Anda di halaman 1dari 17

Fall

08
14

Fall

Joy Amadi
Ramsha Ahmed
Azadeh Mazaheri
.

27th November 2014

1.

Introduction

1.1 Study objectives:


The objective of this soil sampling is to identify the current and past land use of the Niagara
College in Glendale Avenue (NOTL campus) based on the physical properties and soil mapping
of the soil and to determine if soils from Niagara College (NOTL campus) meet applicable
standards for Provincial soil quality.
1.2 Description of the study area:
The study area is located at the entrance to the campus from Taylor road. The entrance drive
passes through vegetation on both sides and constructed wetlands that collect storm water. There
are two ponds close to the study area, one at the main entrance and another at the far north. The
sampling area is general low relief, sloping to the north and surrounded by an open field, trees
and flowers, constructed storm water run offs pond at the centre and a parking lot.
1.3 Current and historic land use:
The information on the historical land use was based on field observations, satellite imagery, and
air photos, as shown in the appendix. Aerial photos for 2010, 2006, 2000, and 1981 was collected
based on the photos sampling location and its immediate surrounding area has mainly been used
for agricultural previously, and now used for institutional purpose. From 2000 to 2010 aerial
photo showed that sample had vegetation, constructed stormwater pond and parking lot close by.

27th November 2014

Table 1 - Hazard Assessment of Field Work Activities

Field Location: On Campus

Date: 2014-11-10

Crew:
Cell Phone: 613-252-5819
Azadeh Mazaheri, Joy Ndudi Amadi and
Ramsha Ahmed.
Coordinator/Supervisor:
Name and Number:
Annie
amichaud@niagaracollege.ca

Emergency: 911
Ambulance: 905-688-2191
Michaud Niagara College Security: ext. 4444

Niagara College 135 Taylor Road,


Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
906-641-2252
Alternate Contact:
289-968-5273

Activity

Soil Sampling

First Aid Kit packed? Yes

Hazards
and
Conditions

Controls

Personal
Protective
Equipment

Sunstroke/
Hypothermia

Appropriate
clothes for the
weather.
Reschedule
if
weather condition
change.
Work with the
partner

Water
and
snacks.
Steel Toe boots,
Sun
screen
creams
Winter coats.

-Wear
footwear

-First Aid kit


Steel toe boots,

Tripping
falling

and

proper

27th November 2014

-Be aware of your


surroundings
-Store equipment
safely
-Work with Partner

Having a tool
box

-Be aware of your


Environment/watc
h your steps
-Wear protective
clothing
(long
sleeves)
Work
with
a
partner

- Steel toe boots


-First Aid Kit

Biological
Hazard

-learn to identify
toxic species and
their
potential
habitats
-Wear protective
clothing

-Insect
repellents
-First Aid Kit
-long
sleeve
cloths.

Working around
water

Be
aware
of
surrounding
(slipping risks on
stream slopes)
Reschedule
fieldwork during
high water events.
Leave the water
during
lightning
events.
Practice the buddy
system.

Steel toe boots

Adverse
weather-Storm

Seek shelter
Use your judgment
Always work with
the partner

Appropriate
cloths

Punctures
Abrasions

and

27th November 2014

Equipment risk

-Be aware of your


surrounding and
members of team
handling.
-Prior training on
equipment
handling
-Wear necessary
safety equipment.
-Work with
a
partner

Steel toe boots

Working around
road side

Be aware of your
surroundings.
Wear appropriate
safety attire (Be
visible to drivers at
all times.)
Use caution when
crossing
busy
roadways.
Have a first aid kit.
Put up safety signs

Safety cloth
signs

Methodology:
Sample collection:
Sample was collected with the use of Dutch Auger, pretreated with Alconox solution to
thoroughly clean the auger bucket. On the site, a selected portion was cleared to remove
surface debris and be able to collect a pure sample.

