Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology

2012 Edition
| Editors: Robert A. Meyers

Geochemical Modeling in Environmental and Geological Studies

  • Chen Zhu
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0851-3_202

Definition of the Subject and Its Importance

Geochemical modeling uses a set of mathematical expressions thought to represent chemical and transport processes in a particular geological system. The predictions of the model are partially observable or experimentally verifiable. Geochemical modeling has found applications in studies of chemical reactions in geological and environmental systems because of its utilities for synthesis of data, testing scenarios, and predicting long-term consequences of chemical reactions.

Introduction

Geochemical modeling is a powerful and indispensable tool for research and investigations of environmental sustainability science and technology. It allows quantitative evaluation of complex processes that often have feedback loops and it can predict the extent and consequences of geochemical reactions in the order of thousands to tens of thousands of years, beyond the range of laboratory experiments.

An excellent example of the utility of geochemical modeling...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgment

The writing of this entry was also made possible with continued financial support from the US National Science Foundation (EAR0423971, EAR0509775, EAR 0809903) and the US Department of Energy (DE-FG26-04NT42125, DE-FE0004381). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material, however, are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US Government or any agency thereof.

Bibliography

Primary Literature

  1. 1.
    Zhu C, Anderson GM (2002) Environmental applications of geochemical modeling. Cambridge University Press, London, p 304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Helgeson HC et al (1970) Calculation of mass transfer in geochemical processes involving aqueous solutions. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 34:569–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fang YL, Yeh GT, Burgos WD (2003) A general paradigm to model reaction-based biogeochemical processes in batch systems. Water Resour Res 39(4):1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nordstrom DK (2007) Modeling low-temperature geochemical processes. In: Drever JI (ed) Surface and ground water, weathering and soils, treatise on geochemistry. Elsevier, New York, pp 1–38, online updateCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wolery TJ (1992) EQ3/6, A software package for geochemical modeling of aqueous systems: package overview and installation guide (Version 7.0). URCL-MA-110662-PT-I, University of California/Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, California/Livermore, p 41Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kharaka YK et al (1988) SOLMINEQ.88: a computer program for geochemical modeling of water-rock interactions. Water-resources investigations report 88–4227, US Geological SurveyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parkhurst DL, Appello AAJ (1999) User’s guide to PHREEQC (Version 2)-a computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical modeling. Water-resource investigation report, US Geological Survey, p 312Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Allison JD, Brown DS, Novo-Gradac KJ (1991) MINTEQA2/PRODEFA2, a geochemical assessment model for environmental systems, Version 3.0 user’s manualGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhu C (2009) Geochemical modeling of reaction paths and geochemical reaction networks. In: Oelkers EH, Schott J (eds) Thermodynamics and kinetics of water-rock interaction. Mineralogical Society of America, Washington, pp 533–569Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnson JW, Lundeen SR (1994) GEMBOCHS thermodynamic data files for use with the EQ3/6 software package. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, p 99Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnson JW, Oelkers EH, Helgeson HC (1992) SUPCRT92 – A software package for calculating the standard molal thermodynamic properties of minerals, gases, aqueous species, and reactions from 1-bar to 5000-bar and 0°C to 1000°C. Comput & Geosciences 18(7):899–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Helgeson HC et al (1978) Summary and critique of the thermodynamic properties of rock forming minerals. Am J Sci 278A:569–592Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wagman DD et al (1982) The NBS tables of chemical thermodynamic properties – selected values for inorganic and C-1 and C-2 organic-substances in SI units. J Phys Chem Ref Data 11(Supplement 2):392Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Berman RG (1988) Internally-consistent thermodynamic data for minerals in the system Na2O-K2O-CaO-MgO-FeO-Fe2O3-Al2O3-SiO2-TiO2-H2O-CO2. J Petrol 29(2):445–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Berman RG (1990) Mixing properties of Ca-Mg-Fe-Mn garnets. Am Mineral 75:328–344Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Holland TJB, Powell R (1998) An internally consistent thermodynamic data set for phases of petrological interest. J Metamorph Geol 16:309–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nordstrom DK et al (1990) Revised chemical equilibrium data for major water-mineral reactions and their limitations. In: Melchior DC, Bassett RL (eds) Chemical modeling of aqueous systems II. American Chemical Society, Washington, pp 398–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robie RA, Hemingway BS (1995) Thermodynamic properties of minerals and related substances at 298.15 K and 1 bar (105pascals) pressure and at higher temperatures. US Geological Survey Bulletin 2131, p 456Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grenthe I et al (1992) The chemical thermodynamics of uranium. Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Helgeson HC, Kirkham DH, Flowers GC (1981) Theoretical prediction of the thermodynamic behavior of aqueous electrolytes at high pressures and temperatures. IV. Calculation of activity coefficients, osmotic coefficients, and apparent molal and standard and relative partial molal properties to 600oC and 5 kb. Am J Sci 281:1249–1516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shock EL, Helgeson HC (1988) Calculation of the thermodynamic and transport properties of aqueous species at high pressures and temperatures: correlation algorithms for ionic species and equation of state predictions to 5 kb and 1000°C. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 52:2009–2036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shock EL, Helgeson HC, Sverjensky DA (1989) Calculations of the thermodynamic and transport properties of aqueous species at high pressures and temperatures: standard partial molal properties of inorganic neutral species. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 53:2157–2183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sverjensky DA, Shock EL, Helgeson HC (1997) Prediction of the thermodynamic properties of aqueous metal complexes to 1000°C and 5 kb. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 61(7):1359–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shock EL et al (1992) Calculation of thermodynamic and transport properties of aqueous species at high pressures and temperatures. Effective electrostatic radii, dissociation constants and standard partial molal properties to 1000°C and 5 kb. J Chem Soc London, Faraday Trans 88:803–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tanger JC, Helgeson HC (1988) Calculations of the thermodynamic and transport properties of aqueous species at high pressures and temperatures: revised equation of state for the standard partial molal properties of ions and electrolytes. Am J Sci 288:19–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Oelkers EH, Helgeson HC (1990) Triple-ion anions and polynuclear complexing in supercritical electrolyte-solutions. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 54(3):727–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nordstrom DK, Munoz JL (1994) Geochemical thermodynamics, 2nd edn. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Harvie CE, Moller N, Weare JH (1984) The predication of mineral solubilities in natural waters: the Na-K-Mg-Ca-H-Cl-SO4-OH-HCO3-CO3-CO2-H2O system to high ionic strength at 25oC. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 48(4):723–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Plummer LN et al (1988) A computer program incorporating Pitzer’s equations for calculation of geochemical reactions in brines. Water resources investigations report 88–4153, US Geological Survey, p 310Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Xu T et al (2004) TOUGHREACT user’s guide: a simulation program for non-isothermal multiphase reactive geochemical transport in variably saturated geologic media (V1.2). Paper LBNL-55460. Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wolery T et al (2004) Pitzer database development: description of the Pitzer geochemical thermodynamic database data0.ypf. Appendix I in In-Drift precipitates/salts model (P. Mariner) report ANL-EBS-MD-000045 REV 02. Bechtel SAIC Company, Las VegasGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Garrels RM, Thompson ME (1962) A chemical model for sea water at 25 \degc and one atmospheric pressure. Am J Sci 260:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liu FY et al (2010) Antimony speciation and contamination of waters in Xikuangshan Sb mining and smelting area, China. Environ Geochem Health. doi:10.1007/s10653-010-9284-zGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lindberg RD, Runnells DD (1984) Groundwater redox reactions - an analysis of equilibrium state applied to Eh measurements and geochemical modeling. Science 225(4665):925–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stumm W, Morgan JJ (1996) Aquatic chemistry, chemical equilibria and rates in natural waters. Wiley, New York, p 1022Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stumm W (1992) Chemistry of solid-water interfaces: processes at the mineral-water and particle-water interface in natural systems, 1st edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dzombak DD, Morel FMM (1990) Surface complex modeling: hydrous ferric oxide. Wiley, New York, 393Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Appelo CAJ, Postma D (2005) Geochemistry, groundwater and pollution. A. A. Balkema, LeidenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Helgeson HC (1968) Evaluation of irreversible reactions in geochemical processes involving minerals and aqueous solutions-1. Thermodynamic relations. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 32:853–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Helgeson HC (1979) Mass transfer among minerals and hydrothermal solutions. In: Barnes HL (ed) Geochemistry of hydrothermal ore deposits. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 568–610Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Anderson GM, Crerar DA (1993) Thermodynamics in geochemistry: the equilibrium model. Oxford University Press, New York, 588Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zhu C et al (2010) Coupled alkali feldspar dissolution and secondary mineral precipitation in batch systems: 4. Numerical modeling of kinetic reaction paths. Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta 74(14):3963–3983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Istok JD et al (2010) A thermodynamically-based model for predicting microbial growth and community composition coupled to system geochemistry: application to uranium bioreduction. J Contam Hydrol 112(1–4):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Liu C et al (2001) Kinetic analysis of the bacterial reduction of goethite. Environ Sci Technol 35(12):2482–2490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Roden EE (2008) Microbiological controls on geochemical kinetics 1: fundamentals and case study on microbial Fe(III) oxide reduction. In: Brantley SL, Kubicki J, White AF (eds) Kinetics of water-rock interaction. Springer, New York, pp 335–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zhu C (2003) A case against Kd-based transport model: natural attenuation at a mill tailings site. Comput Geosci 29:351–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yeh GT, Tripathi VS (1989) A critical evaluation of recent development of hydrogeochemical transport models of reactive multi-components. Water Resour Res 25(1):93–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Liu FY et al (2010) Coupled reactive transport modeling of CO2 Sequestration in the Mt. Simon sandstone formation, Midwest U.S.A. Int J Greenh Gas Con 5:294–307Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zhu C (2004) Coprecipitation in the barite isostructural family: 1. Binary mixing properties. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 68(16):3327–3337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhu C (2004) Coprecipitation in the barite isostructural family: 2. Binary mixing properties. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 68(16):3339–3349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Anderson TT, Vrionis HA, Ortiz-Bernard I, Resch CT, Long PE, Dayvault R, Karp K, Marutzky S, Metzler DR, Peacock A, White DC, Lowe M, Lovley DR (2003) Stimulating the in situ activity Geobacter species to remove uranium from the groundwater of a uranium-contaminated aquifer. Appl Environ Microb 69:5884–5891CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geological SciencesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA