journal article·2023-09-28Open access

Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment and Protection Strategy in the Coastal Area of China: A GIS-Based DRASTIC Model Approach

Qian Zhang, Qiang Shan, Feiwu Chen, Junqiu Liu, Yingwei Yuan

Applied Sciences· Volume 13· Issue 19

Abstract

Groundwater vulnerability reflects the risk level of groundwater contamination and its self-repairing ability, as well as its sustainability for use. Therefore, it provides significant scientific support for implementing measures to prevent groundwater contamination, especially in coastal areas. In this study, considering the lithology of vadose in valley plains and the extent of karst subsidence areas, a GIS-based DRASTIC model was employed to assess groundwater vulnerability in Tangshan City, a coastal area in China. The assessment results were presented and mapped using GIS, based on a comprehensive evaluation of seven parameters, including “Depth of groundwater, Vertical net recharge, Aquifer thickness, Soil media, Topography, Impact of vadose zone, and Hydraulic conductivity”. The identified groundwater vulnerability zones included the highest, higher, moderate, low vulnerability those four zones, which accounted for 4%, 53%, 25%, and 18%, respectively. In addition, according to the results of field investigation, the karst subsidence area and the mined-out coastal area were directly classified as the highest vulnerable areas and covered 1.463 km2; more attention is required here in subsequent groundwater protection processes and strategies. Finally, the groundwater pollution index was used to validate the groundwater vulnerability distribution results, and these two were in high agreement, with an R2 coefficient of 0.961. The study is crucial for the rational utilization and protection of water resources in Tangshan City.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Groundwater and Watershed Analysis · Groundwater and Isotope Geochemistry · Flood Risk Assessment and Management

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

College of Hydraulic Engineering, Tianjin Agricultural University, Tianjin 300384, China

Joint Tianjin Agricultural University-China Agricultural University Smart Water Conservancy Research Center, Tianjin 300384, China

Hebei Key Laboratory of Geological Resources and Environment Monitoring and Protection, Shijiazhuang 050021, China

Hebei Geo-Environment Monitoring Centre, Shijiazhuang 050021, China

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China · Open Funding from Hebei Key Laboratory of Geological Resources and Environment Monitoring and Protection · China Postdoctoral Science Foundation · Tianjin Graduate Research Innovation Project

References (52)

Show source-provided references
1. Developing robust arsenic awareness prediction models using machine learning algorithms10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.01.044 ↗
2. Hydrochemical characterisation of groundwater quality: Merdja plain (Tebessa town, Algeria)10.28991/cej-2020-03091473 ↗
3. Impact of water withdrawals from groundwater and surface water on continental water storage variations
4. Global Groundwater? Issues and solutions10.1146/annurev.environ.030308.100251 ↗
5. Assessing groundwater depletion and dynamics using GRACE and InSAR: Potential and limitations10.1111/gwat.12453 ↗
6. Temporal changes in the groundwater level in the Upper Tigris Basin, Turkey, determined by a GIS technique10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2015.03.004 ↗
7. Detecting and predicting the impact of land use changes on groundwater quality, a case study in Northern Kelantan, Malaysia10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.171 ↗
8. Recent land deformation detected by Sentinel-1A InSAR data (2016–2020) over Hanoi, Vietnam, and the relationship with groundwater level change10.1080/15481603.2020.1868198 ↗
9. Sinking cities in Indonesia: ALOS PALSAR detects rapid subsidence due to groundwater and gas extraction10.1016/j.rse.2012.10.015 ↗
10. Extreme subsidence in a populated city (Mashhad) detected by PSInSAR considering groundwater withdrawal and geotechnical properties10.1038/s41598-020-67989-1 ↗
11. Monitoring of land subsidence due to excessive groundwater extraction using small baseline subset technique in Konya, Turkey10.1007/s10661-021-08962-x ↗
12. Spatial Variability of Relative Sea-Level Rise in Tianjin, China: Insight from InSAR, GPS, and Tide-Gauge Observations10.1109/JSTARS.2021.3054395 ↗
13. Determining the groundwater vulnerability using the aquifer vulnerability index (AVI) in the Salatiga groundwater basin in Indonesia10.1063/1.5062740 ↗
14. Application of DRASTIC and modified DRASTIC models for modeling groundwater vulnerability of Malda District in West Bengal10.1007/s12524-020-01176-7 ↗
15. Groundwater depletion: A global problem10.1007/s10040-004-0411-8 ↗
16. Assessment of U and As in groundwater of India: A meta-analysis10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135199 ↗
17. Land management impacts on runoff sources in small Amazon watersheds10.1002/hyp.6803 ↗
18. Van Dijck, S.J., Laouina, A., Carvalho, A.V., Loos, S., Schipper, A.M., Van der Kwast, H., Nafaa, R., Antari, M., Rocha, A., and Borrego, C. (2006). Desertification in the Mediterranean Region. A Security Issue, Springer.
19. Cui, Y., Liao, Z., Wei, Y., Xu, X., Song, Y., and Liu, H. (2020). The Response of Groundwater Level to Climate Change and Human Activities in Baotou City, China. Water, 12.10.3390/w12041078 ↗
20. A GIS-based multicriteria decision for groundwater potential zone in the west desert of Iraq10.1088/1757-899X/1092/1/012049 ↗
21. Mohammed, O.A., and Sayl, K.N. (2020, January 14–17). Determination of groundwater potential zone in arid and semi-arid regions: A review. Proceedings of the 2020 13th International Conference on Developments in eSystems Engineering (DeSE), Virtual.10.1109/DeSE51703.2020.9450782 ↗
22. Comparative effect of lateritic shield in groundwater vulnerability assessment using GLSI and LC models: A case study of Ijero mining site, Ijero-Ekiti10.1007/s40808-023-01689-3 ↗
23. Assessing the vulnerability of groundwater to pollution in Ireland based on the COST-620 Pan-European approach10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.044 ↗
24. Application of drastic model and GIS: For assessing vulnerability in hard rock granitic aquifer10.1007/s10661-010-1572-7 ↗
25. Total vulnerability estimation for the Tabriz aquifer (Iran) by combining a new model with DRASTIC10.1007/s12665-015-4327-5 ↗
26. A GIS-based DRASTIC model for assessing shallow groundwater vulnerability in the Zhangye Basin, northwestern China10.1007/s00254-008-1421-y ↗
27. Robert, S. (1987). DRASTIC: A Standardized System for Evaluating Ground Water Pollution Potential Using Hydrogeologic Settings, Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency.
28. Optimization of the DRASTIC method for groundwater vulnerability assessment via the use of simple statistical methods and GIS10.1007/s10040-005-0008-x ↗
29. Nitrate vulnerability of groundwater in Jeju Volcanic Island, Korea10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151399 ↗
30. Assessment of intrinsic aquifer vulnerability at continental scale through a critical application of the drastic framework: The case of South America10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153748 ↗
31. Assessment of groundwater quality and groundwater vulnerability in the northern Ordos Cretaceous Basin, China10.1007/s12517-018-3449-y ↗
32. Application of DRASTIC and extension theory in the groundwater vulnerability evaluation10.1111/j.1747-6593.2011.00298.x ↗
33. Changes of groundwater flow field of Luanhe River Delta under the human activities and its impact on the ecological environment in the past 30 years
34. (2023, August 28). Hydrogeological Manual, China Geological Survey. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?dbname=SNAD&filename=SNAD000001542056.
35. US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (1985). DRASTIC: A Standard System for Evaluating Groundwater Potential Using Hydrogeological Settings, Oklahoma WA/EPA Series, Ada.
36. China Geological Survey (2022). Delineation of Priority Areas for Groundwater Pollution Prevention and Control Technical Guideline.
37. Integrated variable weight model and improved DRASTIC model for groundwater vulnerability assessment in a shallow porous aquifer10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127538 ↗
38. Groundwater vulnerability assessment in different types of aquifers10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106275 ↗
39. Watershed-scale response of groundwater recharge to inter-annual and inter-decadal variability in precipitation (Alberta, Canada)10.1007/s10040-014-1176-3 ↗
40. Groundwater vulnerability assessment of an urban coastal phreatic aquifer in India using GIS-based DRASTIC model10.1016/j.gsd.2022.100810 ↗
41. Comparison of DRASTIC and DRASTICL groundwater vulnerability assessments of the Burdekin Basin, Queensland, Australia10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.159945 ↗
42. Predictive modeling of groundwater nitrate pollution using Random Forest and multisource variables related to intrinsic and specific vulnerability: A case study in an agricultural setting (Southern Spain)
43. A comprehensive review of groundwater vulnerability assessment using index-based, modelling, and coupling methods10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113161 ↗
44. A comparison study of DRASTIC methods with various objective methods for groundwater vulnerability assessment10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.130 ↗
45. Cl, Br, B, Li, and noble gases isotopes to study the origin and evolution of deep groundwater in sedimentary basins: A review10.1007/s10311-021-01371-z ↗
46. Evaluation of drought impact on groundwater recharge rate using SWAT and Hydrus models on an agricultural island in western Japan
47. Evaluation of special vulnerability of groundwater in Guangzhou based on fuzzy comprehensive judgment
48. Special vulnerability of groundwater in the Guanzhong Basin and its evaluation
49. Modeling and validation of groundwater pollution prevention performance zoning in reclaimed water irrigation areas
50. (2017). China Environmental Quality Standards for Groundwater (Standard No. GB14848-2017).
51. Balacco, G., Alfio, M.R., and Fidelibus, M.D. (2022). Groundwater Drought Analysis under Data Scarcity: The Case of the Salento Aquifer (Italy). Sustainability, 14.10.3390/su14020707 ↗
52. Kruseman, G.P., De Ridder, N.A., and Verweij, J.M. (1983). Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data, International Institute for land Reclamation and Improvement. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284969758.