Environmental Modeling and Assessment 2 (1997) 7382

73

Water quality in the Elbe estuary: Significance of different

processes for the oxygen deficit at Hamburg
Friedhelm Schroeder
Institute for Hydrophysics, GKSS Research Centre, Max Planck Str.1, D-21502 Geesthacht, Germany

A simple zero-dimensional model was developed which describes the oxygen concentrations and major nutrient processes in the
tidal influenced Elbe estuary. The model was calibrated by way of comparison with continuous measurements of the oxygen- and
chlorophyll concentrations at the non-tidal part of the estuary. A special calibration method was applied which utilised the fact that
natural steady-state conditions are often found during which the range and the average value of the daynight fluctuations remain constant
over a period of several days. Subsequent model runs were carried out to simulate the oxygen concentrations downstream, i.e., after a
few days of transport time of the water body. The varying depth of the Elbe downstream of Hamburg harbour was taken into account by
altering the model parameters light penetration and aeration. The oxygen concentrations resulting from the model showed a distinct
minimum, which agreed well with the minimum measured in longitudinal profiles, thus indicating that the occurrence of the oxygen
minimum in the Elbe estuary can mainly be explained by the processes included in our simple model. Sensitivity checks identified some
relationships, e.g., light intensity growth rate, which are critical for the oxygen balance. With this work it could be demonstrated that
even simple zero-dimensional models can improve our understanding of the complex interrelationship of different physical, chemical
and biological processes in rivers and that such models can be used for simple scenarios in water quality management.
Keywords: model, processes, oxygen, nutrients, water quality, Elbe, estuary

1. Introduction
The river Elbe transports a high load of nutrients and
oxygen-consuming material. During its course from eastern
Germany to the North Sea the oxygen concentrations are
highly variable. For example, in summer the upper reaches
are usually oversaturated whereas oxygen deficits occur in
the tidal parts downstream from the city of Hamburg. Oxygen concentrations below 2 mg l1 O2 were regularly observed downstream of Hamburg until 1990. Even though
the nutrient concentrations, and, as a consequence, the oxygen consumption and production rates, have changed significantly in the upper reaches of the Elbe since the reunification of Germany, low oxygen concentrations of 34
mg/l were still observed near Hamburg during the summer
months in the latter years (see figure 1).
The oxygen balance is mainly controlled by the following processes:
atmospheric aeration,
biogenic oxygen production (primary production),
biochemical oxygen demand of water phase,
biochemical oxygen demand of the sediment and
by transport processes (i.e., mixing, stratification, dispersion, turbulence).
The magnitude of the different processes controlling the
oxygen balance is known, i.e., aeration, primary production, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD, originating from
degradation of carbon and nitrogen). However, since the
different processes are not independent of one another, an
assessment of the main controlling factors and of the rela Baltzer Science Publishers BV

tive importance of an individual parameter is difficult without a numerical model.

The aim of this work was to apply a simple mathematical model for the main processes and their interactions.
The dominant process parameters will be identified and the
sensitivity of the oxygen concentration to changes in these
parameters will be assessed.
2. Model methods
To study the influence of different biological and chemical factors on the oxygen balance, a zero-dimensional water quality model was developed. This was carried out
by modifying the process part of the existing EPA-model
QUAL2E (Roesner et al. [24]). Our model mainly differs
from the QUAL2E model because of an additional carbon
pool, the mineralisation of which consumes oxygen (biochemical oxygen demand, BOD).
The model does not have a transport term. The approach
is thus reflected by the following simplified picture:
A water body with a constant volume, well-mixed
over depth and cross-section, moves downstream from the
Geesthacht weir. The processes within the water body
are defined by the numerical model. Interactions occur
only with the atmosphere (aeration) and the sediment (release, consumption), i.e., dispersion is not allowed. During
the time taken by the water body to travel the course, its
surface-to-depth ratio changes (with constant volume) according to the changes of the hydraulic radius of the Elbe
in the longitudinal profile.
By analysing the concentration versus time curves for
different constituents resulting from the model calculations,

74

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

Figure 1. Typical oxygen and chlorophyll longitudinal profiles for a spring/summer situation in the Elbe estuary (May 1995).

these curves can be converted to concentrations versus location curves (longitudinal concentration profiles). This
is if the following conditions are assumed:
(1) the freshwater discharge remains constant during the
modelled time interval and
(2) the concentrations of the constituents at the weir
Geesthacht (input term) remain constant.
The conversion of time to location can be carried out by
estimating typical transport times of water bodies using simplified transport models which are dependent on the freshwater discharge.
The model contains the subsystems oxygen, biomass
of phytoplankton, carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus.
Within each subsystem the main processes are defined
by differential equations. The numerical solution of the
equations was carried out using the program STELLA II
from High Performance Systems. Although it is beyond
the scope of this paper to discuss all the equations used in
detail, a short overview of the main relationships for the
subsystems will be presented in the following paragraphs.

