Exam II

Soila and Groundwater Pollution in the USA

Threats to Florida Water and Soil

Threats to Surface/Groundwater

inorganic:

nitrate/phosphate

heavy metals

salts

Organic

BOD--wastwater

Petroleum hydrocarbons--groundwater

Toxic synthetic chemicals/solvents

Pesticides--soil/agriculture

Inland Algal Blooms

Phosphate Mines cover 1.3 million acres in Central Florida

LUST--Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (mostly gasoline)

Petroleum hydrocarbon storage tanks develop leaks and spill contaminants into the vadose zone, through which it migrates downwards into the aquifer and disperses and dilutes for miles

contaminated soil often cleaned with bioremediation

chlorinated solvents

Addressed primarily by CERCLA Superfund

Pensacola superfund sites:

Escambia Wood Treating

Agrico 1889-1975

American Creosote 1902-1981

Addressed partially by DoD Cleanup Program

25,250 sites and total expected spending $42,000,000,000

Contaminants addressed:

petroleum hydrocarbons

rocket fuel

chlorinated solvents

explosives

PFAs

USA Pollution Eliminated?

most releases eliminated

many large contaminated sites cleaned up

Emerging Environmental Contaminants

PFAS

human-made, in use since 1940s, voluntarily phased out in 2000s

persistent in environment--found in animals around the world and long half life

not biodegradable

uses:

firefighting foam

non-stick cookware

stain, water, and grease resistant coatings in clothing, carpeting, and furniture

food packaging

paints, varnishes, sealants

ski wax

PFAS and Human Health

elevated cholesterol

increased risk of thyroid disease

decreased immune system response

decreased birth weight

decreased fertility

increased hypertension during pregnancy

EX: Dupont Washington Works Plant, WV

PFOA contamination in tap water found in 90s

class action lawsuit against DuPont intitiated in 98

ongoing litigation regarding exposed population

Found in Santa Rosa Wells

Summary:

most of the urgent and obvious pollution removed in the US and Europe

The first environmental cleanup strategy was elimination of discharges and development of wastewater treatment

later cleaned up soil and groundwater, often using bioremediation

Enormous amounts of money involved

developing countries and emerging contaminants are currently main focus of issue

Use of Microbes in Environmental Reclamation

Why remove/destroy environmental contaminants?

Reduce toxicity/hazard/risk

Risks to consider:

Human health effects

Ecological Effects

Ecosystem: community of living organisms in conjunction with the nonliving components of their environment, interacting as a system, with biotic and abiotic components linked together through nutrient cycles and energy flows

Why we care:

products such as food, fodder, freshwater, wood, fiber, biochemicals, genetic resources

regulating services such as climate regulation, disease regulation, water regulation, water purification, pollination, carbon sequestration

Cultural services such as spiritual and religious, recreational and tourism, aesthetic, inspirational, educational, sense of place, cultural heritage

supporting services necessary for production of all other ecosystem services such as soil formation, nutrient cycling, primary production, oxygen, and nitrogen

Subsurface Ecosystem consists of:

solids, water, gases

viruses, bacteria, fungi, protozoa, invertabrates

How to Clean the Environment Surface Contamination

Mechanical Removal

Chemical and Physical Remediation common for heavily contaminated soil

Bioremediation is slower, cheaper, and less disruptive, making it the preferred removal process when possible

occurs through redox reactions conducted by bacteria

Definitions:

biodegradation: mineralization, use as growth substance-selective advantage

Biotransformation/Cometabolism: incomplete metabolism, no growth

Natural attenuation: non engineered

Bioremediation: engineered cleanup of contaminants by microorganisms

Biostimulation: addition of nutrients or changing conditions

Bioaugmentation: addition of non-indigenous microbes

Phytoremediation: use of plants in bioremediation

Forms of Bioremediation:

in-situ

natural attenuation

bioventing

biosparging

biostimulation

bioaugmentation

Ex-situ

landfarming

biopiles

Composting

bioreactors

Bioremediation Algorithm

Evaluate Contaminants and Environmental Conditions, inc. concentration, geochemistry, fate and transport, plume stability, treatment goals

Biodegradable?

