Skip to main content
Log in

Hydrogeologic Modeling of Submarine Groundwater Discharge: Comparison to Other Quantitative Methods

  • Published:
Biogeochemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Submarine groundwater discharge (SGD) is approached differently by terrestrial hydrogeologists and marine scientists, including whether to incorporate recirculated seawater with freshwater in the definition. This paper focuses on the major hydrogeologic modeling/calculational methods, what component of SGD they quantify and on what scale. It then compares the modeling methods to direct measurement and geochemical techniques used by marine scientists. Hydrogeologic modeling methods focus primarily on freshwater, but recirculated seawater can be examined with density-dependent, solute transport numerical modeling. Direct physical measurements and geochemical tracers performed in the marine environment can quantify fresh, brackish, or seawater fluxes, so that they are not always comparable to the results of modeling. Because of differences in the geochemistry (nutrients and other dissolved species) of fresh and saline waters, for many applications it may be necessary to distinguish between the fresh and recirculated seawater components of SGD.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bokuniewicz HJ (1980) Groundwater seepage into Great South Bay, New York. Estuarine Coast. Marine Sci. 10: 437–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley DE &; McKee LJ (2002) Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus budgets for a shallow subtropical coastal embayment (Moreton Bay, Australia). Limnol. Oceanogr. 47: 1043–1055

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnett W &; Turner J (2001) LOICZ group investigates groundwater discharge in Australia. LOICZ Newslett. 18: 1–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnett W, Chanton J, Christoff J, Kontor E, Krupa S, Lambert M, Moore W, O'Rourke D, Paulsen R, Smith C, Smith L &; Taniguchi M (2002) Assessing methodologies for measuring groundwater discharge to the ocean. EOS, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 83(11): 117 and 12–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Carabin G &; Dassargues A (1999) Modeling groundwater with ocean and river interaction. Water Resour. Res. 35(8): 2347–2358

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison GH, Glenn CR &; McMurtry GM (2003) Measurement of submarine groundwater discharge in Kahana Bay, O'ahu, Hawaii. Limnol. Oceanogr. 48: 920–928

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbin AE &; Gaines AG (1990) Nitrogen inputs to a marine embayment: the importance of groundwater. Biogeochemistry 10: 309–328

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey JW &; Odum WE (1990) The influence of tidal marshes on upland groundwater discharge to estuaries. Biogeochemistry 10: 217–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannes RE (1980) The ecological significance of the submarine discharge of groundwater. Marine Ecol. Progr. Ser. 3: 365–373

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MJ (1988) Geohydrology and mathematical simulation of the Pajaro Valley aquifer system, Santa Cruz and Monterey counties, California. US Geological Survey, Waterresources Investigation Report 87-4281

  • Kanehiro BY &; Peterson FL (1977) Groundwater recharge and coastal discharge for the northwest coast of the island of Hawaii: a computerized water budget approach. Water Resources Research Center, University of Hawaii, Technical Report No. 110

  • Moore W (1996) Large groundwater inputs to coastal waters revealed by 226Ra enrichments. Nature 380: 612–614

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberdorfer JA, Hogan PH &; Buddemeier RW (1990a) Atoll island hydrogeology: flow and freshwater occurrence in a tidally dominated system. J. Hydrol. 120: 327–340

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberdorfer JA, Valetino MA &; Smith SV (1990b) Groundwater contribution to the nutrient budget of Tomales Bay, California. Biogeochemistry 10: 199–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Prieto C (2001) Modeling freshwater–seawater interactions in coastal aquifers: long-term trends and temporal variability effects. Licentiate Thesis Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson MA (1996) A finite element model of submarine ground water discharge to tidal estuarine waters, Ph.D. Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute

  • Sewell PL (1982) Urban groundwater as a possible nutrient source for an estuarine benthic algal bloom. Estuarine Coast. Shelf Sci. 15: 569–576

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons Jr GM (1992) Importance of SGD (SGWD) and seawater cycling to material flux across sediment/water interfaces in marine environments. Marine Ecol. 84: 173–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Souza WR &; Voss CI (1987) Analysis of an anisotropic coastal aquifer system using variable density flow and solute transport simulation. J. Hydrol. 92: 7–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Staver KW &; Brinsfield RB (1996) Seepage of groundwater nitrate from a riparian agroecosystem to the Wye River estuary. Estuaries 19: 359–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Uchiyama Y, Nadaoka K, Rölke P, Adachi K &; Yagi H (2000) Submarine groundwater discharge into the sea and associated nutrient transport in a sandy beach. Water Resour. Res. 30: 1467–1479

    Google Scholar 

  • Valiela I &; Costa JE (1988) Eutrophication of Buttermilk Bay, a Cape Cod coastal embayment: concentrations of nutrients and watershed nutrient budgets. Environ. Manage. 12: 539–553

    Google Scholar 

  • Zektser IS &; Dzhamalov RG (1981) Groundwater discharge to the Pacific Ocean. Hydrol. Sci. Bull. 26(3): 271–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Zektser IS, Ivanov VA &; Meskheteli AV (1973) The problem of direct groundwater discharge to the seas. J. Hydrol. 20(1): 1–36

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oberdorfer, J.A. Hydrogeologic Modeling of Submarine Groundwater Discharge: Comparison to Other Quantitative Methods. Biogeochemistry 66, 159–169 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOG.0000006096.94630.54

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOG.0000006096.94630.54

Navigation