Advertisement

Modeling and uncertainty analysis of seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers using a surrogate model: a case study in Longkou, China

  • Tiansheng Miao
  • Wenxi LuEmail author
  • Jin Lin
  • Jiayuan Guo
  • Tianliang Liu
Original Paper
  • 100 Downloads

Abstract

Seawater intrusion is a complex problem involving groundwater with variable density. It has an important impact on the development and utilization of groundwater resources in coastal areas. In previous studies, numerical simulations of seawater intrusion were performed by assigning fixed values to model parameters, thereby not taking into account the influence of stochastic variability of hydrogeological parameters on model predictions. In this study, we developed a three-dimensional mathematical model of seawater intrusion by modeling vertical solute transport due to density changes resulting from seawater intrusion. We then applied a Monte Carlo–based method to analyze uncertainty in model simulations of seawater intrusion. Because the Monte Carlo method requires the simulation model to be repeatedly run, we used the Kriging method to build a surrogate model that significantly reduced the computational load compared to the simulation model while ensuring the desired accuracy. Then we used a local sensitivity analysis method to select the two parameters with the greatest influence on model output. We treated the two selected parameters as random variables, and results show that (1) the three-dimensional, variable-density seawater intrusion model can effectively simulate and predict the distribution of seawater intrusion in the study area; (2) the local sensitivity analysis can accurately identify the hydrogeological parameters that most influence model output; (3) the uncertainty analysis based on the surrogate model reduces computing time substantially and provides a realistic assessment of the effect of hydrogeological parameter variability on seawater intrusion numerical simulation results.

Keywords

Seawater intrusion Three-dimensional Variable-density groundwater simulation model Surrogate model Uncertainty analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions.

Funding information

This work was supported by the Development Program of China (NO. 2016YFC0402800).