2.1. Subsystem oxygen

The oxygen processes included in the model are as
follows (with oxygen production/consumption rate R =
dcox / dt, f1..5 = conversion factors and R = other
production/consumption rates):
oxygen production by

photosynthesis: Rprod = f1 Ralgal

growth ;
oxygen consumption by

algal respiration: Rres = f2 Ralgal

respiration ,
carbon degradation: Rcarb = f3 RC -degradation ,

nitrification, step 1: Rnitr1 = f4 Rammonium

oxidation ,

nitrification, step 2: Rnitr2 = f5 Rnitrite

oxidation ,
sedimentary oxygen demand: Rsed = RSOD /water
depth (with RSOD = sediment oxygen consumption rate
[g m2 d1 ]);
oxygen exchange with the atmosphere: Raer = KL (Cox
Cs ) (with KL = aeration coefficient [d1 ], Cox = actual
oxygen concentration and Cs = oxygen saturation concentration).
Apart from the aeration, all other terms depend on other
subsystems and will be discussed at the appropriate point.
According to Streeter and Phelps [30] the input rate of

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

oxygen in an under-saturated system is linearly proportional

to the oxygen deficit, i.e., the difference between saturation
concentration and actual oxygen concentration. Much literature exists in which the aeration coefficient KL is derived from hydraulic parameters, e.g., current velocity, turbulence, water depth, etc. (Churchill et al. [7], Owns et
al. [21], Bansal [2], Dobbins [8]). However, the range
of KL is quite large (0.05 to 5.56) and for tidally influenced estuaries only few equations exist (OConnor [19],
OConnor et al. [20]). In addition, the influence of windinduced waves is assumed to be large (Eloubaidy and Plate
[9], Frexes et al. [11], Mattingly [17]), but there seem to
be very few reliable data. In this paper the equation of
Ozturk [22] was used:
KL = (4.56/H)v 4/3 [d1 ]

(1)

with H = mean depth [m] and v = mean tidal velocity [m/s].

Although equation (1) was developed for under-saturated
systems it can be assumed that the exchange processes between water and the atmosphere are mainly the same for
moderately over-saturated systems.
2.2. Subsystem algal biomass
2.2.1. Primary production
For many rivers and lakes the oxygen input by photosynthesis is often the main factor which influences the oxygen
balance. Due to its dependence on the light intensity the
primary production exhibits a distinct daynight rhythm.
The algal activity (and therefore the oxygen input) depends
on the algal growth rate.
The algal biomass processes included in the model are
as follows (with Calg = biomass concentration):
algal production by
algal growth: Rgrowth = Calg , with = algal growth
rate [d1 ], d = 24 hours;
algal decrease by
algal respiration: Rares = Calg , with = algal respiration rate [d1 ],
loss due to death/sedimentation and zooplankton grazing: Rloss = Calg , with = algal loss rate [d1 ].
In the model the algal growth is calculated according
to Monod [18]. The velocity constant for algal growth, ,
depends on the availability of light and nutrients. In the
model only limiting factors for ammonia, nitrate and phosphate are taken into account. The different growth-limiting
factors, Fx , are defined by a MichaelisMenten approach
{Fx = cx /(cx + kx ), with cx = concentration of nutrient
x and kx = half saturation constant} and then are coupled
by multiplication (Chen [6]). Another approach using a
minimum function according to Liebigs law was tried
alternatively (only the most limiting nutrient was considered). However, since the overall effect on the oxygen
balance was small the multiplicative approach was finally
used.

75

The dependence of algal growth on the light intensity

(P-I-dependence) is formulated by different authors, the
main difference being the behaviour at high light intensities (photo-inhibition) (e.g., Vollenweider [31], Steele [29],
Smith [26,27]). A hyperbolic approach which was developed by Jassby and Platt [14] was successfully applied in
the Elbe estuary by Fast [10]. Since this formula is not
very suitable for analytical integration, in our model an approximation described by Smith [26] was used. The light
limiting factor for algal growth, FLZ , is defined by


2
FLZ = II / (KLI
+ IZ2 )1/2
(2)
with IZ = light intensity in a defined depth [mol m2 s1 ],
KLI = light saturation constant (= light intensity at 71%
of the maximal growth) [mol m2 s1 ].
In estuaries the simple approach used here is complicated by the vertical dispersion (circulation/ mixing) of water bodies. However, the difference in primary production
between continuous light conditions and darklight fluctuations seems to be small in comparison to uncertainties of the
P-I-dependence during changes in the planktonic communities (Jewson and Wood [15], Pohlmann [23]). Equation
(2) takes into account that in turbulent systems (darklight
fluctuations) photo-inhibition is small (Harris [12]).
The integral light limiting factor used in our model is
obtained by the integration of equation (2) over the water
depth using Beers law. The attenuation coefficient, , depends on the concentration of non-algal suspended matter
(mineral) and on the algal concentration (self-shading). In
our model self-shading is described by the linear approach
of Cardoni and Stefan [5].
2.2.2. Algal respiration
An important process for oxygen consumption and algal
decrease is algal respiration. It is not clear whether the
respiration rate is different for dark and illuminated conditions. Since the respiration rates for the Elbe estuary
are unknown, this parameter had to be estimated by fitting model data with results from measurements during the
model calibration (see below).
2.2.3. Algal loss
The main factors resulting in algal loss are grazing by
zooplankton and death and subsequent sedimentation. Sedimentation of algae is assumed to be an important process
in rivers (Kopf et al. [16]). In some rivers sedimentation
seems to be the major depletive process (Smol et al. [28],
Pohlmann [23]). Since data do not exist for this in the Elbe
estuary, a general term loss rate is used in the model and
the constants are fitted during the calibration step.
2.3. Subsystem carbon
In river systems oxygen consuming substances at different degradation stages and with different potentials of
microbial degradation come together. Many water quality models follow the approach of Streeter and Phelps [30]

76

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

Figure 2. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) in dependence of time for Elbe water at Elbstorf (for comparison the BOD values are computed for a
time interval of 24 hours). Curve fit (lines) with one e-function and a combination of two e-functions. (Measurements from Wassergutestelle Elbe,
Bergemann, pers. communication.)

who estimated the carbon degradation rate from the measured BOD21 (biochemical oxygen demand, measured in
the lab, at room temperature, after 21 days of incubation).
According to Wolf [32] the StreeterPhelps equation can be
used for short time intervals only if few degradation steps
are taking place. This is the case if the main carbon sources
in a stretch of water are mainly degraded waste water inflows. Problems with this approach can be expected when
the particulate material in the river mainly consists of easily
degradable algal material.
In figure 2, BOD1 values versus time are depicted (biochemical oxygen demand at 20 C, calculated for a time
interval of 24 hours). Two curve fits an e-function only,
and a linear combination of two e-functions are shown.

The latter fits much better and simulates two reactions with
different time constants: a fast reaction of fresh material
and a slow reaction of degraded material. Consequently
two carbon pools are defined in our model, both of which
are fed by dying algae. The initial values of the pools represent the non-algal parts of the carbon system, originating
from external inputs (sewage, run-off).
Both carbon pools represent materials with different
degradability and different C:N ratios. Using this ratio
which changes with time, i.e., with location in the Elbe,
the carbon subsystem is coupled to the nitrogen subsystem.
The measured ratios can be used for a consistency check
of the model parameters.

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

77

2.4. Subsystems nitrogen and phosphorus

These subsystems had to be included into the model because of (1) the oxygen consumption of nitrification, and
(2) possible nutrient limitations of algal growth. The following processes are included in the model: release of
ammonium/phosphorus from organic nitrogen/phosphorus,
nitrification (2-step), release of ammonia and phosphorus
from sediments/suspended matter, and uptake of ammonia,
nitrate and phosphate by algae. Since the nitrification exhibits a lag phase which depends on several factors, e.g.,
input of bacteria from sewage plants, the parameters of the
nitrogen subsystem cannot be used in our model for predictive purposes. Instead they were fitted in such a way as
to reflect the actual concentrations of ammonia, nitrite and
nitrate in the longitudinal cross section of the Elbe.
2.5. Other parameters
2.5.1. Light intensity
In the upper reaches of the Elbe estuary large daynight
fluctuations of the oxygen concentrations occur in summer.
During the day Elbe water is highly over-saturated with
oxygen leading to oxygen losses by atmospheric exchange
processes. Thus, instead of using a time-independent average light intensity, a simple cosine function was used for
the variation of light intensity, It , over time t:



