Comment on “Dynamical Implications of Block Averaging” by G. Treviño and E.L Andreas

A 2006 article in Boundary-Layer Meteorology by G. Treviño and E.L Andreas presents a derivation that questions the use of time averaging for computing turbulence statistics. Their derivation shows that time averaging over a finite interval always leads to a zero integral time scale. As a result, Treviño and Andreas argue that any turbulence quantities derived from time averaging are tainted and incompatible with the Navier–Stokes equations. While Treviño and Andreas are correct that time averaging does produce integral scales that are quite different from what researchers commonly expect, this comment demonstrates that the theoretical implications are not as dire as they claim.     

Plume Dispersion in Low-Wind-Speed Conditions During Project Sagebrush Phase 2, with Emphasis on Concentration Variability

Eight short-range, open-terrain SF₆ tracer tests in low wind speeds were conducted during Phase 2 of Project Sagebrush using continuous releases. Four tests were made during very unstable conditions in July and August 2016, and four during very stable conditions in October 2016. All tests featured 10-min averaging and 1-Hz sampling of tracer concentrations together with an extensive suite of meteorological measurements. We find that the uncertainty in well-mixed daytime measurements of tracer concentrations, using the absolute value of the relative percentage difference in collocated duplicate samplers, approaches a downwind limit of about 7–8%. Concentration variability in collocated sampling, due to stochastic factors and independent of measurement uncertainty, increases the total observational uncertainty closer to the source from about 20% (daytime) to 40% (very stable conditions). Longer averaging periods moderately reduce the concentration variability. The data indicate that the large increase in concentration variability is linked with the suppression of turbulent mixing, small eddy length scales, and meandering in very stable conditions. These results should be considered when comparing observations with model predictions in evaluations.     

Managing Bay and Estuarine Ecosystems for Multiple Services

Managers are moving from a model of managing individual sectors, human activities, or ecosystem services to an ecosystem-based management (EBM) approach which attempts to balance the range of services provided by ecosystems. Applying EBM is often difficult due to inherent tradeoffs in managing for different services. This challenge particularly holds for estuarine systems, which have been heavily altered in most regions and are often subject to intense management interventions. Estuarine managers can often choose among a range of management tactics to enhance a particular service; although some management actions will result in strong tradeoffs, others may enhance multiple services simultaneously. Management of estuarine ecosystems could be improved by distinguishing between optimal management actions for enhancing multiple services and those that have severe tradeoffs. This requires a framework that evaluates tradeoff scenarios and identifies management actions likely to benefit multiple services. We created a management action-services matrix as a first step towards assessing tradeoffs and providing managers with a decision support tool. We found that management actions that restored or enhanced natural vegetation (e.g., salt marsh and mangroves) and some shellfish (particularly oysters and oyster reef habitat) benefited multiple services. In contrast, management actions such as desalination, salt pond creation, sand mining, and large container shipping had large net negative effects on several of the other services considered in the matrix. Our framework provides resource managers a simple way to inform EBM decisions and can also be used as a first step in more sophisticated approaches that model service delivery.