Environmental Earth Sciences

, 75:1258 | Cite as

Evaluation of groundwater quality using a GIS-MCDA-based model: a case study in Aksaray, Turkey

Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 251 Downloads

Abstract

Evaluation of water resources and the protection of these resources from environmental pollutants is a difficult and complex process. In this study, a development of model to estimate the water quality and identify the most suitable regions based on good water quality was aimed. For this purpose, 40 water samples were taken through water wells in Aksaray region of Turkey. A groundwater quality index (AWQI) based on water chemistry data has been developed to assessment the groundwater quality using the techniques of the multi-criteria decision analysis. Based on this index, four suitability classes were defined as excellent, good, permissible and unsuitable. Kriging method was used to determine the spatial distribution of groundwater quality parameters in the study area. For each map, different semivariogram models were tested by cross-validation and the best model was selected. The exponential model having a minimum standard error was selected the most suitable model for deriving water quality maps. The areas that are excellent for groundwater quality are concentrated in the northeastern and southeastern parts of the region where the AWQI-II scores were greater than 0.9. This study provides general information on how to determine the spatial distribution of the groundwater quality and identify the performance scores of criteria affecting water quality in inland aquifers.

Keywords

Groundwater quality Water quality index Multi-criteria decision analysis Geostatistics Turkey 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abtahi M, Golchinpour N, Yaghmaeian K, Rafiee M, Jahangiri-rad M, Keyani A, Saeedi R (2015) A modified drinking water quality index (DWQI) for assessing drinking source water quality in rural communities of Khuzestan Province, Iran. Ecol Indic 53:283–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agarwal E, Agarwal R, Garg RD, Garg PK (2013) Delineation of groundwater potential zone: an AHP/ANP approach. J Earth Syst Sci 122(3):887–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aldworth J (1998) Spatial prediction, spatial sampling, and measurement error. Ph.D. Thesis. Iowa State University, p 186Google Scholar
  4. Altas L, Isik M, Kavurmaci M (2011) Determination of arsenic levels in the water resources of Aksaray Province, Turkey. J Environ Manag 92:2182–2192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aslan Y (2006) An investigation on the physical, chemical and bacteriologic properties of the drinking waters in Aksaray city. MS Thesis, Nigde University, Nigde, Turkey, 114 p (in Turkish with English abstract) Google Scholar
  6. Ball RO, Church RL (1980) Water quality indexing and scoring. J Environ Eng Div 106:757–771Google Scholar
  7. Banai-Kashani R (1989) A new method for site suitability analysis: the analytic hierarchy process. Environ Manag 13:685–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Banerjee T, Srivastava R (2009) Application of water quality index for assessment of surface water quality surrounding integrated industrial estate-Pantnagar. Water Sci Technol 60(8):2041–2053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bardalo AA, Nilsumranchit W, Chalermwat K (2001) Water quality and uses of the Bangpakong river (Eastern Thailand). Water Res 35:3635–3642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berg S (2010) Water utility benchmarking: measurement, methodology, and performance incentives. Int Water Assoc, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyacioglu H (2007) Development of a water quality index based on a European classification scheme. Water SA 33(1):101–106 Google Scholar
  12. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) (2001) Canadian water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life: CCME Water Quality Index 1.0, Technical Report, 5 pGoogle Scholar
  13. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Lewin AY, Seiford LM (1994) Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology, and application. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chica-Olmo M, Luque-Espinar JA, Rodriguez-Galiano V, Pardo-Iguzquiza E, Chica-Rivas L (2014) Categorical Indicator Kriging for assessing the risk of groundwater nitrate pollution: the case of Vega de Granada aquifer (SE Spain). Sci Total Environ 470:229–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Tone K (2000) Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software. Kluwer Academic Publisher, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  16. Cordy GE (2001) A Primer on Water Quality. USGS report no: 027-01. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-027-01/. Accessed 2 Dec 2015
  17. Cude CG (2001) Oregon Water Quality Index: a tool for evaluating water quality management effectiveness. J Am Water Resour Assoc 37(1):125–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dinius SH (1987) Design of an index of water quality. J Water Resour Bull 23:833–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Do HT, Lo SL, Phan Thi LA (2013) Calculating of river water quality sampling frequency by the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Environ Monit Assess 185(1):909–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eastman JR (2003) IDRISI Kilimanjaro: guide to GIS and image processing. Clark Laboratories, Clark University, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  21. Egborge ABM, Coker JB (1986) Water quality index: application in the Warri River, Nigeria. J Environ Pollut (Ser B) 12:27–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Esri (2015) ArcMap 10.1 Help File. Online, http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/main/10.1/. Accessed 25 Oct 2015
  23. European Union (EU) (2014) Consultation on the Quality of Drinking Water in the EU. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/consultations/water_drink_en.htm. Accessed 2 Aug 2015
  24. Fetter CW (1988) Applied hydrogeology, 2nd edn. Merrill Publishing Company, Columbia S.C.Google Scholar
  25. Germolec DR, Yang RSH, Ackerman MF, Rosenthal GJ, Boorman GA, Blair P, Luster MI (1989) Toxicology studies of a chemical mixture of 25 groundwater contaminants. Fundam Appl Toxicol 13:377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Giljanovic NS (1999) Water quality evaluation by index in Dalmatia. Water Res 33:3423–3440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goncuoglu MC, Dirik K, Erler A, Yaliniz K, Ozgul L, Cemen I (1996) Basic geological problems of the western part of the Tuzgolu basin (in Turkish). TPAO Report No. 3753, Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO), Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  28. Goovaerts P, AvRuskin G, Meliker J, Slotnick M, Jacquez G, Nriagu J (2005) Geostatistical modeling of the spatial variability of arsenic in groundwater of southeast Michigan. Water Resour Res 41:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gorai AK, Kumar S (2013) Spatial distribution analysis of groundwater quality index using GIS: a Case Study of Ranchi Municipal Corporation (RMC) area. Geoinfor Geostat Overv 1:2Google Scholar
  30. Harkins RD (1974) An objective water quality index. Journal (Water Pollution Control Federation), 588–591Google Scholar
  31. Hem JD (1985) Study and ınterperation of the chemical characteristics of natural water, USGS Water Supply Paper 2254, U. S. Gov. Print Office, 263 pGoogle Scholar
  32. Horton RK (1965) An index number system for rating water quality. J Water Pollut Control Fed 37:300–306Google Scholar
  33. Jeihouni M, Toomanian A, Shahabi M, Alavipanah SK (2014) Groundwater quality assessment for drinking purposes using GIS Modelling (case study: city of Tabriz). The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XL-2/W3, 163–168Google Scholar
  34. Jha MK, Chowdary VM, Chowdhury A (2010) Groundwater assessment in Salboni Block, West Bengal (India) using remote sensing, geographical information system and multi-criteria decision analysis techniques. Hydrogeology 18(7):1713–1728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Karadavut S (2009) Potential and quality of surface water and ground water resources in Aksaray province and their assessment in terms of efficient irrigation. PhD Thesis, Namik Kemal University, Tekirdag, Turkey, 88 p (in Turkish with English abstract) Google Scholar
  36. Kavurmaci M, Üstün AK (2016) Assessment of groundwater quality using DEA and AHP: a case study in the Sereflikochisar region in Turkey. Environ Monit Assess 188(4):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kavurmaci M, Altas L, Kurmac Y, Isik M, Elhatip H (2010) Evaluation of the Salt Lake effect on the ground waters of Aksaray-Turkey using Geographic Information System. Ekoloji 19(77):29–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kesler ES (1994) Mineral resources, economics and the environment. Mc Millan College Publishing Com Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Kumar T, Gautam AK, Kumar T (2014) Appraising the accuracy of GIS-based multi-criteria decision making technique for delineation of groundwater potential zones. Water Resour Manag 28:4449–4466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Liou S, Lo S, Wang S (2004) A generalized water quality index for Taiwan. Environ Monit Assess 96:35–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marjani A, Jamali M (2014) Role of exchange flow in salt water balance of Urmia Lake. Dyn Atmos Oceans 65:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miller WW, Joung HM, Mahannah CN, Garrett JR (1986) Identification of water quality differences Nevada through index application. J Environ Qual 15:265–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mohammadi Z, Limaei SM (2014) Selection of appropriate criteria in urban forestry (Case study: Isfahan city, Iran). J For Sci 60(12):487–794Google Scholar
  44. Nasiri F, Maqsiid I, Haunf G, Fuller N (2007) Water quality index: a fuzzy river pollution decision support expert system. J Water Resour Plan Manag 133:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ojha CSP, Muller U, Baldauf G, Nad Kuhn W (2003) Variation of certain water quality parameters with stream water turbidity: a case study from southern part of Germany. Hydrology and Water Resources, Sherif, Singh & Al-Rashed 251–269Google Scholar
  46. Oliver MA (1990) Kriging: a method of interpolation for geographical information systems. Int J Geogr Inf Syst 4:313–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pesce SF, Wunderlin DA (2000) Use of water quality indices to verify the impact of Cordoba City (Argentina) on Suquira River. Water Res 34:2915–2926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Nat Hazards 63:965–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Prasad B, Bose JM (2001) Evaluation of the heavy metal pollution index for surface and spring water near a lime stone mining area of the lower Himalayas. Environ Geol 41:183–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ramakrishnaiah CR, Sadashivaiah C, Ranganna G (2009) Assessment of water quality index for the groundwater in Tumkur Taluk, Karnataka State, India. J Chem 6(2):523–530Google Scholar
  51. Saaty TL (2005) Theory and applications of the analytic network: decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. RWS Publication, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  52. Sadat-Noori SM, Ebrahimi K, Liaghat AM (2014) Groundwater quality assessment using the Water Quality Index and GIS in Saveh-Nobaran aquifer, Iran. Environ Earth Sci 71(9):3827–3843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Selvam S, Manimaran G, Sivasubramanian P, Balasubramanian N, Seshunarayana T (2014) GIS-based Evaluation of Water Quality Index of groundwater resources around Tuticorin coastal city, south India. Environ Earth Sci 71(6):2847–2867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 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). Hydrogeol J 21:701–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shabbir R, Ahmad SS (2015) Water resource vulnerability assessment in Rawalpindi and Islamabad. J King Saud Univ Sci, Pakistan using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). doi: 10.1016/j.jksus.2015.09.007 Google Scholar
  56. Stein ML (1999) Interpolation of spatial data: some theory for kriging. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Üstün AK (2015) Evaluating İstanbul’s disaster resilience capacity by data envelopment analysis. Nat Hazards. doi: 10.1007/s11069-015-2041-y Google Scholar
  58. Üstün AK, Barbarosoglu G (2015) Performance evaluation of Turkish disaster relief management system in 1999 earthquakes using data envelopment analysis. Nat Hazards 75(2):1977–1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Walski TM, Parker FL (1974) Consumers water quality index. J Environ Eng Div 100(3):593–611Google Scholar
  60. Wang G, Qin L, Li G, Chen L (2009) Landfill site selection using spatial information technologies and AHP: a case study in Beijing, China. J Environ Manag 90(8):2414–2421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. WHO/UNICEF (2012) Estimated with data from WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation. Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water, 2012 UpdateGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geological Engineering DepartmentAksaray UniversityAksarayTurkey

Personalised recommendations