Background:
In exercise seven we where running a continuation to the original topic we had discussed in exercise five when we looked at the frac sand mining in Wisconsin. Our initial objective for the lab was to locate all of the mines recognized by the WDNR and analyze the overall impact the trucking had on the county roads. Before we could do this we needed to gain some background knowledge to the situation. To obtain this synopsis we where given a recent study conducted that was very similar to our project but specifically located in the Chippewa county of Wisconsin. The study was run by Maria Hart et. al. through the university of Wisconsin Madison. They wanted to find the impact on the transportation roads the trucking had and if the counties would be able to afford the turmoil the constant running of sand would cause. They found that the entire process itself is very demanding on roads for the process requires a lot of water, sand, chemicals, and equipment. Also since most of the mines are located in farm land and generally away from local towns it requires lots of trucking to mine locations. In one of the papers that they had found a conservative estimate of amount of trips could be upwards of 2700 times for one mine fracturing. and if the mine has different oil it can lead to multiple mine fractures (White paper). In total they found that both in bound and out bound truck tons would equate in Chippewa county alone to be about 2.2 million tons. Considering this it is easy to see the implications that amount of weight on the same road over and over could cause a lot of damage. Since the trucks are always taking the shortest route to the rail terminal to off load the product.
Although most of the local governments for Chippewa county and other counties throughout the state have conducted studies to find the most suitable route for the trucks to travel based off of shortest route optimal pavement conditions and other factors the notion that maintenance solely relies on the counties is appalling. Take for example Chippewa county, which has a median income of only 26,000 they are now going to be asked to raise their own taxes to upkeep and repair the roads that is only making profit for most companies that are not even locally based. Income that they may not ever see once it is collected. I hope that through more studies and hypothetical situations as the one we have conducted government agencies will see that they need to step in and regulate and aid these small communities to protect not only their road systems but also there environments as well.
Methods:
For our own hypothetical exercise we now had the necessary information needed to understand what analysis we where looking for, but our next task was to run the process. We already had our previously placed geocoded mines and where now given the actual mine location but we needed to query out some specific aspects of these mines and mine terminals to run our transportation analysis. Starting we needed to build a python script which could be used to query out and make the feature classes that selected only active mines, all mines that only had mine in type and to remove all mines that where within 1.5 km of a rail terminal. The full script can be found within my stand alone blog post of all python scripts made over the semester. Once the script had successfully run we where able to utilize these newly created feature classes for our network analysis.
The analysis would be run using ArcMap by placing the mine final mine locations which consisted of all active mines that where fully labeled as mines only and not within 1.5 km of a rail line. This feature class would act as out location in our analysis. We then needed to place all rail terminals in our map and use them as our facilities. However, we only needed the terminals that where rail and rail compatible so we needed to manually query out all other terminals like air and make a separate feature class. Once here we where now ready to run the analysis for the nearest m terminal from each mine. The outcome would be our route needed in our calculations.
From here we needed to build a model to run our feature classes and calculate our analysis. We built a model that would be able to run all of the features through the analysis and would calculate our own new fields which would show our total mileage of roads travel per county and cost per county. The model (figure 1.1) has a couple of logistics that are worth noting are that in order to calculate mileage and cost we needed to project the map into a useful units. I had chose to use Wisconsin state coordinate system which used feet as the linear units.Next we needed to summarize the counties based on length to determine the total feet traveled in each county.
The last steps where very quick but essential for figuring out how much each county would hypothetically need to pay in to maintain their roads. We needed to add two fields to our summarized table the first being total miles traveled hypothetically saying each truck would travel 100 round trip times in a year. The last was a cost per county field which multiplied the amount traveled by .022 which was the hypothetical amount said it would cost per mile traveled.
| Figure 1.1: Model used to generate final table showing cost in US dollars each county would need to pay to maintain there roads. |
The final table that was generated from the map and then displayed within my results is as follows.
| Final table generated form the model that shows the total length of road traveled in miles and cost per county in US dollars. |
Results:
The results of the study where very intriguing for I would have imagined that the mines would have effected more counties within Wisconsin after visually seeing the extent that the frac sand is located in the state. The results that I had generated although completely hypothetical showed that the two counties most greatly effected by trucking of material for mining where Chippewa county and Wood county. Both would need more than 300 dollars per year greatly differing from the other counties of Wisconsin. The graph below (figure 1.2) shows the full results in form of dollar values. One aspect that needs to be considered when looking at these results where the routes of the trucking. As figure 1.3 shows in some cases the mines needed to truck a long distance and even in some cases across counties boundaries to reach a rail terminal. It is this fact that in my opinion leads to many issues within governmental cost, for how do counties determine how needs to cover the cost of the destruction if the mine is in one county but the terminal unfortunately is in another. This hopefully can be solved peacefully or can eventually be subsidized by federal agencies.
| Figure 1.2: showing the total cost per each county effected by trucking of frac sand in Wisconsin. |
Conclusion:
In the end although the numbers where completely hypothetical this project was very eye opening to a real life problem that is occurring as we are running these tests. This lab was very helpful to not only gain a better understanding of the programs Arc offers but to also see how scientist are utilizing these exact methods in the field to solve a real world issue. After completing the exercise I now have gained a better understanding for some of the programs but also have a deeper compassion for searching for solutions to such issues that effect me as a Wisconsinite. It is issues like these that will directly effect my taxes and infrastructures within this beautiful state I love. I only can hope that soon more people will run similar test with true data to display to multiple federal agencies and finally gain support for maintenance of our important roadways.
sources:
ESRI geodataset
University of Wisconsin Eau Claire Geography Department
National Center for Freight and Infrastructure research and education White Paper : Maria Hart et al. UW Madison