YES: Appropriate microbes present?

YES: Limiting factors/inappropriate geochemistry?

YES: Identify limiting factors, inc. energy source, inducer, electron donor/acceptor, redox, pH, bioavailability, inhibitors, contaminant mixtures, thresholds

THEN: Fix limiting factors and/or geochemistry

THEN: Biostimulation

NO: Discover/Create Microbes

THEN: Bioaugmentation

THEN: Biostimulation

NO: Bioaugmentation

NO: Natural Attenuation

Papers:

Palatucci et al (2019)

Purpose: Discover bacteria that carry out aerobic biodegradation of DCNB isomers

General Methodology: Biological processing of DCNB-contaminated samples

Findings: A mixture of DCNB isomers was fully biodegraded even with high flow rate and the responsible bacteria could be isolated

Conclusions: DCNB isomers are biodegradable under aerobic conditions and thus are candidates for bioremediation

Kurt et al (2014)

Purpose: Test if a certain bacteria can biodegrade cis-DCE and to understand distribution of cis-DCE and VC degradation

General Methodology: Lab columns representing

Findings: Surprisingly active degradation in capillary fringe

Conclusions: Given the presence of cis-DCE and VC degrading bacteria, natural attenuation can eliminate these chemicals at the capillary fringe.

Microplastics in Pensacola Bay Watershed

Microplastics in Pensacola Bay Watershed

Microplastics in Snails in FL

Papers

Witaker et al (2019)

Purpose: Establish a baseline of microplastic presence in Lakes Superior and Huron and to show the value of more sensitive sampling methods

General Methodology: Samples taken of surface water using Niskin bottles and immediately filtered.

Findings: Total microplastic concentration of 0.119 microplastics/mL, with 99% being microfibers

Conclusions: This study had a higher microplastic count most likely because it used more sensitive sampling methods, which could likely create more accurate results on a large scale

Kleinschmidt and Janosik (2021)

Purpose: quantify, characterize, and compare microplastic contamination in two predatory marine snails in FL

General Methodology: Randomized collection of wild snails from each species, collection of water samples, tissue digestion, filtration, and anaylsis of microplastic content

Findings: Significant difference of microplastics between snail species but not location

Conclusions: Differences in contamination may arise from differences in prey items and subsequent contamination of prey items of each snail

Beckwith and Fuentes

Purpose: to determine exposure of important Mexican Loggerhead nesting sites to microplastics

General Methodology: Sand samples were obtained from Loggerhead turtle nesting sites and analyzed for microplastics

Findings: Microplastics found at all sites, mostly in dunes, and decreasing from west to east.

Conclusions: Microplastic accumulation on nesting sites for the Northern Gulf of Mexico may be of great concern and could negatively affect the incubating environment

Project

click to edit

Human Impacts on Seagrasses: Examples from Pensacola Bay

Lewis and Devereaux (2008)

Purpose: Summarize findings of 2003 aerial seagrass surveys of Pensacola Bay and compare it to previous surveys

General Methodology: Aerial color photographs analyzed for continuous and pathcy seagrass coverage

Findings: An almost 9% reduction of Pensacola Bay seagrasses relative to 1992 survey

Conclusions: More frequent monitoring is warranted, especially given increasing urbanization of the area

McGlathery et al (2007)

Purpose: To synthesize understanding of the "coastal filter's" role

General Methodology: LIterature review of current understanding of coastal filters

Findings: Primary producers play an important role in coastal filter in shallow coastal systems and their effect on nutrient cycling via biofeedback is key to understanding eutrophication

Conclusions: Greater understanding of biotic feedback offered by primary producers in coastal filters warrants further study