Notes from DGAS Core Team Meeting, November 2, 1995

Columbia Basin Research hosts this web page for archival purposes only. This project/page/resource is no longer active.

1.0 Univ of WA DGAS Model Group WWW Webpage

  • D-Gas Webpage currently seen as informational, for people outside the group. Possibly to include summaries of everyone's research and to include links to any of the groups webpages posting data or models.
  • Group expressed concern that data, such as the transect data, should not be posted here until a QA/QC process is completed on the data for fear of misinterpretation of questionable data.
  • Pinney suggested that models and research be broken up into biological and physical components.
  • Potential use within group would be for posting abstracts and other documents and allowing for interactive comments. Bill Perkins at PNL offered code off the TMT webpage as a template.
  • TJ Carlson suggested that considering the funding squeeze that the development of this page be shifted to a lower priority.

2.0 Discussion on gas production and the transect study data compilation and analysis.

  • Joe Carroll's 1995 Transect Data update:
    • Walla Walla and Portland Transect Data fairly clean and available on disk. Also available is a variable description document.
    • Carroll presented different visualizations of the data. The first set showing the variablity of the measurements accross the river in a graph of 95% CI for gas levels at each river mile. These graphs showed at once an indication of mixing and also of the nonsteady state of the river during data collection time. **Care and caution is needed in separating these factors.
    • An indication of dissipation downriver was also present.
    • Color contour plots were also presented to give an idea of lateral gradients accross the river. But these plots included data not necessarily from same plume or even same day so more **caution** needed in drawing conclusions from plots.
    • Important information gained from transects: In the Snake river pools elevated levels of gas seen for many miles beyond dam. In the pools of LMN,IHR, and MCN elevated levels of gas, greater than 115%, seen 10-20 miles beyond upstream dam.
    • Fixed monitoring stations only sometimes in accordance with transect measurements.
    • Sometimes multiple days portray a fairlyconsistent degassing trend.
    • Bands of gas at a fixed rivermile are consistent over a few days.
    • Bathymetry, such as sharp bends in river, affect mixing process.
    • Suggestion: Instead of following %-sat follow mass downstream To separate out affects of temperature, possibly would explain some of the sharp changes in %-sat.
  • Marshall and Perkins also had a visualization graphic of the transect data. This included an overlay of the transect measurements, color coded by value, onto a map of the river with depth gradients.

3.0 Steve Wilhelms and Mike Schneider doing a QA on the monitoring data. Schneider presented data summary for the 1995 fixed monitoring data.

  • Diel cycles present, JDA in particular
  • Some stations clearly in wrong place
  • Many parts of the river very dynamic and hourly data has vital information which is lost in daily and weekly averages.
  • Schneider produced a visual of location of monitors on Snake and Columbia.
  • BON has peak spills at night much of the summer. The affects of this is confounded with the diel temperature cycle.
  • Serious problem with temperature, noone doing QC
  • Monitors at varying depth, affecting readings?
  • Evaluation of gaspill compared to monitoring data done at each project ie BON gaspill performs well, at LMN really off
  • Gaspill performance depends on spill operations.
  • Operations data starting to creep into database. Important in explaining changes in gas production. Spillgate settings important. Ratio of spill to generated water important
  • Dont know what plume of water is hitting the monitoring stations.
  • Schneider also looking at issue of TDG% versus Temperature. Suspects temperature is a confounder, possibly by temperature induced changes in the river or perhaps on the instrument's readings.

4.0 Spill at a dam drives water to a certain saturation level regardless of incoming levels. (Comment made by Miller and Wilhelms).

5.0 Wilhelms commented on GASPILL and gas generation.

  • Has confidence at IHR under varying conditions
  • At LGR less confident

6.0 Budget Concerns

  • Due to budget cuts Pinney states there will be less field studies and hence a greater need for reliable analytic tools.
  • Any biological research/studies postponed to 1997 budget.
  • Any biological high priority issues need to be identified and sent to the Corps (Pinney?) ASAP so they can be presented at the NMFS meeting.
  • 1997 Budget will be decided in February.