Redefining the stormwater first flush phenomenon
Introduction
It has become a reasonable assumption that the initial volumes of runoff in urban catchments during rainfall events contain the highest pollutant levels, a phenomenon known as the first flush (Bertrand-Krajewski et al., 1998). Identifying the nature of this phenomenon has significant benefits for the implementation of stormwater quality management practices (e.g. sizing of treatment systems). However, watershed managers and researchers have questioned the existence of a first flush and the applicability of the half-inch rule (which assumes that 90% of an event's total pollutant load is transported in the first half inch of runoff) as a relevant volume for treatment (Bertrand-Krajewski et al., 1998, CWP, 2005, Kaspersen, 2008). The main cause for this lies within the method traditionally used to assess and quantify a first flush. This traditional approach, adopted in almost all first flush investigations (e.g. Saget et al., 1996, Deletic, 1998, Deletic and Maksimovic, 1998, Lee and Bang, 2000, Barco et al., 2008, McCarthy, 2009), involves the use of dimensionless cumulative pollutant load vs. cumulative runoff volume curves. An arbitrary definition for detecting the presence of a first flush is then applied to these curves. Some definitions are as strict as 70–80% of total pollutant mass transported in the first 25–30% of runoff volume (Wanielista and Yousef, 1993, Sansalone and Buchberger, 1997, Bertrand-Krajewski et al., 1998, Deletic, 1998, Deletic and Maksimovic, 1998).
An alternative methodology for a first flush detection is the Mass First Flush Ratio (MFFR), which is the division of the proportion of mass by the cumulative runoff volume at a defined point (e.g. if 80% of pollutant mass occurred at 30% runoff volume, MFFR = 2.67). However, this still relies on the same dimensionless curves and an arbitrary definition (Lee and Bang, 2000, Han et al., 2006, Barco et al., 2008).
Many researchers have found that a first flush was often only present in a small proportion of the analysed events (Saget et al., 1996, Deletic, 1998). Less than half of the events observed by Deletic (1998) showed greater than 40% cumulative pollutant mass in the first 20% cumulative runoff volume (referred to as a 40/20 first flush definition). Saget et al. (1996) only observed the first flush once in 197 events using an 80/30 definition, which was also adopted by Bertrand-Krajewski et al. (1998) who did not detect a first flush according to this definition. If any of these authors chose another definition, then the resultant conclusions may have changed. Multiple regression analyses have also been applied to help explain why events, and catchments, experience different degrees of a first flush (i.e. why one event had 80% mass in 30% volume, whilst another had 20% mass in the same volume). Most studies which report these regressions showed little consistency in variables which could explain the first flush variation (Deletic, 1998, Bertrand-Krajewski et al., 1998, McCarthy, 2009). Bertrand-Krajewski et al. (1998) highlighted the difficulty of establishing clear statistical relationships to explain results from the traditional approach. It is clear that there is the underlying problem in the way the first flush has traditionally been assessed, partly because of the lack of standardisation in the methodologies. This creates subsequent problems in understanding water quality behaviour between catchments and reduces the reliability of further analyses due to the arbitrary definition of the first flush adopted.
Another deficiency of the traditional approach is the dimensionless nature which therefore disregards the impact of storm volume. The total volume of a small event may only be as much as the first 20% of the larger event, and therefore could be considered to be entirely within a first flush volume. Kang et al., 2006, Kang et al., 2008 identified two types of pollutant source in an urban catchment: (1) short-term, that is the accumulated pollution during the dry weather period, which can be depleted if the storm is sufficiently long and intense enough and (2) long-term, that is the catchment's background pollutant levels, which cannot be depleted. If a small event cannot deplete the short-term pollutant source, pollutant concentrations will be consistently high. This explains why several studies found that smaller storms did not exhibit a strong first flush (if at all), as opposed to larger storms (Deletic and Maksimovic, 1998, Kang et al., 2006, Kang et al., 2008, Barco et al., 2008).
Another problem with the traditional method is that it characterises the first flush based solely on changes in pollutant loading within the event and not with the catchment's overall background levels. For example, 80% of the total load in a short event may be diluted in a longer event and thus represent only 60% at the same cumulative runoff. If the short-term pollutant source is depleted early in a very long event, this initial fraction may further decrease and possibly mask a first flush effect due to the influence of pollutants in the latter part of the event.
When sizing treatment systems in practice it is necessary to understand what volume of water should be treated, not what percentage of an event (since this will vary between events). Therefore, the non-dimensional nature of the traditional approach, as discussed above, is not very helpful to practice. A rare attempt to relate the first flush to an absolute volume of runoff and to observe changes in pollutant loads throughout several events over longer periods is presented by Lee et al. (2004).
Kaspersen (2008) suggests that issues of first flush detection can arise with different pollutants. Assessments on different pollutants have indicated problems with the traditional approach. Investigations by Taylor (2006) and McCarthy (2009) found that Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Total Nitrogen (TN) (respectively) exhibit so-called “end flushes” (i.e. high pollutant concentrations towards end of the event). McCarthy (2009) concluded that the comparison of initial and end pollutant concentrations, as is carried out in the traditional approach because of its dimensionless nature, is ill-posed for detecting and quantifying a first flush. If pollutant concentrations were both high at the start and at the end of the event then a first flush would not be detected.
It can be concluded that past research has shown frequent deficiencies with the traditional approach, mainly due to its dimensionless nature. These warrant the need for a revision of this method or a new technique, which should address the following issues:
- (1)
A more sound quantitative method should exist to justify the occurrence and character of the first flush as opposed to an arbitrary definition selected by the researcher,
- (2)
The first flush should be defined by actual runoff volumes and actual pollutant concentrations instead of proportions, as these quantities may serve as a guideline for management strategies and prevent over/under design of treatment systems (including treatment of ‘end flushes’).
- (3)
The method should be applicable to an array of different pollutants and not falter due to the behaviour of certain ones.
The objective of this paper is to demonstrate a new assessment technique to detect the presence and assess the characteristics of a first flush. The method aims to provide quantitative results that will assist in management practices, a more practical approach as compared to dimensionless analysis. This novel technique was tested on discrete water quality data of three pollutant types taken from seven catchments around Melbourne, Australia. A comparison with the traditional approach and a robustness assessment confirmed that the method has the potential to improve current management practices.
Section snippets
Catchment characteristics
Data collected at seven urban catchments around Melbourne, Australia are used in this study (see Table 1 for site characteristics, for more details see Francey et al. (in press)). The studied catchments have separate stormwater and wastewater systems, but it is possible that there are some cross-connections between the systems. Narre Warren is the only catchment which has on-site septic systems.
Sampling regime and data preparation
Data collection from the seven catchments began in late 2003 and ended early 2007. Doppler based
First flush detection using the new method
Using Narre Warren's TSS data as an example, Fig. 2 provides an overview of the new technique's output. The top graph depicts the box and whisker plots after Steps 1–3 are completed while the bottom graph shows the result after Step 4. As defined in Step 5, the median concentration of the first box (TSS = 104.6 mg/L) and the last box (TSS = 29.4 mg/L) in the bottom graph are the catchment initial and background concentrations, respectively. The first flush volume is VFF = 16 mm, as it
Conclusion
This is the initial study on the development of a new approach to assess the existence of a first flush, which improves several flaws seen in the traditional method, including: the use of actual runoff values as compared to proportions, a more sound definition of the phenomenon, treating the behaviour as a catchment characteristic rather than on an event-by-event basis and, finally, being applicable to a wide range of pollutant types.
The new method was applied to data collected from seven
References (19)
- et al.
First flush in a combined sewer system
Chemosphere
(2008) - et al.
Distribution of pollutant mass vs volume in stormwater discharges and the first flush phenomenon
Water Research
(1998) The first flush load of urban surface runoff
Water Research
(1998)- et al.
Implications of a kinematic wave model for first flush treatment design
Water Research
(2006) - et al.
Predicting the existence of stormwater first flush from the time of concentration
Water Research
(2008) - et al.
Seasonal first flush phenomenon of urban stormwater discharges
Water Research
(2004) - et al.
The first flush in sewer systems
Water Science and Technology
(1996) Technical note #28, first flush of stormwater pollutants investigated in Texas
Watershed Protection Techniques
(2005)- et al.
Evaluation of water quality factors in storm runoff from paved areas
Journal of Environmental Engineering
(1998)
Cited by (121)
First flush stormwater pollution in urban catchments: A review of its characterization and quantification towards optimization of control measures
2023, Journal of Environmental ManagementOptimizing first flush diverter for urban stormwater pollution load reduction by most efficiently utilizing first flush phenomena
2023, Journal of Environmental ManagementNew conceptualization and quantification method of first-flush in urban catchments: A modelling study
2023, Science of the Total EnvironmentTwo-scale optimal management of urban runoff by linking LIDs and landscape configuration
2023, Journal of HydrologyMonitoring the effects of urban and forested land uses on runoff quality: Implications for improved stormwater management
2023, Science of the Total Environment