Groundwater Risk Assessment Based on DRASTIC and Special Vulnerability of Solidified/Stabilized Heavy-Metal-Contaminated Sites

被引:2
|
作者
Wei, Zhiyong [1 ]
Chi, Zifang [1 ]
机构
[1] Jilin Univ, Key Lab Groundwater Resources & Environm, Minist Educ, Changchun 130021, Peoples R China
基金
国家重点研发计划;
关键词
solidification; stabilization; heavy-metal-contaminated sites; groundwater risk assessment; DRASTIC; vulnerability; ORGANIC-MATTER; FREEZE-THAW; SOLID-WASTE; SOIL; DESORPTION; STABILIZATION; SORPTION; LEAD; ZN; PB;
D O I
10.3390/su15042997
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Solidification/stabilization technology is commonly used in the remediation of heavy-metal-contaminated sites, which reduces the leaching capacity of heavy metals, but the total amount of heavy metals in the soil is not reduced, there is still a risk of heavy metal re-release and contamination of groundwater, and the risk of groundwater contamination of solidified/stabilized heavy-metal-contaminated sites needs to be assessed. Through the analysis of the system structure of solidified/stabilized heavy-metal-contaminated sites, combined with the integration method of pollution sources-the vadose zone-aquifer, based on the DRASTIC model and the special vulnerability of the solidification/stabilization site, a groundwater pollution risk assessment index system including 4 influencing factors such as site hazard, pollutant hazard, aquifer vulnerability, and natural conditions and a total of 18 evaluation indexes was constructed. Each evaluation index was graded and assigned a scoring value combined with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to calculate index weights. The comprehensive weights of site hazard, contaminant stability, aquifer vulnerability, and natural conditions were 0.1894, 0.3508, 0.3508, and 0.1090, respectively. The isometric method was used to classify the pollution risk into five risk levels (very low risk [0, 2), low risk [2, 4), medium risk [4, 6), high risk [6, 8), and very high risk [8, 10]), and a groundwater comprehensive index pollution risk assessment model was established. The model was applied to the actual site. The results showed that under the scenario of direct landfill of remediated soil, the comprehensive indexes of groundwater pollution risk for As and Cd were 4.55 and 4.58, respectively, both of which were medium risk. When the surrounding protective measures were supplemented, the comprehensive indexes of groundwater pollution risk for As and Cd were 3.98 and 4.02, respectively. Cd remained as medium risk and As as low risk. In both scenarios, the combined groundwater contamination risk index of Cd was greater than that of As because the contaminant stability of As was higher than that of Cd. The average percentage of aquifer vulnerability score reached 45.50%, which was higher than the weight of site inherent vulnerability of 35.08%, indicating that the original site hydrogeological conditions are fragile, groundwater is vulnerable to contamination, and the in situ landfill solidification/stabilization of soil is at risk. In order to further reduce the risk, the topographic slope was increased, thereby increasing the surface drainage capacity, which reduced the combined groundwater contamination risk index for As and Cd to 3.94 and 3.90, both of which were low risk. This study provides a new method for assessing the risk of groundwater contamination at solidified/stabilized heavy-metal-contaminated sites. It also has reference significance for selecting solidification/stabilization remediation parameters
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A regional flux-based risk assessment approach for multiple contaminated sites on groundwater bodies
    Jamin, P.
    Dolle, F.
    Chisala, B.
    Orban, Ph.
    Popescu, I-C
    Herivaux, C.
    Dassargues, A.
    Brouyere, S.
    JOURNAL OF CONTAMINANT HYDROLOGY, 2012, 127 (1-4) : 65 - 75
  • [42] Groundwater risk assessment based on optimization framework using DRASTIC method
    Jafari, Seyedeh Mahboobeh
    Nikoo, Mohammad Reza
    ARABIAN JOURNAL OF GEOSCIENCES, 2016, 9 (20)
  • [43] How do the plants used in phytoremediation in constructed wetlands, a sustainable remediation strategy, perform in heavy-metal-contaminated mine sites?
    Adams, Allan
    Raman, Anantanarayanan
    Hodgkins, Dennis
    WATER AND ENVIRONMENT JOURNAL, 2013, 27 (03) : 373 - 386
  • [44] Assessment of Groundwater Vulnerability in Upper Betwa River Watershed using GIS based DRASTIC Model
    Ahirwar, Shobharam
    Shukla, J. P.
    JOURNAL OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF INDIA, 2018, 91 (03) : 334 - 340
  • [45] Modification and optimization of DRASTIC model for groundwater vulnerability and contamination risk assessment for Bhiwadi region of Rajasthan, India
    Hansa Rajput
    Rohit Goyal
    Urmila Brighu
    Environmental Earth Sciences, 2020, 79
  • [46] Groundwater vulnerability assessment using GIS-based DRASTIC model in Nangasai River Basin, India with special emphasis on agricultural contamination
    Bera, Amit
    Mukhopadhyay, Bhabani Prasad
    Chowdhury, Puja
    Ghosh, Argha
    Biswas, Swagata
    ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY, 2021, 214
  • [47] Risk Assessment of Heavy Metal Contaminated Dagu River Sediments
    Sun, Jingmei
    Rong, Jiangxiu
    Zheng, Yi
    Ma, Degang
    Lan, Xiaoling
    2011 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND BIOTECHNOLOGY (ICESB 2011), 2011, 8 : 764 - 772
  • [48] Ecotoxicological testing and risk assessment of a heavy metal contaminated site
    Sipter, E.
    Auerbach, R.
    Gruiz, K.
    TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, 2005, 158 : S253 - S254
  • [49] Assessment of groundwater vulnerability in an urban area: a comparative study based on DRASTIC, EBF, and LR models
    Mohammaddost, Alimahdi
    Mohammadi, Zargham
    Rezaei, Mohsen
    Pourghasemi, Hamid Reza
    Farahmand, Asadullah
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2022, 29 (48) : 72908 - 72928
  • [50] Assessment of groundwater vulnerability in an urban area: a comparative study based on DRASTIC, EBF, and LR models
    Alimahdi Mohammaddost
    Zargham Mohammadi
    Mohsen Rezaei
    Hamid Reza Pourghasemi
    Asadullah Farahmand
    Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2022, 29 : 72908 - 72928