预测地下水修复时间框架:特定地点的时间监测结果可能无法预测未来的表现

IF 1.8 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 WATER RESOURCES
Thomas E. McHugh, Charles J. Newell, Lila M. Beckley, David T. Adamson, George E. DeVaull, Matthew A. Lahvis
{"title":"预测地下水修复时间框架:特定地点的时间监测结果可能无法预测未来的表现","authors":"Thomas E. McHugh,&nbsp;Charles J. Newell,&nbsp;Lila M. Beckley,&nbsp;David T. Adamson,&nbsp;George E. DeVaull,&nbsp;Matthew A. Lahvis","doi":"10.1111/gwmr.12609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>At contaminated sites, groundwater monitoring results are commonly used (quantitatively or qualitatively) to predict remediation timeframes. If results are predictive, then there should be a strong positive correlation between attenuation rates for the first half of a temporal monitoring record and attenuation rates for the second half of the same record. We utilized the GeoTracker database to evaluate the power of historical groundwater monitoring results to predict future attenuation rates. For two data sets (petroleum and chlorinated solvent), we found a small negative correlation between the first-order concentration vs. time attenuation rate observed during the earlier part of the monitoring record and the later part of the monitoring record: benzene—correlation coefficient (r) = −0.11, methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)—r = −0.12, trichloroethene (TCE) = −0.12. For each data set, a small negative correlation between the first-order attenuation rate observed during the earlier part of the monitoring record and the later part of the monitoring record was also observed for a subset of monitoring records exhibiting the best model fits (R<sup>2</sup> &gt; 0.8), a subset with a statistically significant (p &lt; 0.05) positive attenuation rate for the first half of the monitoring record. For the TCE data set, this negative correlation was also observed for a subset of monitoring records with no change in site remedy during the monitoring period (r = −0.22). Our analysis suggests that the historical concentration vs. time attenuation rate for a contaminant at an individual site or monitoring well is a poor predictor of the future rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":55081,"journal":{"name":"Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation","volume":"43 4","pages":"92-103"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ngwa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gwmr.12609","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forecasting Groundwater Remediation Timeframes: Site-Specific Temporal Monitoring Results May Not Predict Future Performance\",\"authors\":\"Thomas E. McHugh,&nbsp;Charles J. Newell,&nbsp;Lila M. Beckley,&nbsp;David T. Adamson,&nbsp;George E. DeVaull,&nbsp;Matthew A. Lahvis\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/gwmr.12609\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>At contaminated sites, groundwater monitoring results are commonly used (quantitatively or qualitatively) to predict remediation timeframes. If results are predictive, then there should be a strong positive correlation between attenuation rates for the first half of a temporal monitoring record and attenuation rates for the second half of the same record. We utilized the GeoTracker database to evaluate the power of historical groundwater monitoring results to predict future attenuation rates. For two data sets (petroleum and chlorinated solvent), we found a small negative correlation between the first-order concentration vs. time attenuation rate observed during the earlier part of the monitoring record and the later part of the monitoring record: benzene—correlation coefficient (r) = −0.11, methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)—r = −0.12, trichloroethene (TCE) = −0.12. For each data set, a small negative correlation between the first-order attenuation rate observed during the earlier part of the monitoring record and the later part of the monitoring record was also observed for a subset of monitoring records exhibiting the best model fits (R<sup>2</sup> &gt; 0.8), a subset with a statistically significant (p &lt; 0.05) positive attenuation rate for the first half of the monitoring record. For the TCE data set, this negative correlation was also observed for a subset of monitoring records with no change in site remedy during the monitoring period (r = −0.22). Our analysis suggests that the historical concentration vs. time attenuation rate for a contaminant at an individual site or monitoring well is a poor predictor of the future rate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation\",\"volume\":\"43 4\",\"pages\":\"92-103\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ngwa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gwmr.12609\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gwmr.12609\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"WATER RESOURCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gwmr.12609","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"WATER RESOURCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在污染场地,地下水监测结果通常(定量或定性)用于预测修复时间表。如果结果是可预测的,那么在时间监测记录的前半部分的衰减率与同一记录的后半部分的衰减率之间应该存在很强的正相关关系。我们利用GeoTracker数据库来评估历史地下水监测结果预测未来衰减率的能力。对于两个数据集(石油和氯化溶剂),我们发现在监测记录的前期和后期观察到的一阶浓度与时间衰减率之间存在较小的负相关:苯相关系数(r) = - 0.11,甲基叔丁基醚(MTBE) -r = - 0.12,三氯乙烯(TCE) = - 0.12。对于每个数据集,对于具有最佳模型拟合的监测记录子集(R2 > 0.8),在监测记录的前半部分观测到的一阶衰减率与监测记录的后半部分观测到的一阶衰减率之间也存在较小的负相关,该子集在监测记录的前半部分观测到的正衰减率具有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。对于TCE数据集,在监测期间现场补救措施没有变化的监测记录子集中也观察到这种负相关(r = - 0.22)。我们的分析表明,单个站点或监测井中污染物的历史浓度与时间衰减率并不能很好地预测未来的速率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Forecasting Groundwater Remediation Timeframes: Site-Specific Temporal Monitoring Results May Not Predict Future Performance

Forecasting Groundwater Remediation Timeframes: Site-Specific Temporal Monitoring Results May Not Predict Future Performance

At contaminated sites, groundwater monitoring results are commonly used (quantitatively or qualitatively) to predict remediation timeframes. If results are predictive, then there should be a strong positive correlation between attenuation rates for the first half of a temporal monitoring record and attenuation rates for the second half of the same record. We utilized the GeoTracker database to evaluate the power of historical groundwater monitoring results to predict future attenuation rates. For two data sets (petroleum and chlorinated solvent), we found a small negative correlation between the first-order concentration vs. time attenuation rate observed during the earlier part of the monitoring record and the later part of the monitoring record: benzene—correlation coefficient (r) = −0.11, methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)—r = −0.12, trichloroethene (TCE) = −0.12. For each data set, a small negative correlation between the first-order attenuation rate observed during the earlier part of the monitoring record and the later part of the monitoring record was also observed for a subset of monitoring records exhibiting the best model fits (R2 > 0.8), a subset with a statistically significant (p < 0.05) positive attenuation rate for the first half of the monitoring record. For the TCE data set, this negative correlation was also observed for a subset of monitoring records with no change in site remedy during the monitoring period (r = −0.22). Our analysis suggests that the historical concentration vs. time attenuation rate for a contaminant at an individual site or monitoring well is a poor predictor of the future rate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
60
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1981, Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation® has been a resource for researchers and practitioners in the field. It is a quarterly journal that offers the best in application oriented, peer-reviewed papers together with insightful articles from the practitioner''s perspective. Each issue features papers containing cutting-edge information on treatment technology, columns by industry experts, news briefs, and equipment news. GWMR plays a unique role in advancing the practice of the groundwater monitoring and remediation field by providing forward-thinking research with practical solutions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信