Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2006 - Environment (pdf) - Posiva

More documents

Recommendations

Info

26700600500400300200Open areaForested area2004200520061000MRK2MRK7MRK9MRK1MRK3MRK4MRK5MRK6MRK8MRK10Figure 16. Amounts of precipitation in open areas (blue columns) and forested areas(green columns) on MRK plots in 2004-2006.The mean amount of precipitation in stand throughfall in 2006 was clearly lower thanthat measured in bulk deposition in open areas (Fig. 16, Table E-1). The mean amountsof both variables were higher than that in 2005, but lower than in 2004. This clearlydemonstrates that the amount of precipitation falling on the forest floor within thestands is strongly dependent on the precipitation above the tree canopies. Although thecanopy layer and forest structure have a major effect on the amount of water in standthroughfall, the precipitation in the open area is the most important factor regulating theamount of water passing to the forest floor in Finnish conditions. However, a clear effectof the tree canopy layer can be seen in the mean interception values (precipitationin the open – that in the stand) (Fig. 17, Table E-2). The mean interceptions of precipitationby the tree crowns as percentage of the precipitation in the open were 37, 28 and29% in 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively. The difference between 2004 and 2005-2006 suggests that a higher proportion of total precipitation occurred as snow during2005-2006. For comparison, the interception value was ca. 20% in the Scots pine plotslocated at Juupajoki and Tammela.The mean pH of bulk deposition at Olkiluoto during 2006 was 5.1 (Fig. 18, Table E-3),and there were no clear changes in pH during 2004-2006. The mean pH correspondsrather well to the mean values measured in Finland in recent years. Deposition atOlkiluoto contained an appreciable input of base cations (Ca, Mg, K, Na), and this willhave contributed to the maintenance of pH values at a level slightly above the nationallevel. In stand throughfall (Fig. 18, Table E-4), the pH continued to increase in 2006compared with the pH in 2004 and 2005. However, the changes were minimal.
27Interception of precipitation by tree crowns, %50.0045.0040.0035.0030.0025.0020.0015.0010.005.000.00MRK1 MRK3 MRK4 MRK5 MRK6 MRK8 MRK10200420052006Figure 17. Interception of precipitation by the tree crowns as percentage of precipitationin the open on MRK plots in 2004-2006.6Open areaForested area5pH20042005200643MRK2MRK7MRK9REFMRK1MRK3MRK4MRK5MRK6MRK8MRK10REFFigure 18. pH in bulk deposition (blue columns) and stand throughfall (green columns)on MRK plots in 2004-2006 and corresponding reference areas in 2004.The deposition of total nitrogen in bulk deposition decreased between 2004 and 2006(Fig. 19, Table E-3). NH 4 -N deposition in bulk deposition was also lower in 2006 thanin 2004 or 2005, but NO 3 -N deposition in bulk deposition remained relatively constantduring the 2004-2006 period. The deposition of nitrogen compounds in stand through-
Page 1 and 2: Working Report 2007-52Results of Mo
Page 3 and 4: ABSTRACTThis Working Report present
Page 5: 1TABLE OF CONTENTSABSTRACTTIIVISTEL
Page 9 and 10: 52 MONITORING SYSTEM AND SCHEDULETh
Page 11 and 12: 73 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION3.1 Landsc
Page 13 and 14: 9Table 4. Distribution of Olkiluoto
Page 15 and 16: 113.2 Input to Biosphere Modelling3
Page 17 and 18: 13The soils were acid. The organic
Page 19: 15Table 8. Total concentrations (%)
Page 22 and 23: 18Soil MicrobesCarbon (C) and nitro
Page 24 and 25: 201.2Norway spruceScots pine10.8mg/
Page 26 and 27: 22Figure 13. The biomass distributi
Page 28 and 29: 24Table 13. Mean carbon content (g/
Page 32 and 33: 28fall (Table E-4) was lower than t
Page 34 and 35: 30160140120Percolation waterStand t
Page 36 and 37: 3265pH432200420052006Ref. 1998-2000
Page 38 and 39: 34Total nitrogen (Tables F-5 and F-
Page 40 and 41: 36DefoliationThe degree of defoliat
Page 42 and 43: 38302520Temperature at 9 mPAR at 24
Page 44 and 45: 40Exceptionally, only two raccoon d
Page 46 and 47: 42The discharge and the nutrients o
Page 48 and 49: 44In general, the open water season
Page 50 and 51: 4665Substance matter, mg/l432SEA03S
Page 52 and 53: 48Biomass, mg/m32000180016001400120
Page 54 and 55: 50450040003500Individuals/m23000250
Page 56 and 57: 5212000kg100008000600040002000Balti
Page 58 and 59: 54Figure 41. Noise levels (L AT , d
Page 60 and 61: 56phenomenon, especially in dry sum
Page 62 and 63: 58On the southern part of the islan
Page 64 and 65: 60The water quality of the monitore
Page 66 and 67: 62Kaunisto, S. & Moilanen, M. 1998.
Page 68 and 69: 64Starr, M. 1991. Soil formation an
Page 70 and 71: 66Table A-1 cont'd. Monitoring site
Page 72 and 73: 68Table A-1 cont'd. Monitoring site
Page 75 and 76: 71APPENDIX B: FOREST AND MIRE MONIT
Page 77 and 78: 73comprehensive measurement of fore
Page 79 and 80: 75Figure B-4. Top: FIP10, middle: F
Page 81 and 82:
77Table B-3. Coverage (%) and numbe
Page 83:
79Figure B-5. Litterfall samplers (
Page 86 and 87:
Table C-2. Radionuclides in air in
Page 88 and 89:
84Table C-3. Radionuclides in milk
Page 90 and 91:
86Table C-7. Radionuclides in fish
Page 93:
APPENDIX D. RESULTS FROM SOIL MICRO
Page 96 and 97:
Table E-3. Annual amount of precipi
Page 98 and 99:
94Table E-5. Annual bulk deposition
Page 100 and 101:
96Table F-3. Mean pH and dissolved
Page 102 and 103:
98Table F-11. Mean calcium (Ca, mg/
Page 104 and 105:
100Table F-19. Mean silicon (Si, mg
Page 106 and 107:
102
Page 108 and 109:
104
Page 110 and 111:
106
Page 112 and 113:
108Table J-3. The concentrations of
Page 114 and 115:
110Table J-9. Primary production (m
Page 116:
112Table K-2. Chemical analyses of
show all

Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2006 - Environment (pdf) - Posiva

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?