Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-l2zqg Total loading time: 0.224 Render date: 2021-09-18T02:35:19.304Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Assessing threats to shallow groundwater quality from soil pollutants in Glasgow, UK: development of a new screening tool

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2018

F. M. Fordyce*
Affiliation:
British Geological Survey, The Lyell Centre, Research Avenue South, Edinburgh EH14 4AP, UK. Email: fmf@bgs.ac.uk
B. É. Ó Dochartaigh
Affiliation:
British Geological Survey, The Lyell Centre, Research Avenue South, Edinburgh EH14 4AP, UK. Email: fmf@bgs.ac.uk
H. C. Bonsor
Affiliation:
British Geological Survey, The Lyell Centre, Research Avenue South, Edinburgh EH14 4AP, UK. Email: fmf@bgs.ac.uk
E. L. Ander
Affiliation:
British Geological Survey, Environmental Science Centre, Keyworth, Nottingham NG12 5GG, UK.
M. T. Graham
Affiliation:
British Geological Survey, The Lyell Centre, Research Avenue South, Edinburgh EH14 4AP, UK. Email: fmf@bgs.ac.uk
R. McCuaig
Affiliation:
School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
M. Lovatt
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Strathclyde, 50 Richmond Street, Glasgow G1 1XN, UK.
*Corresponding
*Corresponding author

