Probabilistic data integration for characterization of spatial distribution of residual LNAPL

Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 735-749

  Hosseini, Amir H ^a   Deutsch, Clayton V ^a   Biggar, Kevin W ^b   Mendoza, Carl A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b BGC ENGINEERING INC   (Canada)

Author keywords

Boundary modeling and cross validation; Cone penetration testing; Geostatistical modeling; NAPL source

Indexed keywords

ACCURATE PREDICTION; BAYESIAN UPDATING; CONE PENETRATION TESTING; CONTAMINANT TRANSPORT; CROSS VALIDATION; DATA INTEGRATION; DISTANCE FUNCTIONS; GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING; GEOSTATISTICAL TECHNIQUES; INVERSE MODELING; LIGHT NON-AQUEOUS PHASE LIQUIDS; MONTE CARLO; MONTE CARLO SIMULATION; NONSTATIONARY; PENETRATION TESTING; PRIMARY SOURCES; PRIOR PROBABILITY; PROBABILISTIC DATA; PROBABILISTIC MODELS; REACTIVE SOLUTES; RESIDUAL NAPL; SECONDARY DATA SOURCES; SEQUENTIAL INDICATOR SIMULATIONS; SMALL SCALE VARIABILITY; SOIL TEXTURES; SOURCE ZONE; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICAL APPROACH; TRANSPORT MODELING; ULTRA-VIOLET; WATER TABLES;

AQUIFERS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA HANDLING; INVERSE PROBLEMS; MONTE CARLO METHODS; PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION; RANDOM VARIABLES; SOLUTE TRANSPORT; WATER TREATMENT;

SIZE DISTRIBUTION;

ALGORITHM; CONE PENETRATION TEST; GEOSTATISTICS; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NONAQUEOUS PHASE LIQUID; NUMERICAL MODEL; REACTIVE TRANSPORT; SOIL TEXTURE; SOLUTE TRANSPORT; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; WATER TABLE;

