Comparison of methods of evaluating groundwater vulnerability to contamination in arid regions: a case study of Abarkooh plain

Authors

10.22052/6.14.59

Abstract

The issue of protection of groundwater against pollution is of crucial significance. Groundwater vulnerability maps provide useful information to protect groundwater resources and evaluate the potential for water quality improvement with changes in agricultural practices and land use applications. In Yazd province, especially in Abarkooh, the majority of agricultural and drinking water is provided by groundwater; thus, the prevention of pollution and quality consistency is very important. The intrinsic vulnerability of the Abarkooh aquifer to contamination was assessed using the well-known SI, SINTACS, GODS, AVI and DRASTIC methods. The data from these models was first collected and entered into the software of a geographic information system (GIS) to provide the required layers. The use of overlapping techniques and weight coefficients for each layer provided the final plain of vulnerability. In the next step, the accuracy of the models was evaluated by fitting a regression line between the observations and estimated values in the sampling wells. The results showed that there was no significant relation between the NO3 values and pollution potential as shown by GODS, but there was a significant relation at the 1% level (R = 0.81) between these values in DRASTIC. This model is introduced as suitable for classifying of the pollution potential in the study area. The aquifer of Barkooh plain was divided to three vulnerability classes based on the DRASTIC model. The vulnerability classes from this model showed that most of the plain is without risk and has very low vulnerability.

Keywords


1. Akbari. G.H. and Rahimi. M., 2011. Sensitivity analysis of water at higher risk subjected to soil contaminations. Computational Methods Civil Engineering. Vlo. 2., No. 1., pp: 83-94 2. Aller, L., Bennet, T., Lehr, J.H. and Petty, R. J., 1987. DRASTIC: a standardised system for evaluating groundwater pollution potential using hydrologic settings. US EPA Report, 600/2–87/035, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK, 641 pp 3. Assaf H, Saadeh M. Geostatistical assessment of groundwater nitrate contamination with reflection on DRASTIC vulnerability assessment: the case of the Upper LitaniBasin, Lebanon. Water Resour Manage 2009; 23(5):775–96. 4. Aydi, W., Saidi, S., Chalbaoui, M., Chaibi, S., and Ben Dehi, H. 2013. Evaluation of the Groundwater Vulnerability to Pollution Using an Intrinsic and a Specific Method in a GIS Environment: Application to the Plain of Sidi Bouzid (Central Tunisia). Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering. 38(7): 1815-1831 5. Civita., V. 2010. The Combined Approach When Assessing and Mapping Groundwater Vulnerability to Contamination. J. Water Resource and Protection, 2: 14-28 6. Civita, M, 1991. La carte della vulnerabilita` degli acquiferi all’inquiamento: Teoria e Pratica, Pitagora editrice, Bologne, Italie,. 7. Faryabi M., Kalantari N., Rahimi, M.H., 2006. The hydrogeo assessment of groundwater in the Baghmalek plain using composite diagrams, saturation index and ion ratios. Conference of Geology, 24p. 8. Foster S.S.D., Hirata R., Gomes D., D’Elia M., and Paris M., 2002 Groundwater quality protection: a guide for water utilities, municipal authorithies, and environment agen-cies. The World Bank, Washington, D.C., 103 pp 9. Gogu, R. & Dassargues, A., Current trend and future challenge in groundwater vulnerability assessment using overlay and index methods, Journal of environmental geology (1999) 39(6) 549-559 10. Houan, H., Wang. J., Teng, Y., 2012. Assessment and validation of groundwater vulnerability to nitrate based on a modified DRASTIC model: A case study in Jilin City of northeast China. Science of The Total Environment. Vol(440).1.14-23 11. Javadi, S., Kavehkar, N., Mousavizadeh, M.H., and Mohammadi, K., 2011. Modification of DRASTIC model to map groundwater vulnerability to pollution using Nitarte measurements in agricultural areas. Journal of Agriculture Science. Vol 13(2), 239-249. 12. Kavehkar N., Javadi S., Mohammai K., Khayat kholghi M., 2007. Modified DRASTIC method and its application in Iran, Twenty-eighth Conference of Earth Sciences, 70P. 13. Khemiri, S., Khnissi, A., Ben Alaya, M., Saidi, S., and Zargouni, F., 2013. Using GIS for the Comparison of Intrinsic Parametric Methods Assessment of Groundwater Vulnerability to Pollution in Scenarios of Semi Arid Climate. The Case of Foussana Groundwater in the Central of Tunisia. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 5, 835-845 14. Ribeiro, L, 2000. Desenvolvimento de um índice para avaliar a susceptibilidade dos aquíferos a`contaminacao, Nota interna (nao publicada), ERSHA-CVRM, Portugal. 15. Stigter T, Almeida P, CarvalhoDA, Ribeiro L. Evaluation of an intrinsic and a specific vulnerability assessmentmethod in comparison on a regional scale. Hydrogeol J 2006; 14(3): 79–99. 16. U.S. EPA., 1995, Drinking Water Standards. U.S. EPA, New York.