Comparison of approaches for the characterization of contamination at rural megasites

Environmental Earth Sciences

Volumn 63, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 1239-1249

  Rein, Arno ^a   Popp, Steffen ^b   Zacharias, Steffen ^b   Leven, Carsten ^c   Bittens, Martin ^b   Dietrich, Peter ^b  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Direct push; Groundwater contamination; Megasite; Monitoring; Screening

Indexed keywords

CONCENTRATION MEASUREMENT; CONTAMINATION DISTRIBUTION; CONVENTIONAL APPROACH; DIRECT-PUSH; GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION; HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS; INDICATOR KRIGING; LONG TERM MONITORING; MEGA-SITES; MEGASITE; MONITORING WELLS; REMOTE AREAS; SITE INVESTIGATIONS; SPARSE DATA; SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION; TEMPORAL VARIABILITY; WORK FOCUS;

CONTAMINATION; DECISION MAKING; GROUNDWATER; MONITORING; SURVEYS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WELLS;

GROUNDWATER POLLUTION;

COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); GROUNDWATER POLLUTION; HISTORICAL RECORD; KRIGING; POLLUTION MONITORING; RURAL AREA; SITE INVESTIGATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SUBTERRANEAN ENVIRONMENT; TEMPORAL VARIATION; WATER QUALITY; WELL WATER;

EID: 79959585212     PISSN: 18666280     EISSN: 18666299     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12665-010-0797-7     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. American Society for Testing and Materials (1998) Standard guide for direct-push water sampling for geoenvironmental investigations. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, v. 04. 08, ASTM D6001. ASTM, West Conshohocken.
2. Dehnert J, Leven C, Trabitzsch R, Weiß H (2010) Determination of high-resolution concentration profiles of nitrate in groundwater by means of direct push soundings. Grundwasser (in German). doi: 10. 1007/s00767-010-0150-9.
3. Dietrich P, Leven C (2006) Direct-push technologies. In: Kirsch R (ed) Groundwater geophysics. Springer, Berlin, pp 321-340.
4. Eisenbarth S (1995) Chances for accelerated remediation of contaminated sites in the eastern federal states of Germany. Altlastenspektrum 4(95): 200-202 in German.
5. European Commission (2004) Towards a thematic strategy on the urban environment, COM (2004) 60 final. Commission of the European Communities, Brusselsm, p 56.
6. European Commission (2006) Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the protection of soil and amending Directive 2004/35/EC, Directive COM(2006) 232 final. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, p 30.
7. European Environment Agency (2000) Management of Contaminated Sites in Western Europe. Topic report no. 13/1999, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark, 171 pp.
8. Gödeke S, Richnow HH, Weiβ H, Fischer A, Vogt C, Borsdorf H, Schirmer M (2006) Multi tracer test for the implementation of enhanced in situ bioremediation at a BTEX-contaminated megasite. J Contam Hydrol 87(3-4): 211-236.
9. Goovaerts P (1997) Geostatistics for natural resources evaluation. Oxford University Press, New York.
10. Hofmann T, Darsow A, Groning M, Aggarwal P, Suckow A (2010) Direct-push profiling of isotopic and hydrochemical vertical gradients. J Hydrol 385: 84-94.
11. Jacobs JA, Kram M, Lieberman S (2000) Direct-push technology sampling methods. In: Lehr J (ed) Standard handbook of environmental science, health, and technology. McGraw Hill, New York, pp 11. 151-11. 163.
12. Köber R, Hornbruch G, Leven C, Tischer L, Großmann J, Dietrich P, Weiß H, Dahmke A (2009) Evaluation of combined direct-push methods used for aquifer model generation. Ground Water 47(4): 536-546.
13. Millar K, Ferber U, Grimski D, Nathanail P (2005) CABERNET: a vision of economic regeneration and sustainable land use. In: CABERNET (ed) Proceedings of CABERNET 2005: the international conference on managing urban land. LQM Ltd., Nottingham, United Kingdom, pp 238-244.
14. Pitkin SE, Cherry JA, Ingleton RA, Broholm M (1999) Field demonstrations using the Waterloo Ground Water Profiler. Ground Water Monit Remediat 19(2): 22-131.
15. Rein A, Bauer S, Dietrich P, Beyer C (2009) Influence of temporally variable groundwater flow conditions on point measurements and contaminant mass flux estimations. J Contam Hydrol 108(3-4): 118-133.
16. Rijnaarts H, Hoogeveen N, ter Meer J, Bien J, Wallace S (2003) Risk Based Management approaches for megasites. Paper presented at the NICOLE workshop on megasites, Lille, France, 31 October 2003.
17. Schirmer M, Dahmke A, Dietrich P, Dietze M, Gödeke S, Richnow HH, Schirmer K, Weiß H, Teutsch G (2006) Natural attenuation research at the contaminated megasite Zeitz. J Hydrol 328(3-4): 393-407.
18. Schulmeister MK, Healey JM, Butler JJ Jr, McCall GW, Birk S (2003a) High-resolution characterization of chemical heterogeneity in an alluvial aquifer. In: Kovar K (ed) Modelcare 2002: calibration and reliability in groundwater modelling: a few steps closer to reality. IAHS Publication Issue 277, Wallingford, pp 419-424.
19. Schulmeister MK, Butler JJ Jr, Healey JM, Zheng L, Wysocki DA, McCall GW (2003b) Direct-push electrical conductivity logging for high-resolution hydrostratigraphic characterization. Ground Water Monit Remediat 23: 52-62.
20. Sellwood SN, Healey JM, Birk S, Butler JJ Jr (2005) Direct-push hydrostratigraphic profiling: coupling electrical logging and slug tests. Ground Water 43: 19-29.
21. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1997) Expedited site assessment tools for underground tank sites: a guide for regulators. EPA 510-B-97-001, U. S. EPA, Washington, DC, USA.
22. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1998) Environmental technology verification report: soil sampling technology: art's manufacturing and supply: AMS dual tube liner sampler. EPA 600R-98/093, U. S. EPA, Washington, DC, USA.
23. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2003) Remediation challenge: is there a case for source depletion? EPA 600/R-03/143, U. S. EPA, Washington, DC, USA.
24. United States National Research Council (1994) Alternatives to groundwater cleanup. National Academy Press, Washington.