A Review of Methods to Assess Groundwater Vulnerability to Pollution
-
Published:2024-09-11
Issue:4
Volume:13
Page:93-107
-
ISSN:2328-5699
-
Container-title:American Journal of Environmental Protection
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:AJEP
Author:
Aduck Jovens1ORCID, Mufur Alice2, Fonteh Mathias1
Affiliation:
1. Department of Agricultural and Environmental Engineering, College of Technology, The University of Bamenda, Bamenda, Cameroon 2. Department of Agricultural and Environmental Engineering, College of Technology, The University of Bamenda, Bamenda, Cameroon; Department of Geology, Higher Teacher Training College, The University of Bamenda, Bamenda, Cameroon
Abstract
Groundwater resources that are increasingly being cherished for most socioeconomic development are exposed to varied pollutant sources. Studies have shown that they are vulnerable to various impacts such as climatic change, human impacts and also pollution from seawater intrusion in coastal areas. The susceptibility of a groundwater body to pollution indicates extent to which its quality is at risk of being compromised by contaminants. Assessments of this vulnerability are classified based on scale (site, local, regional) or objective (such as risk management or protection zoning) and also distinguish between source and resource vulnerability maps, as well as specific and intrinsic vulnerability maps. Groundwater vulnerability assessment methods differ based on several factors, including the availability and spatial distribution of quantitative and qualitative data, the objectives and scale of the mapping, the costs of model development, and the particular hydrogeological characteristics of the aquifer under investigation. The National Research Council has classified these methods into three primary categories: process-based methods, statistical methods, and overlay/index methods. Among these, the overlay/index method is widely employed for conducting large-scale assessments of aquifer sensitivity and groundwater vulnerability. It is especially advantageous in developing countries due to the easily accessible data required for its implementation.
Publisher
Science Publishing Group
Reference86 articles.
1. Barbulescu, A. J. W, “Assessing groundwater vulnerability: DRASTIC and DRASTIC Like Methods: A review.,” Water, vol. 12, no. 5, p. 1356, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/w12051356 2. Kaur R., and Rosin, K. G, “Ground Water Vulnerability Assessment: Challenges and Opportunities,” Div. Environ. Sci. Indian Agric. Res. Institute, New Delhi-110012, India., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 82–92, 2012, [Online]. Available: http://www.cgwb.gov.in/documents/papers/incidpapers/Paper 12- R. Kaur.pdf 3. Wada, Y., Flörke, M., Hanasaki, N., Eisner, S., Fischer, G., Tramberend, S., Satoh, Y., Van Vliet, M. T. H., Yillia, P., and Ringler, C, “Modelling global water use for the 21st century: The Water Futures and Solutions (WFaS) initiative and its approaches,” Geosci. Model Dev., vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 175–22, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmdd-8-6417-2015 4. (United Nations World Water AssessmentProgramme)/ UN-Water WWAP, “The United Nations World Water Development Report 2018: Nature-Based Solutions for Water; UNESCO: Paris, France,” 2018. 5. (United Nations World Water Assessment Programme) WWAP, “The United Nations World Water Development Report 2014: Water and Energy; UNESCO: Paris, France,” 2014.
|
|