Cargando…

Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study

Although most recharge estimation studies apply multiple methods to identify the possible range in recharge values, many do not distinguish clearly enough between inherent uncertainty of the methods and other factors affecting the results. We investigated the additional value that can be gained from...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Walker, David, Parkin, Geoff, Schmitter, Petra, Gowing, John, Tilahun, Seifu A., Haile, Alemseged T., Yimam, Abdu Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6849517/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29896911
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12801
_version_ 1783469221589549056
author Walker, David
Parkin, Geoff
Schmitter, Petra
Gowing, John
Tilahun, Seifu A.
Haile, Alemseged T.
Yimam, Abdu Y.
author_facet Walker, David
Parkin, Geoff
Schmitter, Petra
Gowing, John
Tilahun, Seifu A.
Haile, Alemseged T.
Yimam, Abdu Y.
author_sort Walker, David
collection PubMed
description Although most recharge estimation studies apply multiple methods to identify the possible range in recharge values, many do not distinguish clearly enough between inherent uncertainty of the methods and other factors affecting the results. We investigated the additional value that can be gained from multi‐method recharge studies through insights into hydrogeological understanding, in addition to characterizing uncertainty. Nine separate groundwater recharge estimation methods, with a total of 17 variations, were applied at a shallow aquifer in northwest Ethiopia in the context of the potential for shallow groundwater resource development. These gave a wide range of recharge values from 45 to 814 mm/a. Critical assessment indicated that the results depended on what the recharge represents (actual, potential, minimum recharge or change in aquifer storage), and spatial and temporal scales, as well as uncertainties from application of each method. Important insights into the hydrogeological system were gained from this detailed analysis, which also confirmed that the range of values for actual recharge was reduced to around 280‐430 mm/a. This study demonstrates that even when assumptions behind methods are violated, as they often are to some degree especially when data are limited, valuable insights into the hydrogeological system can be gained from application of multiple methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6849517
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68495172019-11-15 Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study Walker, David Parkin, Geoff Schmitter, Petra Gowing, John Tilahun, Seifu A. Haile, Alemseged T. Yimam, Abdu Y. Ground Water Research Papers/ Although most recharge estimation studies apply multiple methods to identify the possible range in recharge values, many do not distinguish clearly enough between inherent uncertainty of the methods and other factors affecting the results. We investigated the additional value that can be gained from multi‐method recharge studies through insights into hydrogeological understanding, in addition to characterizing uncertainty. Nine separate groundwater recharge estimation methods, with a total of 17 variations, were applied at a shallow aquifer in northwest Ethiopia in the context of the potential for shallow groundwater resource development. These gave a wide range of recharge values from 45 to 814 mm/a. Critical assessment indicated that the results depended on what the recharge represents (actual, potential, minimum recharge or change in aquifer storage), and spatial and temporal scales, as well as uncertainties from application of each method. Important insights into the hydrogeological system were gained from this detailed analysis, which also confirmed that the range of values for actual recharge was reduced to around 280‐430 mm/a. This study demonstrates that even when assumptions behind methods are violated, as they often are to some degree especially when data are limited, valuable insights into the hydrogeological system can be gained from application of multiple methods. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2018-07-19 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6849517/ /pubmed/29896911 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12801 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Groundwater published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of National Ground Water Association. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Papers/
Walker, David
Parkin, Geoff
Schmitter, Petra
Gowing, John
Tilahun, Seifu A.
Haile, Alemseged T.
Yimam, Abdu Y.
Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study
title Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study
title_full Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study
title_fullStr Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study
title_full_unstemmed Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study
title_short Insights From a Multi‐Method Recharge Estimation Comparison Study
title_sort insights from a multi‐method recharge estimation comparison study
topic Research Papers/
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6849517/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29896911
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12801
work_keys_str_mv AT walkerdavid insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy
AT parkingeoff insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy
AT schmitterpetra insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy
AT gowingjohn insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy
AT tilahunseifua insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy
AT hailealemsegedt insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy
AT yimamabduy insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy