- Author
- Noiton, D. | Fowles, J. | Davies, H.
- Title
- Ecotoxicity of Fire-Water Runoff. Part 2. Analytical Results.
- Coporate
- Environmental Science and Research Limited, New Zealand
- Report
- New Zealand Fire Service Commission; Research Report 18, August 2001, 23 p.
- Distribution
- VIEW THE DOCUMENT: Website: http://www.fire.org.nz/more_info/reports/ fund/reports/report_18.htm
- Keywords
- water | ecology | chemical analysis | sampling | metals | building fires
- Identifiers
- New Zealand; runoff sample collections; ecotoxicological hazard ranking; organics; water quality criteria; ecotoxic hazards
- Abstract
- This report contains the analytical results of chemical testing of sampled runoff from the scenes of four different common types of structural or vehicular fires in New Zealand during 2000. The report aims to compare the results of the chemical analyses of runoff with published water quality criteria for the protection of aquatic life in order to assess the ecological hazard potential of these events, and to identify contaminants contributing the most to the estimated risks The results from the monitoring of 4 structural fires and 1 vehicular fire in this study are consistent with the runoff concentrations from different types of fires reported in other countries. The runoff from the autoshop fire was the most hazardous to aquatic life. A fire at a fruit shop yielded runoff with metal concentrations comparable to that found in a large industrial plastics warehouse fire overseas, although the volumes of runoff for the fruit shop fire were almost certainly much smaller. The runoff from the house fire presented the lowest ecotoxic hazard. Undiluted, the runoff from all five fires would be acutely lethal to aquatic life, if it is assumed that even a fraction of the contaminants are bioavailable. The experience of ecosystems impacted by similar fires overseas indicates that the metal concentrations dissipate from the surface water within several days and do not pose a chronic hazard. It does appear therefore, that in most cases, the threat of lasting ecological damage is small, provided that the receiving waterway is of sufficient size and flow rate to reduce the acute impacts. No fires at chemical storage or other heavy industrial sites were available for sampling in the time period, but it is highly likely that runoff from fires at such facilities would be much more of a toxic threat than those fires in this report, and could result in ecological catastrophe for the aquatic life in the receiving waterway.