(3)
It = (Imax /2) 1 cos 2(24(t int(t)) + N )/N
(during the time interval (24t) < (int(t) + 24 + N ), otherwise It = 0), where It = actual light intensity (PAR) in
the wavelength band 400700 nm (mol m2 s1 ), Imax =
maximum light intensity (PAR) at noon (mol m2 s1 ),
N = number of daylight hours per day, int( ) = integer
function.
Imax was derived from measurements of global irradiation over the year [1]. The calculation of PAR from global
irradiation was carried out using a factor used by Fast [10],
FPAR = 5,036, which also takes into account the loss of
light by reflection at the water surface.
2.5.2. Temperature dependence of processes
Since there are few data on the temperature dependence
of the processes for the Elbe the approach of Streeter and

Phelps [30] was used: kt = k20 Q(T 20 ) , with kt = reaction constant at temperature T , k20 = reaction constant
at temperature T = 20 C. Q is an empirical constant,
which depends on the activation energy. It was taken from
QUAL2E and varied from 1.024 to 1.083 (depending on
the process).

Figure 3. (a) Continuous recordings at the weir Geesthacht for a typical

steady state situation (May 1995, Measurements by G. Blocker, GKSS).
(b) Model results: Steady state situation. Model parameters from table 1.

changes were too high to be plausible. Consequently, the

model had to be calibrated by adapting these missing parameters in such a way that model results agreed with continuous concentration measurements at the weir Geesthacht
which were carried out by GKSS (Bergemann et al. [3],
Blocker [4]). Time intervals can be found within the continuous registrations of oxygen and chlorophyll when the
daily averages do not change over a period of 12 weeks
(steady state). It can be assumed that under these conditions production terms make up for the consumption terms
(this applies for chlorophyll and oxygen). The assumption
of steady state was confirmed by continuous measurements
at another station (Schnackenburg) about 100 km upstream
from Geesthacht (Umweltbehorde Hamburg, pers. comm.).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Model calibration for May 1995

2.6. Calibration methods

The model uses many parameters, some of which could
be determined from experiments while others had to be
taken from the literature. However, when using the range of
parameters cited in the literature the resulting concentration

The model was calibrated with measured concentrations of oxygen and chlorophyll (fluorescence) at the weir
Geesthacht in May 1995 (figure 3a). As can be seen, the
daily averaged concentrations remained nearly constant for
a period of ten days.

78

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

Table 1
Main parameters used in the model.

Initial parameters
Reaction constants:
algal growth rate
algal respiration rate
algal loss rate
carbon-degradation rate, fast
carbon-degradation rate, slow
O2 -aeration rate
Initial concentrations:
algal biomass
carbon, easily degradable
carbon, slow degradable
oxygen
ammonium
nitrite
nitrate
organic nitrogen
o-phosphate
organic phosphorus
Conversion factors:
biomass chlorophyll
O2 -consumpt during algal respiration
O2 -product. during algal growth
O2 -consumpt for 1st nitrific. step
O2 -consumpt for 2nd nitrific. step
Other constants:
light saturation constant KL
sediment oxygen demand
non-algal attenuation coefficient
self-shading attenuation coefficient
average water depth upstream
temperature
1) Together

Unit

Method

1,22
0,1
0,49
0,2
0,05
2,28

d1
d1
d1
d1
d1
d1

adaptation
adaptation
adaptation
adaptation
adaptation
literature

11,5
1
4
11
0,3
0,15
4
0,9
0,25
0,08

mg l1
mg l1
mg l1
mg l1
mg l1
mg l1
mg l1
mg l1
mg l1
mg l1

estimation from
estimation from
estimation from
measurements
measurements
measurements
measurements
estimation from
measurements
estimation from

12
2
1,4
3
1

g chloroph. (mg biomass)1

mg O2 (mg biomass)1
mg O2 (mg biomass)1
mg O2 (mg N)1
mg O2 (mg N)1

literature
literature
literature
literature
literature

500
1
2
0,03
2
15

E m1 s1
g O2 m2 d1
m1
m1 (g chlorophyll/l)1
m
C

literature (Fast [10])

measurements
estimation from measurements, literature
literature
measurement
measurement

using
using
using
using
using

contin. measurements
contin. measurements
contin. measurements
longitudinal profiles 1)
longitudinal profiles 1)

contin. measurements
lab. measurements
lab. measurements

literature values
literature values

with measured changes of C:N ratios along the Elbe.

