The Stormwater Blog 

Contech Stormwater experts discussing Low Impact Development, Onsite Water Management, Rainwater Harvesting and all things Stormwater.

Entries for 'Derek Berg'

Manufactured Stormwater Treatment Devices (MTDs) Frustrations, Misperceptions, and Concerns.  Part 2: Crossing the MTD Divide

The initial wave of manufactured treatment devices (MTDs) were generally simpler than options available today.  With few exceptions, early MTDs were comprised predominantly of swirl/vortex and other types of gravity separators that targeted solids and floating pollutants.  State and local stormwater programs were in their infancy and were predominantly focused on reducing suspended solids loads.  Our knowledge of particle size distributions and other common pollutants carried by stormwater paled in comparison to what we know today.  MTD testing protocols were non-existent leaving early MTD providers to devise their own and make their case for acceptance.  Regulators recognizing the need for underground solutions, especially in urban areas, implemented crude MTD performance criteria typically rooted in demonstrating removal of coarse solids in the laboratory.

Manufactured Stormwater Treatment Devices (MTDs) Frustrations, Misperceptions, and Concerns.  Part 1: Frustration is a Two-Way Street
Having spent the last sixteen years immersed in the world of stormwater best management practices (BMPs), with particular emphasis on manufactured treatment devices (MTDs), I’ve repeatedly borne witness to the frustrations, misperceptions, and concerns raised by all walks of stormwater professionals relative to MTDs.  
Categories: Regulations
Filter Loading: Why Mass Load Capacity Matters in Flow-Through Filters
Given the number of conversations I’ve had in recent months with other stormwater professionals that don’t entirely understand the value of incorporating the sediment mass load capacity of a filtration BMP into the design process, I feel it’s time to revisit the subject.  
Is Green Infrastructure Diminishing Innovation?

Since the Environmental Protection Agency, and in turn state and local regulators, have gone all in on green infrastructure (GI) and low impact development (LID) concepts a seemingly regrettable consequence has emerged.  Topics specific to the broader adoption and implementation of GI have monopolized our collective dialog on stormwater management of late.   The predominantly positive press and barrage of GI heavy conference agendas seemingly suggest that if we apply GI far and wide then water quality impairments caused by urban runoff will soon be a thing of the past.  GI provides stormwater practitioners with invaluable tools to aid in the stormwater fight, but many site specific challenges can’t be surmounted with GI solutions alone.  To that end, should we be concerned that overemphasis on GI is discouraging innovation?

5 Key Concepts For Developing Local Stormwater Regulations

Drafting stormwater regulations that are clear, comprehensive and effective is crucial to protecting and preserving receiving waters.  The Clean Water Act has yielded a wide spectrum of local stormwater regulations and policies, but many leave something to be desired when it comes to actually mitigating the impacts of urban runoff.  It has been our experience that many local regulations are missing core components that are invaluable in achieving our ultimate goal.

Field Testing Stormwater BMPs: The Pros & Cons
As an industry, we’ve acquired a vast amount of knowledge about stormwater, its adverse impacts, and the best management practices (BMPs) implemented to mitigate them. However, the spirited debate with regard to whether the field or the laboratory is the best arena for evaluating BMP performance refuses to yield to consensus. Here are some of the arguments for and against field testing.
 Stormwater BMP Testing – A Two-Pronged Strategy
Given the limitations and challenges inherent of BMP evaluations, whether done in the field or the laboratory, it’s a wonder we bother with either. However, the intent of identifying these issues is not to discourage evaluation, but to foster understanding so as to encourage BMP evaluations to be structured in a manner that yields sound results.
Innovation has become synonymous with the United States, serving as a catalyst for our economic growth and continuous improvement of our standard of living. Economics aside, if not for innovative scientific and technological breakthroughs we would be without countless apparatus, methodologies, and other discoveries that now serve as solutions to once daunting scientific and societal challenges. Faced with a growing list of water quality and other environmental quandaries, our ability to collectively innovate viable solutions has perhaps never been more crucial.
What Does 80% TSS Removal Mean?
The intent of LEED Sustainable Sites Credit 6.2 is “to limit disruption and pollution of natural water flows by managing stormwater runoff,” and the requirements necessary for meeting this intent are clearly spelled out: capture 90% of the average annual rainfall and treat it by removing 80% of the total suspended solids (TSS). While the rating system does not define TSS it does recommend reliance on field monitoring data that is compliant with the Technology Acceptance Reciprocity Partnership (TARP) protocol or the Technology Acceptance Protocol-Ecology (TAPE) when screening stormwater best management practices (BMPs).
Lab Testing Stormwater BMPs: The Pros & Cons
As an industry, we’ve acquired a vast amount of knowledge about stormwater, its adverse impacts and the best management practices (BMPs) implemented to mitigate them. However, the spirited debate with regard to whether the field or the laboratory is the best arena for evaluating BMP performance refuses to yield to consensus. Here are some of the arguments for and against laboratory testing...
Page 1 of 2First   Previous   [1]  2  Next   Last   

Stormwater Blog Update Hubspot subscription form

We respect your privacy,
your email will only be used to send
Stormwater blog updates.