EID: 77955054694     PISSN: 14363240     EISSN: 14363259     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00477-009-0360-9     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alostaz M, Biggar KW, Donahue R, Hall G (2008) Petroleum contamination characterization and quantification using fluorescence emission-excitation matrices (EMMs) and parallel factor analysis (PARAFAC). J Environ Eng Sci 7(3): 183-197.
2. American Petroleum Institute (2004) API Interactive LNAPL Guide Version 2. Environmental Systems and Technologies, Blacksburg, VA.
3. Aral MM, Guan J, Masila ML (2001) Identification of contaminant source location and release history in aquifers. J Hydrol Eng 6: 225-234.
4. Bridge JS, Leeder MR (1979) A simulation model of alluvial stratigraphy. Sedimentology 26(5): 617-644.
5. Campanella RG, Robertson PK (1988) Current status of the piezocone test. In: De Ruiter J (ed) Proceedings of cone penetration testing, vol I, pp 93-116. ISOPT-1, Orlando.
6. Chen MJ, Keller AA, Zhang DX, Lu ZM, Zyvoloski GA (2006) A stochastic analysis of transient two-phase flow in heterogeneous porous media. Water Resour Res 42(3): W03425.
7. Chen MJ, Keller AA, Lu ZM (2009) Stochastic analysis of transient three-phase flow in heterogeneous porous media. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 23: 93-109.
8. Christ JA, Ramsburg CA, Pennell KD, Abriola LM (2006) Estimating mass transfer from dense nonaqueous phase liquid source zones using upscaled mass transfer coefficients: an evaluation using multiphase numerical simulations. Water Resour Res 42(11): W11420.
9. Cowan E, Beatson R, Ross H, Fright W et al. (2003) Practical implicit geological modeling. In: Proceedings of 5th international mining geology conference, 17-19 November, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia.
10. D'Affonseca FM, Blum P, Finkel M, Melzer R, Grathwohl P (2008) Field-scale characterization and modeling of contaminant release from a coal tar source zone. J Contam Hydrol 102: 120-139.
11. Deutsch CV (2002) Geostatistical reservoir modeling. Oxford University Press, New York.
12. Deutsch CV (2006) A sequential indicator simulation program for categorical variables with point and block data. Comput Geosci 32(10): 1669-1681.
13. Deutsch CV, Journel AG (1998) GSLIB: geostatistical library and user's guide, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York.
14. Dillard LA, Essaid HI, Herkelrath WN (1997) Multiphase flow modeling of a crude-oil spill site with a bimodal permeability distribution. J Contam Hydrol 48(1-2): 89-119.
15. Essaid HI, Hess KM (1993) Monte Carlo simulations of multiphase flow incorporating spatial variability of hydraulic properties. Ground Water 31(1): 123-134.
16. Essaid HI, Herkelrath WN, Hess KM (1993) Simulation of fluid distributions observed at a crude-oil spill site incorporating hysteresis, oil entrapment, and spatial variability of hydraulic properties. Water Resour Res 29(6): 1753-1770.
17. Gorelick SM, Evans BE, Remson I (1983) Identifying sources of groundwater pollution: an optimization approach. Water Resour Res 19(3): 779-790.
18. Houlding SW (1994) 3D geoscience modeling: computer techniques for geological characterization. Springer, Berlin.
19. Huntley D, Beckett GD (2002) Persistence of LNAPL sources: relationship between risk reduction and LNAPL recovery. J Contam Hydrol 59: 3-26.
20. Journel AG (2002) Combining knowledge from diverse sources: and alternative to traditional data independence hypotheses. Math Geol 34(5): 573-596.
21. Journel AG, Gomez-Hernandez JJ (1993) Stochastic imaging of the Wilmington clastic sequence. SPE Form Eval 8(1): 33-40.
22. Kueper BH, Gerhard JI (1995) Variability of point source infiltration rates for two-phase flow in heterogeneous porous media. Water Resour Res 31(12): 2971-2980.
23. Mahar PS, Datta B (2001) Optimal identification of groundwater pollution sources and parameter estimation. J Water Resour Plan Manag 131(1): 45-57.
24. McLennan JA (2007) The decision of stationarity. PhD Thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
25. Neupauer RM, Lin R (2006) Identifying sources of a conservative groundwater contaminant using backward probabilities conditioned on measured concentrations. Water Resour Res 42(3): W03424.
26. Parker JC, Islam M (2000) Inverse modeling to estimate LNAPL plume release timing. J Contam Hydrol 45(3-4): 303-327.
27. Parker JC, Park E (2004) Modeling field-scale dense nonaqueous phase liquid dissolution kinetics in heterogeneous aquifers. Water Resour Res 40(5): W05109.
28. Pyrcz M, Catuneanu O, Deutsch CV (2005) Stochastic surface-based modeling of turbidite lobes. AAPG Bull 89(2): 177-191.
29. Robertson PK, Campanella RG (1983) Interpretation of cone penetration tests, part I: sand. Can Geotech J 20(4): 718-733.
30. Rojas-Avellaneda D, Silvan-Cardenas JL (2006) Performance of geostatistical interpolation methods for modeling sample data with non-stationary mean. Stoch Environ Res Risk Asses 20(6): 455-467.
31. Sciortino A, Harmon TC, Yeh WG (2000) Inverse modeling for locating dense nonaqueous pools in groundwater under steady flow conditions. Water Resour Res 36(7): 1723-1735.
32. Sidauruk PA, Cheng HD, Ouzar D (1998) Groundwater contaminant source and transport parameter identification by correlation coefficient optimization. Ground Water 26(2): 208-214.
33. Snodgrass MF, Kitanidis PK (1997) A geostatistical approach to contaminant source identification. Water Resour Res 33(4): 537-546.
34. Sun AY, Painter SL, Wittmeyer GW (2006) A constrained robust least squares approach for contaminant release history identification. Water Resour Res 42(4): W04414.
35. van Genuchten M (1980) A closed form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44: 892-898.
36. Wagner BJ (1992) Simultaneously parameter estimation and contaminant source characterization for coupled groundwater flow and contaminant transport modeling. J Hydrol 135: 275-303.
37. Wilson JL, Liu J (1994) Backward tracking to find the source of pollution. Waste Manag Risk Remediat 1: 181-199.
38. Yeh HD, Chang TH, Lin YC (2007) Groundwater contaminant source identification by a hybrid heuristic approach. Water Resour Res 43(9): W09420.
39. Zhang Z, Tumay MT (2003) Non-traditional approaches in soil classification derived from the cone penetration test. In: van Marcke E, Fenton GA (eds) Probabilistic site characterization at the national geotechnical experimentation sites, pp 101-149. ASCE, Reston VA.
40. Zhu J (2001) Transport and fate of nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL) in variably saturated porous media with evolving scales of heterogeneity. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 15(6): 447-461.