After a test run of the model, initially using literature

values for the unknowns, i.e., not measured, parameters,
these input parameters were fine-tuned with the aim of
bringing the model into a steady state for algal biomass
and oxygen. The criteria for a successful fit were: (1) correct average concentrations and (2) correct range (difference between minimum and maximum). At the same time
the changes in nutrient concentrations had to remain small.
During the fine-tuning it was found that the different relationships in the model are closely coupled. This made the
adjustment more difficult because several parameters had
to be changed simultaneously in order to obtain a good fit,
but due to the close coupling there were fewer degrees of
freedom for the adjustment.
Results from the model calibration for May 1995 are
depicted in figure 3b; the parameters used are itemised in
table 1. As can be seen, the model results for oxygen agree
with those measured. The modelled chlorophyll concentrations vary less than the measured fluorescence values. This
seems to be realistic because in-situ fluorescence measurements overestimate the daily biomass variations due to a
superimposed light sensitivity of the method.
By varying several parameters it was found that the system reacts strongly to changes in algal growth rate: small
changes of about 10% in the growth rate had to be com-

pensated by 100% changes in respiration rate, algal loss

rate and aeration rate in order to bring the model back into
steady state again.
During the calibration a comparatively large algal loss
rate had to be chosen because when a small loss rate is
chosen this has to compensated by a high algal respiration
rate in order to keep the biomass constant (steady state). As
a consequence, the enhanced respiration rate would imply a
large oxygen consumption rate which could not be verified
with the BOD measurements.
The model indicates that a high amount of oxygen loss
is caused by exchange with the atmosphere. This loss is
compensated by a comparatively high primary production.
Consequently, a decrease of production, e.g., caused by bad
weather = poor light conditions, immediately leads to a
strong decrease of chlorophyll and oxygen concentrations.
This could be verified by our continuous measurements over
longer periods (Bergemann et al. [3]). The model results indicate that the oxygen consumption is mainly dominated by
algal respiration and carbon degradation whereas the oxygen consumption from nitrification and sediment processes
is comparatively small.

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

79

Figure 4. Scenario 1: simulation of a longitudinal profile with the parameters of figure 3b. After 2 days the steady state is abandoned due to a change
in water depth.

3.2. Model simulations of a longitudinal profile for May

1995 (scenario 1)
A model run was carried out over 2040 days using the
parameters of table 1 to study the variation of different
process parameters over a longer period (simulation of a
longitudinal profile). The following changes were included
into the model after a transport time of the water body of
two days:
1. The mean water depth was increased from 2 m to 10 m
according to the increased depth of the Elbe near Hamburg (due to the model assumptions of constant volume
the larger depth results in a smaller surface area). This
has consequences for primary production (light) and for
the exchange with air (aeration) and sediment (release
of ammonia and phosphate).
2. An increase of the non-algal attenuation coefficient
from 2 m1 to 5 m1 , corresponding to an increase
of suspended matter from 20 mg l1 in the upstream
region to 80 mg l1 downstream of Hamburg.

(Remark: in the Elbe estuary downstream of Hamburg the concentration of suspended matter changes
during a tidal cycle between 20 mg l1 at slack water
to > 150 mg l1 at full current. Near the bottom concentrations > 500 mg l1 are found. Therefore, it is
difficult to define an average concentration.)
Results from a model run are depicted in figures 4af.
Figure 4a shows the decrease of the oxygen concentration from 13 mg l1 (over-saturation) to 6.5 mg l1 after 7
days. The main reason for this is a decrease of primary
production: Since algal growth is impeded by increased
depth and turbidity (less light) the biomass decreases very
fast due to losses by respiration, sedimentation and grazing (compare the rates in figure 4c). Another reason for
the decline in oxygen concentrations is the decrease of the
aeration rate downstream of Hamburg (figure 4d) which is
caused by the increased water depth. From figure 4e it is
evident that the importance of the sediment oxygen demand
decreases at the larger water depths (with the assumption

80

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

that the consumption rates averaged over the cross section

do not change downstream from Hamburg).
Figure 4f shows the variation of nutrient concentrations as predicted by the model. During the reduction of
the biomass which occurs downstream of Hamburg nitrate
and phosphate concentrations increase because they are no
longer consumed by algae. In the case of nitrate there is
an additional input caused by nitrification of ammonium
as can be seen by the decrease of ammonium. The measured nutrient increase is more shallow than that modelled,
the reason perhaps being sedimentary nutrient consumption
processes which were not included in the model (e.g., denitrification).
It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss all the
other processes. However, it should be mentioned that the
variation of C:N ratios which change from 8 (at the weir
Geesthacht) to 20 (50 km downstream from Hamburg) is
correctly reproduced by the model.
3.3. Sensitivity of the oxygen minimum to model
parameters
Comparing the model results (figure 4a) with the measured longitudinal profile (figure 1) it is clear that the modelled increase of the oxygen concentrations after the minimum is less steep than in reality. The reasons for this are
presumably higher aeration in this area due to wind and
waves (open stretches). However, the main differences between the two figures are the larger oxygen concentration
in the modelled minimum after 7 days.
The depth of the oxygen trough, i.e., the difference
between initial and minimum concentrations, is controlled
in a very sensitive way by different process parameters.
To improve our understanding of the complex relations,
different parameters were altered and the resulting influence
on the oxygen minimum observed. However, the variation
of different parameters had to be carried out carefully so as
not to violate the previously defined boundary conditions
(e.g., steady state for oxygen and biomass at the weir).
Three categories must be distinguished for the parameter
variation:
1. Processes which only change at the depth transition
between upper and lower reaches of the Elbe: these
parameters may be varied, preserving all other parameters.
2. Processes which influence the oxygen concentrations,
but do not change the biomass balance, e.g., aeration,
nitrification, sediment oxygen consumption. Parameters controlling these processes can be varied in pairs
in such a way that the oxygen steady state is maintained.
3. Processes which control the breakdown and buildup of
biomass, e.g., growth rate, loss rate, respiration, light
utilisation. A change of these parameters has to be
followed by a change of other parameters in order to
counteract the effect on the (1) biomass/oxygen steady

state, and (2) level and daily range of biomass/oxygen

concentrations. These parameters may only be altered
within their sensible range, either defined by possible
measurement errors or by their range found in the literature.
3.3.1. Scenario 2: Alteration of algal loss rate
In figure 5a the algal loss rate was decreased from
0.49 d1 to 0.3 d1 . This had to be compensated by an increase of the algal respiration rate from 0.1 d1 to 0.25 d1
and a slight decrease of the growth rate from 1.22 d1 to
1.12 d1 . However, with these new parameters the simulated oxygen values (average and range) were much smaller
than the measured values. The only way of neutralising this
was to greatly decrease the aeration rate at the weir from
2.28 d1 to 0.9 d1 .
The consequences are: (1) the aeration rate is now at
the lower limit of estimations as given by Imhoff [13] in
the literature and (2) the smaller loss rate in this scenario
results in in-situ BOD1 values (including algal respiration)
of 6.7 mg l1 O2 , which is too high. This had to be compensated by a decrease in the C-degradation rate.
The changed parameters resulted in smaller oxygen minimum concentrations of 3.8 mg l1 . Due to the large BOD
values this scenario does not seem to be very realistic. Presumably, the real state of the system will be between scenario 1 and 2. However, it can be seen that the degrees of
freedom for parameter variation are small.
3.3.2. Scenario 3: Alteration of the aeration rate in the
lower Elbe
In the preceding scenarios the model calculations were
made using an aeration rate for the lower Elbe of 0.45 d1
(after 2 days; the initial rate at the weir was 2.28 d1 ). In
figure 5b the aeration rate of the lower Elbe was varied between 0.18 and 1.15 d1 , corresponding to average current
velocities between 0.5 and 2 m s1 . Especially with small
aeration rates the oxygen minimum decreases dramatically.
This will be the reason that the smallest oxygen concentrations are always measured after days without wind.
3.3.3. Scenario 4: Alteration of the sedimentary oxygen
demand in the lower Elbe
The effect of a variation of the sedimentary BOD rate
from 0.5 to 2 g m2 d1 can be seen in figure 5c. Sediment
oxygen demands of 2 g m2 d1 can only be observed in
some very muddy areas of the lower Elbe (Schroeder et
al. [25]). Values averaged over the river cross section will
be about or less than 1 g m2 d1 . As can be seen from
the figure the influence of the oxygen consumption of the
sediment for the oxygen minimum in the water phase is
comparably small. Only downstream of the oxygen minimum point, where the other oxygen consuming processes
are small, that is, where no longer any fresh algal material
is available, does the importance of this parameter increase.
In this zone the oxygen consumption of the sediment delays
the filling up of the oxygen deficit.

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

81

Figure 5. (a) Scenario 2: same parameters as in figure 4 but changed algal respiration rate, algal loss rate and aeration rate. (b) Scenario 3: variation
of the aeration rate in the lower Elbe (after two days), other parameters as in figure 4. (c) Scenario 4: variation of the sediment oxygen demand in the
lower Elbe (after two days), other parameters as in figure 4. (d) Scenario 5: variation of the attenuation coefficient (turbidity) in the lower Elbe (after
two days), other parameters as in figure 4.

