, 2018. "Profitability of Direct Greenhouse Gas Measurements in Carbon Credit Schemes of Peatland Rewetting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 766-771.
    11. Catherine L. Kling & Yiannis Panagopoulos & Sergey S. Rabotyagov & Adriana M. Valcu & Philip W. Gassman & Todd Campbell & Michael J. White & Jeffrey G. Arnold & Raghavan Srinivasan & Manoj K. Jha & Je, 2014. "LUMINATE: linking agricultural land use, local water quality and Gulf of Mexico hypoxia," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 41(3), pages 431-459.
    12. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    13. Song, Wei & Deng, Xiangzheng & Yuan, Yongwei & Wang, Zhan & Li, Zhaohua, 2015. "Impacts of land-use change on valued ecosystem service in rapidly urbanized North China Plain," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 245-253.
    14. Wainger, Lisa A. & Van Houtven, George & Loomis, Ross & Messer, Jay & Beach, Robert & Deerhake, Marion, 2013. "Tradeoffs among Ecosystem Services, Performance Certainty, and Cost-efficiency in Implementation of the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 196-224, April.
    15. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    16. Colin Hultgren Egegård & Maja Lindborg & Åsa Gren & Lars Marcus & Meta Berghauser Pont & Johan Colding, 2024. "Climate Proofing Cities by Navigating Nature-Based Solutions in a Multi-Scale, Social–Ecological Urban Planning Context: A Case Study of Flood Protection in the City of Gothenburg, Sweden," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Gutierrez-Castillo, Ana & Penn, Jerrod & Tanger, Shaun & Blazier, Michael A., 2022. "Conservation easement landowners' willingness to accept for forest thinning and the impact of information," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. Nahlik, Amanda M. & Kentula, Mary E. & Fennessy, M. Siobhan & Landers, Dixon H., 2012. "Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 27-35.
    19. Molnar, Jennifer L. & Kubiszewski, Ida, 2012. "Managing natural wealth: Research and implementation of ecosystem services in the United States and Canada," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 45-55.
    20. Geng, Ruiying & Liu, Xin & Lv, Xin & Gao, Zhiqiang & Xu, Ning, 2021. "Comparing cost-effectiveness of paddy fields and seawalls for coastal protection to reduce economic damage of typhoons in China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:318:y:2015:i:c:p:177-183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.