A field study on cost‐effectiveness of five erosion control measures

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to quantitatively evaluate five erosion control measures at a residential development area in Louisiana, USA in order to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) that have been tested in the field with demonstrated cost‐effectiveness.Design/methodology/approachA total of six testing sites at a nine‐degree slope were used in parallel to study five erosion control measures with one being the control site (no protection). Soil erosion rate was quantified using the erosion bridge method. Soil underlying the study area was analyzed for surface runoff potential. Precipitation was monitored using a Sigma rain gauge. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student Newman‐Keuls Post‐Hoc ANOVA analysis were conducted to evaluate statistical significance of erosion control effectiveness. Ratio of soil erosion rate reduction to cost of each control measure is also analyzed.FindingsAll erosion control measures studied were very effective in reducing soil erosion for soils with high runoff potential, ranging from 75 percent to about 100 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. The most effective soil erosion protection was observed by Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket with greater than 90 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. However, after factoring‐in cost, straw bedding was observed to be five times as cost‐effective as Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket. The most cost‐effective measure is temporary seeding using perennial rye grass. For each dollar spent, about 12 tons of soil per acre per year will be prevented from eroding.Originality/valueThe study evaluated erosion control measures in the field with quantitative cost‐effectiveness analyzed. Besides enforcement, providing practical and cost‐effectiveness control measures that have been tested in the field is critical for actual implementation of erosion control measures.