Data from field notes:

Name of Samplers: Azadeh Mazaheri, Ramsha Ahmed, joy Amadi


Date: November 10, 2014
5

27th November 2014

Time: 8:46
Weather conditions: Cool, Cloudy
Equipment Land Used: Auger
Surrounding Land Use: Stormwater pond, vegetation (trees), parking lot, winery farm and
buildings and
Sampling Location: Soil near stormwater Pond near the intersection at Taylor Road
Geographical Location: 43.1383605, -79.037667199999
Georeferencing (in UTMs) and map of sampling site:
Slope position: Top of Soil extending down to storm water pond
Rockiness: 0
Stoniness: 0
The collected soil was taken to the laboratory in the Dutch auger, placed on a clean sheet of
Kraft paper on the lab bench. With the use of disposable nitrile gloves, soil was removed
from the auger head and place on the clean sheet of Kraft paper. Organic layer was removed,
the bottom third of sample was sample separated and the remaining soil sample were placed
in a glass sampling jar provided for further laboratory analysis.
Equipments used
Dutch auger
Ph probe
Glass Beakers
Conductivity meter
Weighting scale
Soil crusher
Glass stirring rod

Soil analysis methodology:


Physical property analysis:
Texture by feel- with bare hands determining the texture of soil (addition of little water) and
using Munsell colour chart the soil texture was classified
Analytical methods for chemical parameters:
Two parameters were checked namely Soil pH and Conductivity. Approximately 10 g of soil
was weighed and placed in a glass beaker. Distilled water was added (20ml) to the beaker
and continuously stirs with a glass-stirring rod for 10 minutes. The soil slurry was allowed to
settle.
Soil pH- pH probe was placed into the sample carefully to prevent bulb from touching soil at the
bottom of the beaker. The pH reading were obtained and recorded.

QA/QC:

27th November 2014

Equipment such as the auger and lab bench should be sanitized before use
Calibration of the conductivity meter and other devices should be performed before taking
Measurements.
Placing soil on kraft paper reduces contamination that may have been present on the lab bench.

3. Results:
3.1 Soil physical properties

Table 2
Soil Color

10 YR, 4/2 , Dark Grayish Brown

Soil Texture

By feel: Smooth, can from a ribbon (2.5-5


cm) ,

Soil Structure

Silty Clay

Soil Consistence and plasticity

Slightly sticky, firm,very plastic

3.2 Basic chemistry


Table 3
PH

7.13

Soil Conductivity

2.68

3.3 Soil Classification


Determine the following using available soil series and Quaternary geology mapping:
Parent material: Mainly lacustrine heavy clay
Soil series:
Drainage : Imperfect
Slope type: smooth, gently sloping 2-5%
Taxonomic classification:

Analytical results
Result Comparison of the Site B1 and B2 in 2014

27th November 2014

Site B1 and B2 in 2014


Table 4: Metals in Site B1 and site B2 in 2014
Analyte

MRL

Unit

Guidelines

B1

B2

Ag

0.2

mg/g

STD-0.5

<0.2

<0.2

Al

mg/g

23600

12600

Ba

mg/g

STD-210

122

64

Be

mg/g

STD-2.5

<1

<1

Cd

0.5

mg/g

STD-1

<0.5

<0.5

Co

mg/g

STD-19

12

Cr

mg/g

STD-67

34

23

Cu

mg/g

STD-62

29

26

Fe

mg/g

34800

22300

Mn

mg/g

400

762

Mo

mg/g

STD-2

<1

<1

Ni

mg/g

STD-37

30

22

Pb

mg/g

STD45

14

26

Sr

mg/g

28

89

Tl

mg/g

STD-1

<1

<1

mg/g

STD-86

45

26

Zn

mg/g

STD-290

76

88

Usually Soils contain low background levels of heavy metals. Heavy metals are hazardous to
human, animals and plants such as arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), copper (Cu), lead (Pb), nickel
(Ni), selenium (Se), and Zinc (Zn), which are regulated by EPA.

