Advertisement

An integrated multivariate statistical approach for the evaluation of spatial variations in groundwater quality near an unlined landfill

  • Conglian Pan
  • Kelvin Tsun Wai NgEmail author
  • Amy Richter
Research Article
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

Groundwater is a major resource for water supply in Canada, and 43 of 68 Saskatchewan municipalities rely on groundwater or combined groundwater and surface water sources. The Regina landfill is built on top of the Condie aquifer, without an engineered liner. Missing data and inconsistent sampling make a traditional groundwater assessment difficult. An integrated statistical approach using principle component analysis, correlation analysis, ion plots, and multiple linear regression is used to study groundwater contamination at the Regina landfill. Geological locations of the water samples were explicitly considered. The abundance of cations in the groundwater was Ca2+ > Mg2+ > Na+ > K+ > Mn2+; and for anions SO42− > HCO3 > Cl. Correlation analysis and ion plots pointed to gypsum and halite dissolution being the main factors affecting groundwater chemistry. Principal component analysis yielded three principal components, responsible for 80.7% of the total variance. For all monitoring well groups, the sodium absorption ratio was generally less than one. The variation in the ratio from monitoring well groups suggests possible groundwater contamination from landfill operation. Wilcox diagrams indicate groundwater near the landfill is unsuitable for irrigation. A two-step multiple linear regression was used to develop a model for total hardness prediction.

Keywords

Hydrochemical analysis Groundwater quality Principal component analysis Multiple linear regression Drinking and irrigation suitability 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research reported in this paper was supported by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-385815). The authors are grateful for their support. The views expressed herein are those of the writers and not necessarily those of our research and funding partners.