References

  1. Abd-Elhamid H, Javadi A, Abdelaty I, Sherif M (2016) Simulation of seawater intrusion in the Nile Delta aquifer under the conditions of climate change. Hydrol Res 47(6):1198–1210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allow KA (2011) Seawater intrusion in Syrian coastal aquifers, past, present and future, case study. Arab J Geosci 4(3–4):645–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allow KA (2012) The use of injection wells and a subsurface barrier in the prevention of seawater intrusion: a modelling approach. Arab J Geosci 5(5):1151–1161Google Scholar
  4. Bear J (1972) Dynamics of fluids in porous media. Elsevier Scientific 222–244Google Scholar
  5. Binder K, Heermann D, Roelofs L, Mallinckrodt AJ, McKay S (1993) Monte Carlo simulation in statistical physics. Comput Phys 7(2):156–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Filippis G, Foglia L, Giudici M, Mehl S, Margiotta S, Negri SL (2016) Seawater intrusion in karstic, coastal aquifers: current challenges and future scenarios in the Taranto area (southern Italy). Sci Total Environ 573:1340–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dong X, Woo H, Park H, Park J (2013) Application of a newly developed column test device to analyze seawater transport in sandy soils. Environ Earth Sci 70(5):2397–2404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duan QY, Ajami NK, Gao XG, Sorooshian S (2007) Multi-model ensemble hydrologic prediction using Bayesian model averaging. Adv Water Resour 30(5):1371–1386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fen CS, Chan C, Cheng HC (2009) Assessing a response surface-based optimization approach for soil vapor extraction system design. J Water Resour Plan Manag 135(3):198–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. García-Menéndez O, Morell I, Ballesteros BJ, Renau-Pruñonosa A, Renau-Llorens A, Esteller MV (2016) Spatial characterization of the seawater upconing process in a coastal mediterranean aquifer (plana de castellón, Spain): evolution and controls. Environ Earth Sci 75(9):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Helton JC, Davis FJ (2003) Latin hypercube sampling and the propagation of uncertainty in analyses of complex systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 81(1):23–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hemker T, Fowler KR, Farthing MW, von Stryk O (2008) A mixed-integer simulation-based optimization approach with surrogate functions in water resources management. Optim Eng 9(4):341–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaymaz I (2005) Application of kriging method to structural reliability problems. Struct Saf 27(2):133–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kura NU, Ramli MF, Ibrahim S, Sulaiman WNA, Aris AZ (2014) An integrated assessment of seawater intrusion in a small tropical island using geophysical, geochemical, and geostatistical techniques. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21(11):7047–7064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Langevin CD, Shoemaker WB, & Guo W (2003). MODFLOW-2000, the US geological survey modular ground-water model--documentation of the SEAWAT-2000 version with the variable-density flow process (VDF) and the integrated MT3DMS transport process (IMT) (No. 2003-426)Google Scholar
  16. Li YP, Huang GH, Nie SL (2006) An interval-parameter multi-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Adv Water Resour 29(5):776–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lin J, Snodsmith JB, Zheng C, Wu J (2009) A modeling study of seawater intrusion in Alabama Gulf Coast, USA. Environ Geol 57(1):119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu S, Tao A, Dai C, Tan B, Shen H, Zhong G, ... & Chalov R. (2017) Experimental study of tidal effects on coastal groundwater and pollutant migration. Water Air Soil Pollut, 228(4):163Google Scholar
  19. Lophaven SN, Nielsen HB, Sondergaard J (2002) DACE—a Matlab Kriging toolbox; version 2; informatics and mathematical modelling. Technical University of Denmark, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  20. Luo J, Lu W, Xin X, Chu H (2013) Alternative model application to the identification of an optimal surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation strategy for DNAPL-contaminated sites. J Earth Sci 24(6):1023–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ (1979) Comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21(2):239–245Google Scholar
  22. Muleta MK, Nicklow JW (2005) Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis coupled with automatic calibration for a distributed watershed model. J Hydrol 306(1):127–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Olsson A, Sandberg G, Dahlblom O (2003) On Latin hypercube sampling for structural reliability analysis. Struct Saf 25(1):47–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Queipo NV, Haftka RT, Shyy W, Goel T, Vaidyanathan R, Tucker PK (2005) Surrogate-based analysis and optimization. Prog Aerosp Sci 41(1):1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rao VG, Rao GT, Surinaidu L, Rajesh R, Mahesh J (2011) Geophysical and geochemical approach for seawater intrusion assessment in the Godavari Delta Basin, AP, India. Water Air Soil Pollut 217(1–4):503–514Google Scholar
  26. Robert CP (2004). Monte Carlo methods. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
  27. Ryu JS, Kim MS, Cha KJ, Lee TH, Choi DH (2002) Kriging interpolation methods in geostatistics and DACE model. KSME Int J 16(5):619–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sacks J, Welch WJ, Mitchell TJ, Wynn HP (1989) Design and analysis of computer experiments. Stat Sci 4:409–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sappa G, Ergul S, Ferranti F, Ngalya Sweya L, Luciani G (2015) Effects of seasonal change and seawater intrusion on water quality for drinking and irrigation purposes, in coastal aquifers of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. J Afr Earth Sci Elsevier 105:64–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sappa G, Ferranti F, De Filippi FM, Cardillo G (2017) Mg2+ based method for Pertuso Spring discharge evaluation. Water 9(1):67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sherif MM, Singh VP (1999) E ect of climate change on sea water intrusion in coastal aquifers. Hydrol Process 13:1277–1287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhang X, Miao J, Hu BX, Liu H, Zhang H, Ma Z (2017) Hydrogeochemical characterization and groundwater quality assessment in intruded coastal brine aquifers (Laizhou Bay, China). Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(26):21073–21090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zheng C, & Wang PP (1999). MT3DMS: a modular three-dimensional multispecies transport model for simulation of advection, dispersion, and chemical reactions of contaminants in groundwater systems; documentation and user's guide. Alabama Univ UniversityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tiansheng Miao
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Wenxi Lu
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Jin Lin
    • 4
  • Jiayuan Guo
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Tianliang Liu
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Environment and ResourcesJilin UniversityChangchunChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Groundwater Resources and Environment, Ministry of EducationJilin UniversityChangchunChina
  3. 3.Jilin Provincial Key Laboratory of Water Resources and EnvironmentJilin UniversityChangchunChina
  4. 4.Nanjing Hydraulic Research InstituteNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations