Historical Contaminated Sediments and Soils at the River Basin Scale

Data from the Elbe River and its tributaries indicate, despite extensive improvement in water quality during the last 15 years, that the respective sediment situation of many priority pollutants has not reached an acceptable level. For the coming decades, risks for downstream sites and stakeholders will persist, mainly due to secondary sources originating from historical pollution of soils and sediments in the catchment area. In practice, a catchment-wide assessment of historical contaminated soil and sediment should apply a three-step approach: (i) Identification of substances of concern (s.o.c.) and their classification into ’hazard classes of compounds’; (ii) identification of areas of concern (a.o.c.) and their classification into ‘hazard classes of sites’; (iii) identification of areas of risk (a.o.r.) and their assessment relative to each other with regard to the probability of polluting the sediments in the downstream reaches. The conversion of this concept has to consider the underlying philosophy of the EU Water Framework Directive, particularly with respect to the analysis and monitoring of priority substances in solid matrices. However, major deficiencies are still in the assessment and prognosis of resuspension processes, and potential approaches to fill this gap are described both in theory and from examples of the Elbe River. The sediment stability testing facilities consist of a unique triple set developed by innovative experimental laboratory and field research. The instrumental facilities consisting of a tube corer and a pressurized channel allow one to measure not only the onset of erosion (critical bed shear stress), but also the erosion rate for different sediment layers. Undisturbed sediment samples were taken from contaminated sites, e.g. in near-bank groyne fields and floodplains, using (i) core sampler (diameter 14 cm, length 150 cm) for sediment erodibility depth profiling and (ii) box sampler (30*70 cm2 top view area, 28 cm depth) for comparing and upscaling the results from the laboratory to the field. Sediment properties such as grain size spectrum (laser beam attenuation), water and gas content were analyzed by a non-intrusive, high frequency, capacity measurement method and bulk density by γ-ray. Sediment core samples from flooded areas in the Middle Elbe indicate, that, except from the uppermost 5 cm and at a depth of from 47 to 48 cm, where the critical shear stress is very low (0.5 Pa), the critical bottom shear stress is between 1.2 Pa and 3.4 Pa, i.e. at a moderate level. Major reasons for the distinct heterogeneity of the erosion stability are differences in consolidation processes, grain size distribution and in the composition of stabilizing exudates in the individual sediment layers. Similar to the erosion stability depth profile, the metal data exhibit short-range heterogeneities; the variations in the individual layers can be explained by different proportions of fine grained components and by an improvement of suspended matter quality in the course of time. A comparison of the metal contents of embanked alluvial soils and unembanked alluvial areas suggests the following causal chain: Recent floodplain areas at low mean water levels exhibiting high concentrations of organic carbon represent the most highly contaminated sites. On the other hand, insignificant pollution has occurred on alluvial areas, which were embanked already at pre-industrial times. In the case of flood events, due to the combination of flooding probability and flow conditions, the most favorable conditions for the deposition of nutrient- and contaminant-rich suspended particulate matter are found in the low level depressions with low current. Within a typical river section of 1 km length in the lower middle Elbe, the groyne fields are recognized as dominant, slack-water zones containing the following nutrient and trace metal loads (reference year 2001, anthropogenic proportions): 287 t organic carbon, 17.6 t phosphorous, 17.4 t nitrogen, and 16.7 t sulfur; 8.6 t zinc, 1.1 t copper, 0.9 t lead, 0.4 t chromium, and 0.2 t nickel, respectively. The estimated nutrient and pollutant loads, deposited on the floodplains and in the river course, clearly demonstrate the specific sink function of both sites. At the same time, however, the results suggest, in contrast to the deposits in the floodplains, that sediments within the river course may partly be remobilized. This means that the longterm sink function can at least temporarily become a significant source character, involving the hazard of a substantial deterioration of the downstream sections of the river basin. In view of the findings of relative low erosion stabilities of groyne field sediments and, in particular, after the extreme Elbe flood from August 2002, a prime question relates to the remobilization risks of these sediments typically enriched in contaminants and nutrients. The combined view on substances, areas and processes of concern in the Elbe catchment - with special emphasis on historical contamination of floodplain soils and sediments, as well as on groyne field sediments, as significant secondary sources of pollution - is a typical example for the holistic river basin approach of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD), both with respect to assessment of ecological risks and the development of remediation measures. In the latter respect, recent developments in ‘soft’ (geochemical and biological) techniques on contaminated soils and sediments, both with respect to policy aspects as well as to technical developments have led to a stimulation of in-situ remediation options, such as sub-aqueous depots, active capping, and application of natural attenuation processes. Limited financial resources require a direction of investments to those sites with the highest efficiencies in risk reduction. Establishing a rough sediment dynamic model, building on tributary/Elbe dilution factors, sedimentation data, suspended particulate matter monitoring data as well as calculations of long-term costs and benefits, based on risk management, could be essential steps in a basin wide river management.