Funding

This study was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-385815).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abou Zakhem B, Al-Charideh A, Kattaa B (2017) Using principal component analysis in the investigation of groundwater hydrochemistry of Upper Jezireh Basin, Syria. Hydrol Sci J 62(14):2266–2279.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2017.1364845 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arora AS, Reddy AS (2014) Development of multiple linear regression models for predicting the stormwater quality of urban sub-watersheds. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 92(1):36–43.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-013-1160-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakis R, Tuncan A (2011) An investigation of heavy metal and migration through groundwater from the landfill area of Eskisehir in Turkey. Environ Monit Assess 176(1–4):87–98.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1568-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbour SL, Fredlund DG (1989) Mechanisms of osmotic flow and volume change in clay soils. Can Geotech J 26:551–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bingham N.H., Fry J.M. (2010a) Multiple Regression. In: Regression. Springer Undergraduate Mathematics Series. Springer, London. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-969-5_3
  6. Bingham, N. H., & Fry, J. M. (2010b). Regression: linear models in statistics. Springer Science & Business Media. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-969-5
  7. Brix KV, DeForest DK, Tear L, Grosell M, Adams WJ (2017) Use of multiple linear regression models for setting water quality criteria for copper: a complementary approach to the biotic ligand model. Environ Sci Technol 51(9):5182–5192.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b05533 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruce N, Ng KTW, Richter A (2017) Alternative carbon dioxide modelling approaches accounting for high residual gases in LandGEM. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(16):14322–14336.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-8990-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruce N, Ng KTW, Vu HL (2018) Use of seasonal parameters and their effects on FOD landfill gas modeling. Environ Monit Assess 190:291.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-018-6663-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Canadian Municipal Water Consortium. (2015). Canadian municipal water priorities report – towards sustainable and resilient water management, Canadian Water NetworkGoogle Scholar
  11. Cattell RB, Jaspers J (1967) A general plasmode (no. 30-10-5-2) for factor analytic exercises and research. Multivar Behav Res Monogr 211:67–63Google Scholar
  12. Cho KH, Sthiannopkao S, Pachepsky YA, Kim KW, Kim JH (2011) Prediction of contamination potential of groundwater arsenic in Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand using artificial neural network. Water Res 45(17):5535–5544.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.08.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. City of Regina. (2012). City of Regina landfill groundwater monitoring report. City of Regina Environmental Services. Regina, SKGoogle Scholar
  14. City of Regina. (2013). City of Regina landfill groundwater monitoring report. City of Regina Environmental Services. Regina, SKGoogle Scholar
  15. City of Regina. (2014). City of Regina landfill groundwater monitoring report. City of Regina Environmental Services. Regina, SKGoogle Scholar
  16. City of Regina. (2015). City of Regina landfill groundwater monitoring report. City of Regina Environmental Services. Regina, SKGoogle Scholar
  17. City of Regina. (2016). City of Regina landfill groundwater monitoring report. City of Regina Environmental Services. Regina, SKGoogle Scholar
  18. City of Regina. (2018). City of Regina landfill – acceptable materials and applicable fees. Retrieved from https://www.regina.ca/residents/waste/landfill/ on April 10, 2018
  19. Civelekoglu G, Yigit NO, Diamadopoulos E, Kitis M (2007) Prediction of bromate formation using multi-linear regression and artificial neural networks. Ozone Sci Eng 29(5):353–362.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01919510701549327 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ebrahimi H, Rajaee T (2017) Simulation of groundwater level variations using wavelet combined with neural network, linear regression and support vector machine. Glob Planet Chang 148:181–191.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2016.11.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Environment and Climate Change Canada. (2017). Groundwater contamination. Retrieved from https://www.ec.gc.ca/eau-water/default.asp?lang=En&n=6A7FB7 on April 10, 2018
  22. Foster S, Chilton J, Moench M, Cardy F, Schiffler M (2008) Groundwater in rural development: facing the challenges of supply and resource sustainability. World Bank.  https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-4703-9
  23. Google Maps (2018). Regina landfill. Retrieved from https://www.google.ca/maps/search/google+maps/@50.4891495,-104.5482896,1548m/data=!3m1!1e3 on May 31, 2018
  24. Government of Canada. (2013). Water sources: groundwater. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/water-overview/sources/groundwater.html on April 27, 2018
  25. Greis T, Helmholz K, Schöniger HM, Haarstrick A (2012) Modelling of spatial contaminant probabilities of occurrence of chlorinated hydrocarbons in an urban aquifer. Environ Monit Assess 184(6):3577–3591.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2209-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gu H, Chi B, Li H, Jiang J, Qin W, Wang H (2015) Assessment of groundwater quality and identification of contaminant sources of Liujiang basin in Qinhuangdao, North China. Environ Earth Sci 73(10):6477–6493.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3870-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Han D, Tong X, Currell MJ, Cao G, Jin M, Tong C (2014) Evaluation of the impact of an uncontrolled landfill on surrounding groundwater quality, Zhoukou, China. J Geochem Explor 136:24–39.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2013.09.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Han Z, Ma H, Shi G, He L, Wei L, Shi Q (2016) A review of groundwater contamination near municipal solid waste landfill sites in China. Sci Total Environ 569:1255–1264.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hassen I, Hamzaoui-Azaza F, Bouhlila R (2016) Application of multivariate statistical analysis and hydrochemical and isotopic investigations for evaluation of groundwater quality and its suitability for drinking and agriculture purposes: case of Oum Ali-Thelepte aquifer, central Tunisia. Environ Monit Assess 188(3):135.  https://doi.org/10.1007/S10661-016-5124-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Health Canada (1979). Guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality—hardness. Water and air quality bureau, healthy environments and consumer safety branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  31. Health Canada (2017). Guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality—summary table. Water and air quality bureau, healthy environments and consumer safety branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  32. Hu S, Luo T, Jing C (2013) Principal component analysis of fluoride geochemistry of groundwater in Shanxi and Inner Mongolia, China. J Geochem Explor 135:124–129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2012.08.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ishaku JM, Ahmed AS, Abubakar MA (2011) Assessment of groundwater quality using chemical indices and GIS mapping in Jada area, Northeastern Nigeria. Journal of Earth Sciences and Geotechnical Engineering 1(1):35–60Google Scholar
  34. Jiang Y, Guo H, Jia Y, Cao Y, Hu C (2015) Principal component analysis and hierarchical cluster analyses of arsenic groundwater geochemistry in the Hetao basin, Inner Mongolia. Chemie der Erde - Geochemistry 75(2):197–205.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemer.2014.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Karanth KR (1987) Ground water assessment: development and management. Tata McGraw-Hill EducationGoogle Scholar
