Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering

ISSN 2095-2201

ISSN 2095-221X(Online)

CN 10-1013/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-973

2018 Impact Factor: 3.883

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.    2019, Vol. 13 Issue (2) : 20    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-019-1104-9
RESEARCH ARTICLE
The influence of slope collapse on water exchange between a pit lake and a heterogeneous aquifer
Bo Zhang1,2, Xilai Zheng1,2, Tianyuan Zheng(), Jia Xin1,2, Shuai Sui1,2, Di Zhang4
1. Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Marine Environment and Geological Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China
2. Key Laboratory of Marine Environmental Science and Ecology (Ministry of Education), College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China
3. Department of Environmental Informatics, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Leipzig 04318, Germany
4. Key Laboratory of Surficial Geochemistry, Ministry of Education, Department of Hydrosciences, School of Earth Sciences and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
5. College of Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China
 Download: PDF(2394 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Slope collapse will reduce the water exchange.

Slope collapse will affect the spatial distribution of the water exchange.

Precipitation have the most impact on the dynamics of the water exchange.

Due to the increase in open pit mining, pit lakes have become common surface water features, posing a potential risk to subsurface aquifer. In this study, a pit lake–groundwater interaction model is built based on the general program MODFLOW with the LAK3 package. For the first time, the effects of lake-slope collapse and aquifer heterogeneity on pit lake–groundwater interactions are analyzed by dividing the lake into six water exchange zones based on the aquifer lithology and groundwater level. Our investigation and simulations reveal a total water exchange from groundwater to the lake of 349000 m3/a without collapse of the pit lake slope, while the total net water exchange under slope collapse conditions is 248000 m3/a (i.e., a reduction of 1.40-fold). The monthly net water exchange per unit width from groundwater to the lake reaches the largest in April, shifting to negative values in zone IV from June to August and in zone V in June and July. Moreover, the monthly net water exchange per unit width decreases from north to south, and the direction and magnitude of water exchange are found to depend on the hydraulic gradients between the lake and groundwater and the hydraulic conductivity of the slope collapse.

