Design an investigation
Permeable pavement and stormwater
- Units 4, 5 and 8
- 10 points
- About 23 minutes
You can use a calculator on this question, just like on exam day.
You read about a real-world environmental situation with a described figure or model, then pick out the parts of a scientific investigation (hypothesis, variables, controls), explain the science behind it, and propose solutions to the problems it raises. On the exam: Question 1 of 3 in the 70-minute free-response section (Section II is 40% of the exam score).
The question and its sources
A city's storm drains carry rainwater from streets and parking lots straight into Mill Creek, which floods after heavy storms. Before repaving its parking lots, the city's engineers tested whether permeable pavement would reduce stormwater runoff.
Figure 1: Diagram of one test pad
The diagram shows a side view of a rectangular parking-lot test pad, 10 m long and 5 m wide (50 m²), with a 2% slope. A sprinkler frame above the pad sprays artificial rain evenly over the surface.
Water that soaks into the pad drains down through a gravel layer and into the soil below. Water that does not soak in flows downhill across the surface into a gutter at the lower edge, which empties into a measuring tank.
The engineers built nine pads on the same soil: three of standard asphalt, three of permeable concrete pavers (blocks with gaps filled with small stones) and three of porous concrete (concrete full of tiny connected holes). Each pad received 25 mm of artificial rain in one hour, which is 1,250 liters of water per pad. They then measured the volume of water in each tank.
Source: Hypothetical study design
Table 1: Surface runoff from a 25 mm simulated storm
| Surface | Mean runoff per pad (L) | Percent of applied water that ran off (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Standard asphalt | 1,140 | 91 |
| Permeable concrete pavers | 210 | 17 |
| Porous concrete | 150 | 12 |
Source: Hypothetical data
Suggested time: 23 minutes
Your answers are saved in this browser as you type.
Part (a)
1 pointIdentify the independent variable in this investigation.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (b)
1 pointIdentify the dependent variable in this investigation.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (c)
1 pointIdentify the control group in this investigation.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (d)
1 pointIdentify one variable that the engineers kept the same for all nine pads.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (e)
1 pointState a null hypothesis for this investigation.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (f)
1 pointUsing Table 1, describe the difference in runoff between the asphalt pads and the two permeable surfaces.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (g)
1 pointExplain why large areas of asphalt in a watershed increase the risk of flooding in Mill Creek.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (h)
1 pointIdentify one pollutant that stormwater runoff from parking lots commonly carries into streams.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (i)
1 pointExplain how covering a large part of a city with impervious surfaces can affect the supply of groundwater beneath the city.
0 / 2,500 characters
Part (j)
1 pointPropose one method, other than permeable pavement, that the city could use to reduce the amount of stormwater runoff reaching Mill Creek.
0 / 2,500 characters
Checking scoring…
Scoring it yourself shows you the rubric, examples and a model answer. Try writing your answer first.