Comparison of different groundwater vulnerability evaluation models of typical karst areas in north China: a case of Hebi City

Abstract

Groundwater pollution is a serious problem in north China. However, the study on the vulnerability of karst groundwater is mainly in south China, and there are few studies in north China. To study the applicability of different models of karst areas in north China, this paper chose a special study area—Hebi City, where the exposed karst area is widely developed in the hilly area, but the covered karst area is in the eastern part of the study area. The DRASTIC model, the AHP-DRASTIC model, and the improved COPK model were adopted to evaluate the vulnerability of shallow karst groundwater in Hebi City. Cl, SO42−, NO3, and TDS were selected to verify the rationality of the evaluation results. It shows that the improved COPK model is more suitable for the shallow karst groundwater vulnerability evaluation in the karst areas in northern China represented by the study area than the other two. The study area was divided into 4 classes by the improved COPK model: highest (14.07%), high (53.05%), low (21.37%), and lowest (11.51%). Then, the analytic hierarchy process and comprehensive index model were used to evaluate the groundwater pollution load intensity, and the study area was divided into 3 classes: high (23.33%), moderate (64.66%), and low (12.01%). According to the analysis of the relationship between groundwater pollution load intensity and groundwater quality, it can be found that human activities have an obvious influence on groundwater quality in the study area. Finally, combined with human activities, the study area was divided into 3 remediation areas, 1 control area, and 1 protected area. This paper can provide a scientific basis for rational exploitation and utilization of groundwater resources. It can also provide a reference for future generations to evaluate the groundwater vulnerability in the northern China karst areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Data availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Aller LT (1985) DRASTIC: a standardized system for evaluating ground water pollution potential using hydrogeologic settings[M]. Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency

  2. Bosch DD (1995) Ground Water Vulnerability Assessment: Predicting Relative Contamination Potential Under Conditions of Uncertainty[J]. J Environ Qual 24(2)

  3. Chen H, Wang GL, Hou XW et al (2006) The groundwater vulnerability assessment of the district around city taking Luancheng County as an example[J]. Hydrogeol Eng Geol 33(5):103–105 (in Chinese)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Daly D, Dassargues A, Drew D, Dunne S, Goldscheider N, Neale S, Popescu I, Zwahlen F (2002) Main concepts of the" European approach" to karst-groundwater-vulnerability assessment and mapping[J]. Hydrogeol J 10(2):340–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Doerfliger N, Jeannin PY, Zwahlen F (1999) Water vulnerability assessment in karst environments: a new method of defining protection areas using a multi-attribute approach and GIS tools (EPIK method)[J]. Environ Geol 39(2):165–176

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Duan JP, Gao HL (2013) The shallow groundwater in north China plain is seriously polluted[J]. Urban Geol 1:10–10 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ducci D (2007) Intrinsic vulnerability of the Alburni karst system (southern Italy)[J]. Geol Soc Lond Spec Publ 279(1):137–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. E J, Sun AR, Zhong XY (2010) Inadequacies of DRASTIC model and discussion of improvement[J]. Hydrogeol Eng Geol 037(001):102–107 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Foster SSD (1987) Fundamental concepts in aquifer vulnerability, pollution risk and protection strategy. In: Duijvenbooden W, Waegeningh HG (eds) Vulnerability of soil and groundwater to pollutants. TNO Committee on Hydrological Research, The Hague, Proc Info., 38:pp 69–86

  10. Goldscheider N, Ravbar N (2007) Proposed methodology of vulnerability and contamination risk mapping for the protection of karst aquifers in Slovenia[J]. Acta Carsologica 36(3):397–411

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gu B, Ge Y, Chang SX, Luo W, Chang J (2013) Nitrate in groundwater of China: Sources and driving forces[J]. Glob Environ Chang 23(5):1112–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Huangfu XF, Liu HZ (1992) Characteristics of karst development and law of water abundance in Hebi area[J]. Henan Geol 3:211–216 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jalali M (2007) Hydrochemical identification of groundwater resources and their changes under the impacts of human activity in the Chah basin in western Iran[J]. Environ Monit Assess 130(1-3):347–364

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jeannin PY, Cornaton F, Zwahlen F et al (2001) VULK: a tool for intrinsic vulnerability assessment and validation[J]. 7th Conference on Limestone Hydrology and Fissured Media, Besançon 20-22 Sept. 2001. Sci Tech Environ Mem. H. S., 13:185–190

  15. Kalhor K, Ghasemizadeh R, Rajic L, Alshawabkeh A (2019) Assessment of groundwater quality and remediation in karst aquifers: A review[J]. Groundw Sustain Dev 8:104–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kavouri K, Plagnes V, Tremoulet J, Dörfliger N, Rejiba F, Marchet P (2011) PaPRIKa: a method for estimating karst resource and source vulnerability—application to the Ouysse karst system (southwest France)[J]. Hydrogeol J 19(2):339–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kazakis N, Voudouris KS (2015) Groundwater vulnerability and pollution risk assessment of porous aquifers to nitrate: modifying the DRASTIC method using quantitative parameters[J]. J Hydrol 525:13–25

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Keita S, Tang ZH (2017) The assessment of processes controlling the spatial distribution of hydrogeochemical groundwater types in Mali using multivariate statistics[J]. J Afr Earth Sci 134(oct):573–589