Keywords Pit lake      Slope collapse      Groundwater–surface water interactions      Numerical simulation     
Corresponding Author(s): Tianyuan Zheng   
Issue Date: 18 February 2019
 Cite this article:   
Bo Zhang,Xilai Zheng,Tianyuan Zheng, et al. The influence of slope collapse on water exchange between a pit lake and a heterogeneous aquifer[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(2): 20.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-019-1104-9
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2019/V13/I2/20
Fig.1  Location of the study area.
Fig.2  Monthly precipitation and evaporation in the study area from Jan. 2008 to Dec. 2017.
Fig.3  Hydrogeological cross-section of the study area (Section 1–1′).
Fig.4  Distribution of double-layer aquifer: upper layer (a), lower layer (b) and 6 slope zones (c) around pit-lake.
Fig.5  Model grid, boundary conditions and groundwater flow direction.
Zone Kh(m/d)
0.322
0.063
0.088
0.072
0.081
0.382
Tab.1  Hydraulic conductivity of the thin layer
Fig.6  Simulated and observed water tables for groundwater (a) and (b); and the lake (c).
Aquifer lithology Kh (m/d) Kh/Kv Sy a
Clay 0.18 1 0.03 0.15
Sandy clay 0.46 1 0.05 0.23
Clay sand 1.29 1 0.07 0.25
Fine sand 12.34 1 0.10 0.28
Medium sand 82.32 1 0.12 0.30
Coarse sand 110.70 1 0.18 0.35
Tab.2  Model parameters after calibration
Fig.7  Net water exchange with and without collapse between groundwater and the pit lake in 2013.
Fig.8  Monthly unit width flow-in or flow-out of water exchange zones and water tables of lake and monitoring wells in 2013: (a) zones I and II, (b) zones III and IV, and (c) zones V and VI.
1 PAla-aho, P M Rossi, E Isokangas, BKløve (2015). Fully integrated surface–subsurface flow modelling of groundwater–lake interaction in an esker aquifer: model verification with stable isotopes and airborne thermal imaging. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 522: 391–406
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.12.054
2 ADavis, T Bellehumeur, PHunter, BHanna, G GFennemore, CMoomaw, SSchoen (2006). The nexus between groundwater modeling, pit lake chemogenesis and ecological risk from arsenic in the Getchell Main Pit, Nevada, U.S.A. Chemical Geology, 228(1–3): 175–196
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2005.11.023
3 J ADowning, S B Watson, E McCauley (2001). Predicting cyanobacteria dominance in lakes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 58(10): 1905–1908
https://doi.org/10.1139/f01-143
4 L JDrew, W H Langer, J S Sachs (2002). Environmentalism and natural aggregate mining. Natural Resources Research, 11(1): 19–28
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014283519471
5 A AEl-Zehairy, M WLubczynski, JGurwin (2018). Interactions of artificial lakes with groundwater applying an integrated MODFLOW solution. Hydrogeology Journal, 26(1): 109–132 doi:10.1007/s10040-017-1641-x
6 DGenereux, I Bandopadhyay (2001). Numerical investigation of lake bed seepage patterns: Effects of porous medium and lake properties. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 241(3–4): 286–303
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00380-2
7 DHou, G Li, PNathanail (2018). An emerging market for groundwater remediation in China: Policies, statistics, and future outlook. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 12(1): 16doi:10.1007/s11783-018-1027-x
8 PHerzsprung, M Schultze, MHupfer, BBoehrer, WTümpling Jr, ADuffek, AVanderVeen, KFriese (2010). Flood effects on phosphorus immobilization in a river water filled pit lake—Case study Lake Goitsche (Germany). Limnologica, 40(2): 182–190
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.limno.2009.11.007
9 R JHunt (2003). Ground water-lake interaction modeling using the LAK3 Package for MODFLOW 2000. Ground Water, 41(2): 114–118
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2003.tb02575.x
10 C PMcDonald, J A Rover, E G Stets, R G Striegl (2012). The regional abundance and size distribution of lakes and reservoirs in the United States and implications for estimates of global lake extent. Limnology and Oceanography, 57(2): 597–606
https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2012.57.2.0597
11 DMcJannet, A Hawdon, TVan Niel, DBoadle, BBaker, MTrefry, IRea (2017). Measurements of evaporation from a mine void lake and testing of modelling approaches. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 555: 631–647
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.10.064
12 P NMollema, M Antonellini (2016). Water and (bio) chemical cycling in gravel pit lakes: A review and outlook. Earth-Science Reviews, 159: 247–270
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.05.006
13 P NMollema, P J Stuyfzand, M H A Juhasz-Holterman, P M J A Van Diepenbeek, M Antonellini (2015). Metal accumulation in an artificially recharged gravel pit lake used for drinking water supply. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 150: 35–51
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2014.12.004
14 CMuellegger, A Weilhartner, T JBattin, THofmann (2013). Positive and negative impacts of five Austrian gravel pit lakes on groundwater quality. Science of the Total Environment, 443(15): 14–23
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.097 pmid: 23178886
15 JPeckenham, T Thornton, BWhalen (2009). Sand and gravel mining: effects on ground water resources in Hancock county, Maine, USA. Environmental Geology, 56(6): 1103–1114
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-008-1210-7
16 R LSchneider, T LNegley, CWafer (2005). Factors influencing groundwater seepage in a large, mesotrophic lake in New York. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 310(1–4): 1–16
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.09.020
17 B DSmerdon, C A Mendoza, K J Devito (2007). Simulations of fully coupled lake-groundwater exchange in a subhumid climate with an integrated hydrologic model. Water Resources Research, 43(1): W014016
https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005137
18 STaviani, H Henriksen (2015). The application of a groundwater/surfacewater model to test the vulnerability of Bracciano Lake (near Rome, Italy) to climatic and water-use stresses. Hydrogeology Journal, 23(7): 1481–1498
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-015-1271-0
19 LVæret, B Kelbe, SHaldorsen, R HTaylor (2009). A modelling study of the effects of land management and climatic variations on groundwater inflow to Lake St Lucia, South Africa. Hydrogeology Journal, 17(8): 1949–1967
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-009-0476-5
20 CVerpoorter, T Kutser, D ASeekell, L JTranvik (2014). A global inventory of lakes based on high-resolution satellite imagery. Geophysical Research Letters, 41(18): 6396–6402
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL060641
21 M LVirdi, T M Lee, A Swancar, R GNiswonger (2013). Simulating the effect of climate extremes on groundwater flow through a lakebed. Ground Water, 51(2): 203–218
pmid: 22891702
22 AWeilhartner, C Muellegger, MKainz, FMathieu, THofmann, T JBattin (2012). Gravel pit lake ecosystems reduce nitrate and phosphate concentrations in the outflowing groundwater. Science of the Total Environment, 420(15): 222–228
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.01.032 pmid: 22341469
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed