Toledo Sediment Management and Use Solutions Evaluation of Sediment Management and Use Options for the Toledo Harbor Sediment Management and Use Plan Joe Cappel, Director of Development 1
CANADA MINNESOTA DREDGED MATERIAL Grand Lake Superior MANAGEMENT STATUS Marias Critical – Dredged Material Management Two issues could severely restrict channel Harbors Duluth Superior Keweenaw availability within 5 years Waterway CANADA Pressing – Dredged Material Management Presque issues could severely restrict channel Ontonagon Isle Ashland Grand Marquette availability within 10 years. Marias St. Marys River Channel in Straits of No pressing issues within next 10 years; Mackinac Little Bay Grays Reef continue to work on long range planning de Noc such as DMMPs. Cheboygan Charlevoix WISCONSIN Menominee Alpena Frankfort Green Bay Kewaunee MICHIGAN Manistee Manitowoc Ludington Sheboygan Saginaw Harbor CANADA Beach ANNUAL DREDGING Port Muskegon Washington Harbor REQUIREMENT (CY) Grand Milwaukee St. Clair Haven NEW YORK River Kenosha Rouge Channels in Holland 800K River Lake St. Waukegan Clair St. Joseph Detroit Harbor River Chicago River & Harbor 100K – 250K Monroe Calumet 50K – 95K PENNSYLVANIA Toledo <50K IN ILLINIOS INDIANA OHIO 2
3
Sediment Entering Lake Erie on 4/2/08 4 4
Toledo Harbor - Sediment Current : 850,000 yd 3 • 850,000yd 3 • Equivalent to 2.2x One SeaGate* *Numbers are not exact, but estimations are instructive. 5
Great Lakes Shipping: Economic Benefits • The shipping industry employs 227,000 people in the U.S. and Canada and produces business revenue of $33.5 billion. • Electrical utilities, steel mills, construction companies, mining companies, manufacturers and farmers all depend on the 164 million tons of cargo delivered by Great Lakes ships each year. • Marine transportation on the System provides $3.6 billion in annual savings compared to the next best all land transportation alternative. • 6,971 jobs are supported by the cargo moving via Toledo’s marine terminals. 2,521 jobs were directly generated by the maritime activity at the terminals with wages and salaries totaling over $109 million. • Direct business revenue received by the firms dependent upon the cargo handled at the Port totaled $381.3 Million in 2010. 6
Lake Erie Economic Values • Lake Erie – $10.7 Billion Lake Erie Tourism – $1 Billion Lake Erie Fishing – 3 million Ohio drinking water users 7
Ohio’s Position • Ohio has long (25 years) consistent position on this issue • Toledo Harbor must be kept open • Lake Erie must be restored & open lake disposal is not acceptable • Beneficial use and source reduction-best • Strongly support cooperative partnerships • Sustainable practices 8
Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material • • Beach nourishment Construction and industrial use (port development, • Aquaculture airports, urban, & residential) • Parks and recreation • Material transfer (fill, dikes, • Strip mine reclamation & solid levees, parking lots, roads) waste management • Habitat development • Brownfields restoration (wetland, upland, island, • Shoreline stabilization and aquatic, others) erosion control 9 9
Toledo Harbor Dredging Task Force • Membership Local officials - Toledo-Lucas - Non-governmental County Port organizations Authority (environmental, commercial, and - State agencies recreational) - Federal agencies 10
Toledo Harbor Sediment Management and Use Planning • Introduction to the Project – The Ohio Lake Erie Commission was awarded a GLRI grant to create a sediment management strategy/plan for the Toledo Harbor that identifies and addresses: • recommended short-term (1-5 years) options • recommended long-term (30 year) options • funding needs/sources/mechanisms • timelines for implementation of recommended approaches – The Hull & Associates, Inc. Team was retained to assist in developing this plan 11
Toledo Harbor Dredging • Federal Channel spans RM 7 to LM 18 (25 miles, 400-500 ft. width) • Projected 1M CY Dredged Annually, includes federal and non-federal channels • 30-year total of 30M CY 12
Single Option Relative Unit Costs 13
Single-Option Challenges • Challenges of using only one alternative: – Practicality/Logistics (low flexibility, seasonal limitations) – Costs (high initial capital investment, balance between capital and O&M) – Location (large overall footprint) – Optimization of alternative (compromise/tradeoff between technical categories) – Size (large structural requirements to control quantity) • Both short-term and long-term plans will likely consist of a combination of approaches due to the challenges of single-option 14
Agricultural Field Improvements Relative Footprint of 30M CY for Single-Option Not a proposed location (shown for relative size needed to accommodate all 30M CY) 15
Wetland Restoration and Shoreline Protection Relative Footprint of 30M CY for Single-Option Not a proposed location (shown for relative size needed to accommodate all 30M CY) 16
Submerged Habitat Restoration Unit Relative Footprint of 30M CY for Shallow and Deep Single-Options Not a proposed location (shown for relative size needed to accommodate all 30M CY) 17
New Confined Disposal Facility Relative Footprint of 30M CY for Single-Option Not a proposed location (shown for relative size needed to accommodate all 30M CY) 18
Combination Option • Wetland Restoration and Shoreline Protection (7M CY) • Agricultural fields (7M CY) • Beneficial Use (3M CY) • Open-lake with controls (13M CY) 19
Single and Combination Option Final Ranking and Relative Costs Weighted Relative Unit Costs Rank Option Score ($/CY) 406.2 1 Combination $13.50 401.3 2 Wetland Restoration & Shoreline Protection $10.90 3 Agricultural Fields (5-mile Radius) 391.0 $10.20 4 Agricultural Fields (10-mile Radius) 384.0 $11.20 5 Emergent HRU - Shallow Water 383.6 $24.70 6 Emergent HRU - Deep Water 357.1 $32.40 7 Beneficial Use 352.0 $30.20 8 Open-Lake - With Controls 349.4 $11.10 9 Submerged HRU - Deep Water 325.9 $42.60 10 Open-Lake - No Controls 324.7 $10.50 11 New CDF 323.9 $27.30 12 Submerged HRU - Shallow Water 292.6 $61.70 20
Conceptual Locations of Combination Option 21
Beneficial Use to Date • Dredged material used in the Marina District and at the Jeep Overland site. • Dredged material used for Toledo Edision project • Dredged material used in the Cherry Street Legacy project as engineered soil • S&L Fertilizer blends dredged material with treated biosolids from the City of Toledo to create Nu-Soil which is used as landfill cover. 22
Other sticks in the fire ODNR Coastal Mgmt Grant Capital Improvement Budget Center of Innovation 23
Questions The full Toledo Harbor Sediment Management and Use Plan is available on the Ohio Lake Erie Commission Website at www.lakeerie.ohio.gov Thank You! 24
Recommend
More recommend