3.3.4. Scenario 5: Alteration of the attenuation coefficient

in the lower Elbe
Figure 5d shows the results of an alteration of the attenuation coefficient in the lower Elbe between 2 and 8 m1 ,
corresponding to suspended matter concentrations between
20 and 160 mg l1 . It is evident that the greater turbidity
has an effect on the oxygen minimum. However, when the
suspended matter concentrations increase above 50 mg l1
the influence is negligible due to the large water depth.
This is to be expected since the depth at which only 1% of
the incident light penetrates is about 1.2 m with suspended
matter concentrations of 50 mg l1 .
4. Conclusions
From the comparison of the different computed scenarios with measured longitudinal Elbe profiles it can be concluded that the simple process model simulates the oxygen
minimum near Hamburg well. In the simulation a minimum
always develops if realistic parameters from measurements
and from literature are used, the difference being the depth
of the minimum. It can be concluded that the main factors
which control the oxygen balance are included in the model
and therefore that the model is suitable for a quantitative
description of the oxygen balance in the Elbe.

An exact forecast of concentrations of oxygen, chlorophyll and other compounds over time cannot be made because:
1. The oxygen balance is very sensitive to the following
parameters: algal growth rate, light utilisation, respiration rate, loss rate and aeration rate. Since these
parameters can only be approximated it is difficult to
forecast the exact magnitude of resulting oxygen concentrations.
2. The limitation of the algal growth by light is dependent
on the of particulate matter concentrations and on selfshading. The first parameter is very variable in tidal
estuaries and the second parameter can only be roughly
estimated. Without knowing what these parameters are
it is difficult to forecast exactly the maximum chlorophyll concentrations.
3. The limitation of algal growth by nutrients, i.e., mainly
nitrogen and phosphorus, is not very well known. This
is due to uncertainties of the half-saturation constants
for nitrate, ammonia and phosphate. A detailed knowledge of these parameters in dependence of the main
algal species is necessary for a more detailed forecast
of maximum chlorophyll concentrations.

82

F. Schroeder / Water quality in the Elbe estuary

During the model simulations our understanding of the different interacting processes improved. From the measurements and the model results the formation of the oxygen
minimum can be explained in the following manner:
In the upper estuary the water is over-saturated by oxygen because the very high primary production exceeds the
high oxygen consumption, which is mainly caused by oxidation of easily degradable carbon. When the hydraulic
radius changes near Hamburg, the primary production decreases due to poor light conditions, the oxygen consumption exceeds the production and the oxygen concentration
decreases. This effect is enhanced by the decreasing importance of the aeration due to the larger depth. After ten
days of transport most of the easily consumable carbon has
been consumed and, since no fresh material is produced,
the oxygen consumption rate decreases. From this point
the aeration rate exceeds the consumption and the oxygen
concentration increases again.
With our model the occurrence of the oxygen minimum
in the lower Elbe could be explained in a quantitative manner. However, the estimated error of the modelled oxygen
concentrations is about 25%, mainly due to uncertainties
of the parameters light saturation constant, KLI , and aeration rate in the tidal estuary, KL .
It was demonstrated that in some cases our understanding of the complex interrelationship of different physical,
chemical and biological processes in rivers can be improved by very simple models. Such models are much
easier to handle and to modify than complex two- or threedimensional models and therefore are well suited for decision makers who want a simple tool for water management.
References
[1] ARGE ELBE: Wassergutedaten der Elbe von Schnackenburg bis zur
See, Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur die Reinhaltung der Elbe (Eigenverlag,
19801994).
[2] M.K. Bansal, Atmospheric reaeration in natural streams, Water Research 7 (1973) 769782.
[3] M. Bergemann, G. Blocker, H. Harms, M. Kerner, R. Nehls, W. Petersen and F. Schroeder, Der Sauerstoffhaushalt der Tidedelbe, Die
Kuste 58 (1996) 165.
[4] G. Blocker, GKSS Research Centre (pers. communication).
[5] J.J. Cardoni and H.G. Stefan, A model of light and temperature
limited primary productivity in Lake Chicot, External memorandum
M-177, St. Falls Hydraulic Laboratory, University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN (1982).
[6] C.W. Chen, Concepts and utilities of ecological model, ASCE SED,
96 (SA-5:1085) (1970).
[7] M.A. Churchill, H.L. Elmore and R.A. Buckingham, The prediction
of stream reaeration rates, Int. J. Air and Water Poll. 6 (1962) 467
504.
[8] W.E. Dobbins, BOD and oxygen relationships in streams, J. Sanitary
Engineering Division, Proc. of the Am. Soc. of Civil Engineers 90(3)
(1964) 5378.
[9] A.F. Eloubaidy and E.J. Plate, Wind shear-turbulence and reaeration coefficient, ASCE, Journal Hydraulics Division 98(HY1) (1972)
153170.