  36. Khanna P (2015) Physico-chemical parameters of groundwater of Bishnah, district Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir, India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B: Biological Sciences, 85(1), 121–130. DOI  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40011-014-0345-4
  37. Lucas L, Jauzein M (2008) Use of principal component analysis to profile temporal and spatial variations of chlorinated solvent concentration in groundwater. Environ Pollut 151(1):205–212.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.01.054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maathuis H, Van der Kamp G (1986) Groundwater observation well network in Saskatchewan, Canada. In Proceedings of Canadian Hydrology Symposium. No. 16, pp. 565–581Google Scholar
  39. Machiwal D, Jha MK (2015) Identifying sources of groundwater contamination in a hard-rock aquifer system using multivariate statistical analyses and GIS-based geostatistical modeling techniques. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 4:80–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2014.11.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maiti S, Erram VC, Gupta G, Tiwari RK, Kulkarni UD, Sangpal RR (2013) Assessment of groundwater quality: a fusion of geochemical and geophysical information via Bayesian neural networks. Environ Monit Assess 185(4):3445–3465.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-012-2802-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marsalek J (2003) Road salts in urban stormwater: an emerging issue in stormwater management in cold climates. Water Sci Technol 48(9):61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mogaji KA, San Lim H, Abdullah K (2015) Modeling of groundwater recharge using a multiple linear regression (MLR) recharge model developed from geophysical parameters: a case of groundwater resources management. Environ Process 73(3):1217–1230.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3476-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nagaraju A, Kumar KS, Thejaswi A (2014) Assessment of groundwater quality for irrigation: a case study from Bandalamottu lead mining area, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh, South India. Appl Water Sci 4(4):385–396.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-014-0154-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Natural Resources Canada (2017) Groundwater and Aquifers. Retrieved from http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/earth-sciences/science/water/groundwater/10988 on April 7, 2018
  45. Pan C, Ng KTW (2018) Multivariate analysis and hydrochemical assessment of groundwater at the Regina landfill site. 33rd International Conference on Solid Waste Technology and Managemen, Annapolis, Washington, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  46. Pan C, Ng KTW, Richter A (2017) Hydrochemical assessment of groundwater quality near Regina municipal landfill”. Sardinia ‘17, 16 th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Santa Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  47. Pan C, Ng KTW, Fallah B, Richter A (in press) Evaluation of the bias and precision of regression techniques and machine learning approaches in total dissolved solids modelling of an urban aquifer. Environ Sci Pollut Res.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3751-y
  48. Ravikumar P, Somashekar RK (2017) Principal component analysis and hydrochemical facies characterization to evaluate groundwater quality in Varahi river basin, Karnataka state, India. Appl Water Sci 7(2):745–755.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-015-0287-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reddy AGS (2013) Evaluation of hydrogeochemical characteristics of phreatic alluvial aquifers in southeastern coastal belt of Prakasam district, South India. Environ Earth Sci 68(2):471–485.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-012-1752-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Richter A, Ng TWK (2017) “Snow cover effects on active landfill gas collection systems in a semi-arid climate”. In Proceedings, Sardinia ‘17, 16th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Santa Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy, October 2–6. Edited by R. Cossu, P. He and P. Kjeldsen, CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, Cagliari, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  51. Rutherford S (2004) Groundwater use in Canada. West Coast Environmental Law 2004 NovemberGoogle Scholar
  52. Sahoo S, Jha MK (2013) Groundwater-level prediction using multiple linear regression and artificial neural network techniques: a comparative assessment. Hydrogeol J 21(8):1865–1887.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-013-1029-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Salem GSA, Kazama S, Komori D, Shahid S, Dey NC (2017) Optimum abstraction of groundwater for sustaining groundwater level and reducing irrigation cost. Water Resour Manag 31(6):1947–1959.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1623-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment (2016) Municipal drinking water quality monitoring guidelines. Edition 4. Environmental and Municipal Management Services Division, Water Security Agency. Regina, SaskatchewanGoogle Scholar
  55. Selvakumar S, Chandrasekar N, Kumar G (2017) Hydrogeochemical characteristics and groundwater contamination in the rapid urban development areas of Coimbatore, India. Water Resources and Industry 17:26–33.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wri.2017.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Spanos T, Ene A, Xatzixristou C, Papaioannou A (2015) Assessment of groundwater quality and hydrogeological profile of Kavala area, Northern Greece. Romanian Journal of Physic 60(7–8):1139–1159Google Scholar
  57. Talalaj IA (2014) Assessment of groundwater quality near the landfill site using the modified water quality index. Environ Monit Assess 186(6):3673–3683.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-014-3649-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Talukder MRR, Rutherford S, Phung D, Islam MZ, Chu C (2016) The effect of drinking water salinity on blood pressure in young adults of coastal Bangladesh. Environ Pollut 214:248–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.03.074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Stempvoort DR, Roy JW, Brown SJ, Bickerton G (2011) Artificial sweeteners as potential tracers in groundwater in urban environments. J Hydrol 401(1–2):126–133.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.02.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Villegas P, Paredes V, Betancur T, Ribeiro L (2013) Assessing the hydrochemistry of the Urabá Aquifer, Colombia by principal component analysis. J Geochem Explor 134:120–129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2013.08.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Vineis P, Chan Q, Khan A (2011) Climate change impacts on water salinity and health. Journal of Epidemiology and Global Health 1(1):5–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jegh.2011.09.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Viswanath NC, Kumar PD, Ammad KK (2015) Statistical analysis of quality of water in various water shed for Kozhikode City, Kerala, India. Aquatic Procedia 4:1078–1085.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vu HL, Ng KTW, Richter A (2017) Optimization of first order decay gas generation model parameters for landfills located in cold semi-arid climates. Waste Manag 69:315–324.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.08.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wang X, Liu G, Yang J, Huang G, Yao R (2017) Evaluating the effects of irrigation water salinity on water movement, crop yield and water use efficiency by means of a coupled hydrologic/crop growth model. Agric Water Manag 185:13–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2017.01.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wilcox L (1955) Classification and use of irrigation waters. Circular 969. Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Systems EngineeringUniversity of ReginaReginaCanada

Personalised recommendations