27th November 2014

Levels of these heavy metals in our site compared to guideline are low. Existence of barium and
cadmium in soil near or above standard value is not uncommon. The Higher level of these heavy
metals above the standard value requires the greater concern.
Comparison site B1 and B2 with standards in 2014:
Comparison of the results of B1 and B2 in 2014 (Table4) shows that almost all values of site B1
is higher than B2 for heavy metals execpt for Mn , Pb, Sr and Zn that B2 values are higher that
B1.In general all values in B1 and B2 are lower compare to the standards. The table shows that
there was no standard exceedence for both site B1 and B2.

Table 5: Illustrates result for site B1 in 2013


Analyte

Site B1 in 2013

Aluminium

15300

Barium

107

Beryllium

<1

Cadmium

<0.5

Chromium Total

26

Cobalt

13

Copper

24

Iron

26500

Lead

26

Manganese

1020

Molybdenum

<1

Nickel

26

Silver

<0.2

Strontium

40

27th November 2014

Thallium

<1

Vanadium

33

Zinc

92

Electrical Conductivity

0.27

Comparison Site B1 in 2013 and 2014:


The results from site B1 in 2013 compared to the site B1 in 2014. The Table 5 shows that heavy
metals in site B1 in 2014 has higher level in Al, Ba, Cu, Fe, Ni and V.In addition, Mn
significantly decreased from 2013 to 2014 from 1020 mg/g to 400 mg/g.Other materials like Sr ,
Pb and Co is lower in 2014 compare to 2013 in site B1.In general Compare to the Standards in
2013 ,All the value for site B1 in 2013 are lower than Standard levels and there were no standard
exceedence for site B1 in 2013.

Analysis:
Due to the soil being a heavy clay as detected by the texture-by-feel method it can be deduced
that the soil will have poor drainage and thus may contain and restrict the mobility of metals.
This may be one of the reasons. The soil conductivity was also higher as compared to the other
sections results. This may have been due to the location of where the soil had been taken from.
If the soil sample was taken closer to the water then the soil may have had better drainage as the
water may have been flowing through the soil at one point. The pH was neutral and did not
indicate the soil was acidic or highly contaminated in acidic contaminants. This could have also
been observed because there was plenty vegetation growing in the surrounding area which could
have only been possible due to the non-acidic soil.

Conclusion:

10

27th November 2014

Soil sampling was done in a specific region on the Niagara-on-the lake college campus. This
report was created to collect, analyze and compare the results of soil conductivity and pH to
previous years and to see if the soil standards meet applicable standards for Provincial soil
quality.

Appendix:
Aerial Photographs

11

27th November 2014

http://maps.niagararegion.ca/Navigator/
Figure 1 (2010): Image of the location the soil sample was extracted from for analysis.
The soil was taken adjacent of a stormwater pond near the intersection at Taylor Road

12

27th November 2014

Figure 2 (2006): Location where the soil sample was taken. This image illustrates the locations
features eight years from now. The stormwater pond appears to be smaller in size and more
sediment is present in the area as well as in the water.

13

27th November 2014

Figure 3 (2000): This map illustrates the site near the stormwater pond

14

27th November 2014

Figure 4: This is the soil map of the location that was sampled.

15

27th November 2014

Figure 5 : (1981) Image of the location the soil sample was extracted from for analysis.

16

27th November 2014

Figure 6: Site map

Reference:
1) M.S. Kingston, The Soils of The Regional municipality of Niagara, Volume 1 ,(1989).
2) M.S. Kingston, The Soils of The Regional municipality of Niagara, Volume 2 ,(1989).
3) Niagara Navigator
4) Interpretation the result of soil tests for heavy metals , Vern Grubinger and Don Ross,
(Sep 2011)
[http://www.uvm.edu/vtvegandberry/factsheets/interpreting_heavy_metals_soil_tests.pdf]
5) https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.1537118,-79.1679656,18z

17