[10] Th. Fast, Zur Dynamik und Primarproduktion des Phytoplanktons

im Elbe-Astuar,
Dissertation, Univ. Hamburg (1993).
[11] P. Frexes, G.H. Jirka and W. Brutsaert, Examination of recent field
data on stream reaeration, ASCE, J. Environm. Engineering Division
110 (6) (1984) 477490.
[12] G.P. Harris, Photosynthesis, productivity and growth: The physiological ecology of phytoplankton, Arch. Hydrobiol. Beih. Ergebn.
Limnol. Heft 10 (1978) 1171.
[13] K. Imhoff, Taschenbuch der Stadtentwasserung (R. Oldenbourg,
Munchen, Wien 1966).
[14] A.D. Jassby and T. Platt, Mathematical formulation of the relationship between photosynthesis and light for phytoplankton, Limn.
Oceanogr. 21(4) (1976) 540547.
[15] D.H. Jewson and R.B. Wood, Some effects on integral photosynthesis of artificial circulation of phytoplankton through light gradients,
Verh. Internat. Limnol. 19 (1975) 10371044.
[16] W. Kopf, W. Pohlmann and K. Reimann, Grundlagen der Eutrophierung von Fliegewassern, dargestellt am Beispiel von Main und
Regnitz, Bericht d. Bayer, Landesanstalt f. Wasserforschung (Hrsg.)
(Munchen, 1988).
[17] G.E. Mattingly, Experimental study of wind effects on reaeration,
ASCE, Journal Hydraulics Division 103(HY3) (1977) 311.
[18] J. Monod, The growth of bacterial cultures, Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 3
(1949) 371394.
[19] D.J. OConnor, Oxygen (1969). Balance of an estuary, ASCE, J. Sanitary Engineering Division 86(SA3) (1960) 3555.
[20] D.J. OConnor, J.L. Mancini and J.R. Guerriero, Evaluation of factors influecing the temporal variation of dissolved oxygen in the New
York Bight, Phase II (Manhattan College, Bronx, New York, 1981).
[21] M. Owens, R.W. Edwards and J.W. Gibbs, Some reaeration studies
in streams, Int. J. Air Wat. Poll. 8 (1964) 469486.
[22] Y.F. Ozturk, Mathematical modelling of dissolved oxygen in mixed
estuaries, ASCE, J. Environmental Engineering Division 105(EE5)
(1979) 883904.
[23] W. Pohlmann, Zur Eutrophierung von Fliegewassern. Teil 2: Einflu von Licht, Turbulenz, Gewassertiefe und Primarbelastung des
Vorfluters auf das Wachstum von Phytoplankton (in situ Messungen),
Z. Wasser-Abwasser-Forsch 22 (1989) 196202.
[24] L.A. Roesner, P.R. Giguere and D.E. Evensong, Computer program
documentation for stream quality modeling (Qual-II) (U.S. Environmental Protection, Athens, GA, 1981).
[25] F. Schroeder, K.H. Wiltshire, D. Klages, B. Mathieu and
H.D. Knauth, Nitrogen and oxygen processes in sediments of the
Elbe Estuary, Arch. f. Hydrobiol./Suppl. 110(2/3) (1996) 311328.
[26] E.L. Smith, Photosynthesis in relation to light and carbon dioxide,
Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 22 (1936) 504510.
[27] R.A. Smith, The theoretical basis for estimating phytoplankton production and specific growth rates from chlorophyll, light and temperature data, Ecol. Modeling 10 (1980) 243264.
[28] J.P. Smol, S.R. Brown and H.J. McIntosh, A hypothetical relationship between differential algal sedimentation and diatom succession,
Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 22 (1984) 13611365.
[29] J.H. Steele, Notes on some theoretical problems in production
ecology, in: Primary Production in Aquatic Environments, ed.
C.R. Goldman (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1965)
pp. 393398.
[30] H.W. Streeter and E.B. Phelps, A study of the pollution and natural
purification of the Ohio River, Public Health Bulletin 146 (1925).
[31] R.A. Vollenweider, Calculation models of photosynthesis-depth
curves and some implications regarding day rate estimating in primary production measurements, in: Primary Production in Aquatic
Environments, ed. C.R. Goldman (University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA, 1965) pp. 425457.
[32] P. Wolf, Simulation des Sauerstoffhaushaltes in Fliegewassern
(Kommissionsverlag R. Oldenbourg, Munchen, 1974).