Case Study for Customer Location WI109:
Reservoir or Lake Use:
The bay is used recreationally for boating, fishing, and has several swim beaches.
System Overview and Reservoir:
The bay is a 160-acres that receives the storm water runoff from the city before entering lake. It has a maximum depth of 13 ft, with an average depth of about 5 ft.
Reported Problem Before SolarBee Installation:
The bay has had a long history of toxic blue-green algae blooms, periodic oxygen deficiency, odors, and aquatic weed problems. The city teamed with the SolarBee Division of Pump Systems, Inc. (PSI) in 2005 to attempt to solve these problems. PSI provided the SolarBee equipment for the 2005 testing, and the city was encouraged with the first year results and rented the SolarBees for the 2006 season. The written, agreed-upon goals of the test were to: (1) improve the fishery, (2) eliminate blue-green algae blooms, which are the cause of periodic anoxia, (3) improve the pH, chlorophyll a, water clarity, and eliminate odors, and (4) slowly reduce invasive aquatic weeds, particularly Eurasian watermilfoil. After public input, a fifth goal was added: (5) make sure the SolarBees do not re-suspend sediments.
SolarBee Installation:
Date: May 26, 2005, installed six (6) SB10000v12 units, 5 in the main part of the bay and 1 in the south part. The units were removed in the fall of 2005, and redeployed on May 17, 2006. The units were removed in November 2006 (see discussion below).
Results:
City data, PSI data, and numerous positive comments from local residents provide support that the primary goals (1), (2), (3), and (5) above were substantially met by the SolarBees. Results were more inconclusive on the 4th goal to slowly inhibit invasive weed growth because: (a) in both 2005 and 2006, permitting delays pushed back the installation of the machines until the end of May when the weeds were already nearly 6 feet tall and up to the surface, (b) with the small number of machines, progress on weeds was going to be slow over a period of years (as indicated in the stated objectives), and (c) there were no preinstallation weed surveys to compare the weed growth to.
Although the bay receives the storm water runoff, prior to 2005 there had not been any scientific studies or systematic water quality data collected on Monona Bay. Everyone understood that the water quality was generally bad in the bay during summer months, but there were limited quantitative data. A few people within the city’s academic community were adamant from the beginning that several years of pre-SolarBee data were needed for a scientifically-sound evaluation, and were categorically and consistently against the SolarBee deployments in the bay. In balancing the inconclusiveness of the data, the negativity from a few local scientists, and fiscal concerns, the City decided to terminate the test in the fall of 2006 even though a number of local residents believe that Monona Bay had its best, odor-free water quality in memory during the 2005 and 2006 test years.
We consider the results at the bay to be as positive as could be reasonably expected under the specific circumstances of this test. Considering the constraints of: (1) seasonally-late deployments in a basin already heavily infested with invasive weeds, and (2) the non-optimal depth of intake hoses (because of unfounded concerns of sediment resuspension), we believe that the lack of harmful algal blooms (and associated beach closures), lack of odors, good water clarity, and good dissolved oxygen concentrations/profiles during the summer months of both 2005 and 2006 were clear positives and consistent with the other 160+ North American lakes, reservoirs and ponds where SolarBees are currently installed.
The city of Madison has always been supportive and a pleasure to work with, and we fully respect their decision. We work with literally hundreds of municipalities nationwide regarding SolarBee applications in raw water reservoirs, wastewater ponds, and potable water storage facilities, and we appreciate that a myriad of factors can go into decisions to spend public funds. We will continue to maintain our good relationship with the City and assist in any way we can in the future.
An SB10000v12 unit with the city behind it.
Updated: 01/05/2007
Case Studies |
|
