Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:00:55.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Agricultural wind erosion and air quality impacts: A comprehensive research program

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Keith E. Saxton
Keith E. Saxton
Affiliation:
Research agricultural engineer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-6120.
Get access

Abstract

With the passage of the 1990 Clean Air Act came the responsibility to monitor and control particulates in the size range 10 μ and smaller (PM10). Many urban areas, particularly in the western U.S., have experienced concentrations of fugitive dust particulates from upwind sources that exceed the federal health standards. Often a significant amount of this material is generated upwind on agricultural fields, and then is entrained and transported in the regional air mass, thus degrading the air quality in downwind urban regions. Current technology cannot adequately quantify the fugitive dust emitted and transported from agricultural sources, nor specify adequate control methods. A comprehensive research plan recently was developed and initia ted for the Columbia Plateau of eastern Washington State that involves multiple disciplines and several state and federal agencies. This research has several components: characterizing the soil, vegetation and climate in a region of 136,000 km2; developing wind erosion and fugitive dust emission relationships for individual farm fields; developing and applying transport-dispersion-deposition models of the region; selecting and testing farm-level control strategies; and providing public information to both the urban and farm communities for understanding the problem and developing management plans. Simultaneous receptor analyses and public health research combine to make this a comprehensive regional research effort on fugitive dust emissions and impacts.

Keywords

wind erosionair qualityconservationdryland farmingcerealdispersion modelsdustparticulatePM10
Type
Selected Papers from the U.S.-Middle East Conference on Sustainable Dryland Agriculture
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 11 , Issue 2-3 , September 1996 , pp. 64 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Abtew, W., Gregory, J.M., and Borreffi, J.. 1989. Wind profile: Estimation of displacement height and aerodynamic roughness. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers 32:521–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Borrelli, J., Gregory, J.M., and Abtew, W.. 1989. Wind barriers: A reevaluation of height, spacing and porosity. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers 32:2023–2027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Cameron, D.C. 1931. The great dust storm in Washington and Oregon. Monthly Weather Review 59:195.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Chepil, W.S., and Woodruff, N.E.. 1963. The physics of wind erosion and its control. Advances in Agronomy 15:211–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Fryrear, D.W. 1984. Sou ridges—clods and wind erosion. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers 27:445–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Glen, R.E., and Craft, B.F.. 1986. Airsampling for particulates. Pub. No. 86–102. Occupational Respiratory Diseases, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C. pp. 69–82.Google Scholar
7.Hagen, L.J. 1991. A wind erosion prediction system to meet user needs. J. Soil and Water Conservation 46:106–111.Google Scholar
8.Jutze, G., and Axetell, K.. 1974. Investigation of Fugitive Dust. Vol. II. Control Strategy and Regulatory Approach. EPA-450-3-74-03e6B. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Waste Management, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.Google Scholar
9.Lyles, L.J., and Tatarko, J.. 1988. Soil wind credibility index in seven north central states. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers 31:1396–1399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Matsumura, R.T., Flocchini, R.G., Cahili, T.A., Carvacho, O., and Lu, Z.. 1992. Measurement of fugitive PM10 emissions from selected agricultural practices in the San Joaquin Valley. A&WMA Transactions Series. No. 22. ISSN 1040-8177. Air and Waste Management Assoc. pp. 417–432.Google Scholar
11.Piper, S. 1989a. Estimating the off-site benefits from a reduction in wind erosion and the optimal level of wind erosion control: An application in New Mexico. J. Soil and Water Conservation, 44:334–338.Google Scholar
12.Piper, S. 1989b. Measuring particulate pollution damage from wind erosion in the western United States. J. Soil and Water Conservation 44:70–75.Google Scholar
13.Scire, J.S., Strimaitis, D.G., and Yamartino, R.J.. 1990. Model formulation and user's guide for the CALGRID dispersion model. Sigma Research Corp., Westford, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
14.Skidmore, E.L., and Nelson, R.G.. 1992. Small-grain equivalent of mixed vegetation for wind erosion control and prediction. Agronomy J. 84:98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 1968. Wind erosion forces in the United States and their use in predicting soil loss. Agric. Handbook 346. Agric. Res. Service, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
16.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter. Federal Register 52:24634.Google Scholar