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lake IR, Lovett AA, Hiscock KM, Betson M, Foley A, Sünnenberg G, Evers S, Fletcher S (2003) Evaluating factors influencing groundwater vulnerability to nitrate pollution: developing the potential of GIS[J]. J Environ Manag 68(3):315–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Li P, Wu J, Qian H, Lyu X, Liu H (2014) Origin and assessment of groundwater pollution and associated health risk: a case study in an industrial park, northwest China[J]. Environ Geochem Health 36(4):693–712

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Li XX, Wu P, Zha XF (2021) Tracing nitrate sources in urban waters of karst mountainous area using hydrochemistry and stable isotope. Acta Sci Circumst:1-12. (in Chinese)

  22. Liu SY, Liu PF, Zhou XN et al (2012) Idea and action for the rational development and utilization of water resource in North China Plain[J]. J Earth Sci Environ 000(3):57–63 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lu HP, Zhang F, Zhao C et al (2018) Differences between southern Karst and northern Karst besides scientific issues that need attention[J]. China Min Mag 27(S2):317–319 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Margat J (1968) Groundwater vulnerability to contamination. 68, BRGM, Orleans, France. In: Massone H., Londoño M.Q., Martínez D. (2010) Enhanced groundwater vulnerability assessment in geological homogeneous areas: a case study from the Argentine Pampas. Hydrogeol J 18:371–379

  25. Nguyet VTM, Goldscheider N (2006) A simplified methodology for mapping groundwater vulnerability and contamination risk, and its first application in a tropical karst area, Vietnam[J]. Hydrogeol J 14(8):1666–1675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ren K, Yang PH, Jiang ZL et al (2015) Variation characteristics and sources of heavy metals in an urban karst groundwater system during rainfall event[J]. Environ Sci 36(4):1270–1276 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Saaty TL (1986) Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process[J]. Manag Sci 32(7):841–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1985) Modeling behavior in competition: the analytic hierarchy process[J]. Appl Math Comput 16(1):49–92

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sener E, Davraz A (2013) Assessment of groundwater vulnerability based on a modified DRASTIC model, GIS and an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method: the case of Egirdir Lake basin (Isparta, Turkey)[J]. Hydrogeol J 21(3):701–714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tang LQ, Zhao WL (2012) A Review of groundwater vulnerability assessment methods based on DRASTIC model[J]. J Anhui Agric Sci 40(34):16782–16785 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Thirumalaivasan D, Karmegam M, Venugopal K (2003) AHP-DRASTIC: software for specific aquifer vulnerability assessment using DRASTIC model and GIS[J]. Environ Model Softw 18(7):645–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vías JM, Andreo B, Perles MJ, Carrasco F, Vadillo I, Jiménez P (2006) Proposed method for groundwater vulnerability mapping in carbonate (karstic) aquifers: the COP method[J]. Hydrogeol J 14(6):912–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang XB, Wan GS (2016) Study on the dynamic evolution of groundwater resources in Hebi City[M]. The Yellow River Water Conservancy PR, Zhengzhou 39 pp. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wu SZ, Wang D, Wu YY et al (2013) Groundwater environment monitoring and pollution prevention measures in north China plain[J]. Environ Prot 12:20–22 (in Chinese)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Xu Z (2018) Development Characteristics of Karst Groundwater in Hebi City[J]. Environ Sci Manag 43(01):171–176 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Zhang B (2018) Study on water resources comprehensive planning for Hebi City[D]. China University of Geosciences (Beijing). (in Chinese)

  37. Zhang YW, Li L (2018) Change trend of groundwater quality in hebi city and countermeasures for water quality protection[J]. Theor Res Urban Constr 15:101–102 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Zhang HL, Wang Z, Pang W et al (2019) Application of sulfur and oxygen isotope tracer in Karst water of Jinan City[J]. Geol Surv China, 1-12[2020-11-28] 6(1):75–80 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Zhong Z (2005) A discussion of groundwater vulnerability assessment methods[J]. Earth Sci Front 012(s1):003–013 (in Chinese)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Zhou JL, Li GM, Liu F et al (2009) DRAV model and its application in assessing groundwater vulnerability in arid area: a case study of pore phreatic water in Tarim Basin, Xinjiang, Northwest China[J]. Environ Earth Sci

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Lin Gao for his great help in field sampling and Qian Liang for her great help in English expression improvement.

Funding

This paper was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) (No.: CUGCJ1822).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

YQ conducted field sampling and drew the pictures and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. CM modified the manuscript and provided a general idea. JQ and XW conducted laboratory sample testing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chuanming Ma.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Highlights

• The covered karst and exposed karst are developed simultaneously in the study area.

• 3 models were adopted for evaluation and the results of each model were compared.

• The COPK model was improved according to the actual situation of the study area.

• The improved COPK model is more suitable for the study area.

• Suggestions on the prevention and control of groundwater pollution were put forward.

Responsible Editor: Marcus Schulz

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 6514 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Qiu, Y., Ma, C., Qian, J. et al. Comparison of different groundwater vulnerability evaluation models of typical karst areas in north China: a case of Hebi City. Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12719-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Hebi City
  • Shallow karst groundwater
  • Groundwater vulnerability
  • Model comparison
  • COPK model
  • Groundwater pollution