How much does it cost to mitigate soil erosion after wildfires?

Girona-García, Antonio; Cretella, Carola; Fernández, Cristina; Robichaud, Peter R.; Vieira, Diana; Keizer, Jan Jacob

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117478

Cited by 19 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wildfires decrease rainfall interception and increase eroding the capacity of rainfall impact on the ground, increase overland flow velocity, and reduce soil's cohesion, all of which collectively increase erosion. Erosion contributes to the accumulation of downslope soil deposits, surface water redirection, and often redistribution of topographic conditions (Girona-García et al, 2023).…”

Section: Erosionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdependencies Between Wildfire‐Induced Alterations in Soil Properties, Near‐Surface Processes, and Geohazards

Vahedifard,

Abdollahi,

Leshchinsky

et al. 2024

Earth and Space Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The frequency, severity, and spatial extent of destructive wildfires have increased in several regions globally over the past decades. While direct impacts from wildfires are devastating, the hazardous legacy of wildfires affects nearby communities long after the flames have been extinguished. Post‐wildfire soil conditions control the persistence, severity, and timing of cascading geohazards in burned landscapes. The interplay and feedback between geohazards and wildfire‐induced changes to soil properties, land cover conditions, and near‐surface and surface processes are still poorly understood. Here, we synthesize wildfire‐induced processes that can affect the critical attributes of burned soils and their conditioning of subsequent geohazards. More specifically, we discuss the state of knowledge pertaining to changes in mineralogical, hydraulic, mechanical, and thermal properties of soil due to wildfire with a focus on advances in the past decade. We identify how these changes in soil properties alter evapotranspiration, interception, sediment transport, infiltration, and runoff. We then link these alterations to the evolution of different geohazards, including dry raveling, erosion, rockfalls, landslides, debris flows, and land subsidence. Finally, we identify research gaps and future directions to advance knowledge on how wildfires control the evolution of various earth surface processes and geohazards over time.

show abstract

Section: Erosionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdependencies Between Wildfire‐Induced Alterations in Soil Properties, Near‐Surface Processes, and Geohazards

Vahedifard,

Abdollahi,

Leshchinsky

et al. 2024

Earth and Space Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, in many areas of severe soil erosion, there is a need to restore soil quality and associated soil functions [24]. Keesstra et al [25] summarize two types of nature-based solutions: soil and landscape solutions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing Straw Mulching Methods to Control Soil and Water Losses on Loess Sloped Farmland

Zhao,

Song,

Wang

et al. 2024

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Straw mulching is a key method for controlling soil and water losses. Mulching costs may be reduced by applying it in strips rather than over entire areas. However, the effect of different straw mulching methods on the effectiveness of reducing soil erosion is unclear. In this study, the effects of straw mulching strip length (covering 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, and 4/4 of the slope length) and coverage rate (0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 kg m−2) on interception, infiltration, runoff, and soil erosion were investigated at the plot scale using rainfall simulation experiments. The further complex correlations between these variables were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM). Bare slopes were used as a control group. The rainfall intensity was chosen to be 60 mm h−1. The results showed that (1) the modified Merriam interception model can describe the change in interception with time under straw mulching conditions well (R2 > 0.91, NSE > 0.75). (2) A total of 35.39–78.79% of the rainwater is converted into infiltration on straw-covered slopes, while this proportion is 36.75% on bare slopes. The proportion of rainwater converted to infiltration was greatest (78.79%) when the straw covered 3/4 of the slope length at a coverage rate of 0.5 kg m−2, which was the most conducive to rainwater harvesting on the slope. (3) Straw mulching protects the topsoil from the impact of raindrops and directly affects the sediment yield (direct effect = −0.44). Straw mulching can also indirectly affect sediment yield by increasing interception, reducing runoff, and decreasing the sediment carrying capacity of runoff (indirect effect = −0.83). Compared with bare slopes, straw covering at least 1/2 of the slope length can significantly reduce runoff yield, but straw covering only 1/4 of the slope length can significantly reduce sediment yield. Moreover, once the straw mulch slope length reaches 3/4 and the coverage rate reaches 0.5 kg m−2, further increases in mulch slope length and coverage rate will not significantly reduce the runoff and sediment yields. These results assessed the effectiveness of different straw mulching methods in controlling soil and water losses on sloping farmland.

show abstract

“…There is very limited information on the cost-effectiveness of PPTs. A recent assessment based on 63 sites in Spain, Portugal, USA, and Canada [36], finds that land treatments are the most cost-effective (e.g., straw mulch, wood-residue mulch, and hydromulch). The cost-effectiveness of barrier PPTs was found to be low because their effectiveness is low related to the reduced erosion rates, and they might have high implementation costs in some cases [36].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A recent assessment based on 63 sites in Spain, Portugal, USA, and Canada [36], finds that land treatments are the most cost-effective (e.g., straw mulch, wood-residue mulch, and hydromulch). The cost-effectiveness of barrier PPTs was found to be low because their effectiveness is low related to the reduced erosion rates, and they might have high implementation costs in some cases [36]. Concerning the barriers, it is noteworthy to mention that log erosion barriers had slightly better cost-effectiveness values than other barrier types [36].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The cost-effectiveness of barrier PPTs was found to be low because their effectiveness is low related to the reduced erosion rates, and they might have high implementation costs in some cases [36]. Concerning the barriers, it is noteworthy to mention that log erosion barriers had slightly better cost-effectiveness values than other barrier types [36]. Keeping in mind that the cost ranges can be highly variable, seeding PPTs generally have low costs (but require considerable time and labor to implement), while chemical treatment erosion control mats are considered costly PPTs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating Post-Fire Erosion and Flood Protection Techniques: A Narrative Review of Applications

Papaioannou,

Alamanos,

Maris

2023

GeoHazards

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wildfires affect and change the burned sites’ condition, functionality, and ecosystem services. Altered hydrologic processes, such as runoff, increased streamflows, and sediment transport, are only a few examples resulting from burned soils, vegetation, and land cover. Such areas are flood-prone and face risks of extreme peak flows, reduced infiltration, water pollution affecting habitats, and hydromorphological changes. In this study, we present the different post-fire erosion and flood protection treatments that have been developed to avoid and mitigate the consequences and risks mentioned above. We categorize them into Land, Channel, Barrier, and Road treatments and analyze their types, such as cover-based methods, barriers, mulching, in-channel treatments, such as check dams, seeding, or even chemical treatments. Examples of how such treatments were used in real cases are provided, commenting on their results in flood and erosion protection. We found that cover changes were more effective than barriers, as they provided an immediate ground-cover increase in both Mediterranean and US sites. We explore the factors that play a role in their effectiveness, including storm duration and intensity, topography and slopes, land cover and uses, treatment implementation-installation, as well as fire-related factors such as burn severity. These factors have different effects on different treatments, so we further discuss the suitability of each one depending on the site’s and treatment’s characteristics. The outcomes of this work are expected to improve the understanding of the practical aspects of these treatments, providing for the first time a synthesis of the available knowledge on the multiple complex factors that can determine their efficiency.

show abstract

How much does it cost to mitigate soil erosion after wildfires?

Cited by 19 publications

References 48 publications

Interdependencies Between Wildfire‐Induced Alterations in Soil Properties, Near‐Surface Processes, and Geohazards

Interdependencies Between Wildfire‐Induced Alterations in Soil Properties, Near‐Surface Processes, and Geohazards

Optimizing Straw Mulching Methods to Control Soil and Water Losses on Loess Sloped Farmland

Evaluating Post-Fire Erosion and Flood Protection Techniques: A Narrative Review of Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About