Abstract

A new GIS-based screening tool to assess threats to shallow groundwater quality has been trialled in Glasgow, UK. The GRoundwater And Soil Pollutants (GRASP) tool is based on a British Standard method for assessing the threat from potential leaching of metal pollutants in unsaturated soil/superficial materials to shallow groundwater, using data on soil and Quaternary deposit properties, climate and depth to groundwater. GRASP breaks new ground by also incorporating a new Glasgow-wide soil chemistry dataset. GRASP considers eight metals, including chromium, lead and nickel at 1622 soil sample locations. The final output is a map to aid urban management, which highlights areas where shallow groundwater quality may be at risk from current and future surface pollutants. The tool indicated that 13% of soil sample sites in Glasgow present a very high potential threat to groundwater quality, due largely to shallow groundwater depths and high soil metal concentrations. Initial attempts to validate GRASP revealed partial spatial coincidence between the GRASP threat ranks (low, moderate, high and very high) and groundwater chemistry, with statistical correlation between areas of high soil and groundwater metal concentrations for both Cr and Cu (r2>0.152; P<0.05). Validation was hampered by a lack of, and inconsistency in, existing groundwater chemistry data. To address this, standardised subsurface data collection networks have been trialled recently in Glasgow. It is recommended that, once available, new groundwater depth and chemistry information from these networks is used to validate the GRASP model further.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © British Geological Survey UKRI 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aller, L., Bennett, T., Lehr, J. H. & Petty, R. J. 1985. DRASTIC: a standardized system for evaluating groundwater pollution potential using hydrogeological settings. US-EPA Document EPA/600/2-85/018. Washington: US Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
Ball, D., MacDonald, A. M., Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Del Rio, M., Fitzsimons, V., Auton, C. & Lilly, A. 2004. Development of a groundwater vulnerability screening methodology for the Water Framework Directive. Final Project Report WFD28. Edinburgh: SNIFFER. http://www.envirobase.info/PDF/SNIFFER_WFD28.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bewley, R. 2007. Treatment of chromium contamination and chromium ore processing residue. Technical Bulletin 14. London: CL:AIRE. http://www.claire.co.uk/Google Scholar
BGS. 2012. Assessing subsurface knowledge – ASK Network. Nottingham: British Geological Survey. http://www.bgs.ac.uk/research/engineeringGeology/urbanGeoscience/Clyde/askNetwork/home.html (accessed January 2016).Google Scholar
Blume, H. P. & Brummer, G. 1991. Prediction of heavy metal behaviour in soil by means of simple field tests. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 22, 164174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonsor, H. C., Bricker, S. H., Ó Dochartaigh, B. É. & Lawrie, K. I. G. 2010. Groundwater monitoring in urban areas: pilot investigation in Glasgow, UK, 20102011. Internal Report, IR/10/087. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey. http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/15773/.Google Scholar
Boorman, D. B., Hollis, J. M. & Lilly, A. 1995. Hydrology of soil types: a hydrologically-based classification of the soils of the United Kingdom. Report no.126. Wallingford: Institute of Hydrology. http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/7369/.Google Scholar
BS-ISO. 2004. Soil quality – characterisation of soil related to groundwater protection. Report BS ISO 15175:2004, London: British Standards – International Standards Organisation.Google Scholar
Butler, D. & Parkinson, J. 1997. Towards sustainable urban drainage. Water Science and Technology 35, 5363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, S. D. G., Merritt, J. E., Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Mansour, M., Hughes, A. G., Fordyce, F. M., Entwisle, D. C., Monaghan, A. A. & Loughlin, S. 2010. 3D geological models and hydrogeological applications: supporting urban development – a case study in Glasgow – Clyde, UK. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Geowissenschaften 161, 251262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, M. & Thursten, N. 2014. Evidence: new groundwater vulnerability mapping methodology. Report SC040016. Bristol: Environment Agency.Google Scholar
CEC. 1998. Water Quality Framework. EU Directive 98/83/EC. Brussels: Commission of the European Community.Google Scholar
COST. 2016. COST Sub-Urban Action – a network to improve understanding and use of the ground beneath our cities. European Cooperation in Science and Technology. http://www.cost.eu/COST_Actions/tud/TU1206 (accessed January 2016).Google Scholar
Dearden, R. A., Marchant, A. & Royse, K. 2013. Development of a suitability map for infiltration sustainable drainage systems. Environmental Earth Sciences 70, 25872602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dearden, R. A. & Price, S. J. 2012. A proposed decision-making framework for a national infiltration SuDS map. Management of Environmental Quality 23, 478485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaton, T. T. & Zaporozec, A. 1997. Evaluation of groundwater vulnerability in an urbanizing area. In Chilton, J., Hiscock, K., Younger, P., Morris, B., Puri, S., Nash, H., Aldous, P., Tellam, J., Kimblin, R. & Hennings, S. (eds) Groundwater in the urban environment: problems, processes and management, 577582. Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema.Google Scholar
Environment Agency, Golders Associates. 1999. ConSim Software: contamination impacts on groundwater – simulation by Monte-Carlo Method. Nottingham: Golders Associates (UK) Ltd.Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Act Part IIa. 1990. Contaminated land. London: HSMO.Google Scholar
Evanko, C. R. & Dzombak, D. A. 1997. Remediation of metals contaminated soils and groundwater. Technical Report TE-97-01. Pittsburgh: Groundwater Remediation Technologies Analysis Centre.Google Scholar
Farmer, J. G., Thomas, R. P., Graham, M. C., Geelhoed, J. S., Lumsdon, D. G. & Paterson, E. 2002. Chromium speciation and fractionation in ground and surface waters in the vicinity of chromite ore processing residue disposal sites. Journal of Environmental Monitoring 4, 235243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fordyce, F. M., Brown, S. E., Ander, E. L., Rawlins, B. G., O'Donnell, K. E., Lister, T. R., Breward, N. & Johnson, C. C. 2005. GSUE: urban geochemical mapping in Great Britain. Geochemical Exploration and Environment A 5, 325336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fordyce, F. M., Nice, S. E., Lister, T. R., Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Cooper, R., Allen, M., Ingham, M., Gowing, C., Vickers, B. P. & Scheib, A. 2012. Urban soil geochemistry of Glasgow. Open Report, OR/08/002. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey. http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/18009/.Google Scholar
Fordyce, F. M., Bonsor, H. C. & Ó Dochartaigh, B. É. 2013. Developments to GRASP 2012/13. GRASP: a GIS tool to assess pollutant threats to shallow groundwater in the Glasgow area. Internal Report, IR/13/024. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Fordyce, F. M., Everett, P. A., Bearcock, J. M. & Lister, T. R. 2018. Soil metal/metalloid concentrations in the Clyde Basin, Scotland, UK: implications for land quality. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. DOI: 10.1017/S1755691018000282.Google Scholar
Fordyce, F. M. & Ander, E. L. 2003. Urban Soils Geochemistry and GIS-aided Interpretation – A Case Study from Stoke-on-Trent. British Geological Survey Research Report IR/01/35/R. Nottingham: British Geological Survey. http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/7018/.Google Scholar
Fordyce, F. M. & Ó Dochartaigh, B. É. 2011. Developments to GRASP 2009/10. GRASP: a GIS tool to assess pollutant threats to shallow groundwater in the Glasgow area. Internal Report, IR/10/034. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Graham, M. T., Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Fordyce, F. M. & Ander, E. L. 2008. Preliminary GRoundwater-quality Assessment from Soil Pollutants (GRASP) tool for Glasgow. Internal Report IR/08/057. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Grunsky, E. C. 2010. The interpretation of geochemical survey data. Geochemistry, Exploration, Environment Analysis 10, 2774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, I. H. S., Browne, M. A. E. & Forsyth, I. H. 1998. Geology of Glasgow District. British Geological Survey Memoir for 1:50 000 Geological Sheet 30E (Scotland). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Howard, K. W. F. (ed.) 2008. Urban groundwater – meeting the challenge. Abingdon, Oxford: Taylor Francis.Google Scholar
Johnson, C. C., Demetriades, A., Locutura, J. & Ottesen, R. T. (eds) 2011. Mapping the chemical environment of urban areas. London: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, D. (ed.) 2003. Urban groundwater pollution: IAH International Contributions to Hydrogeology 24. Abingdon, Oxford: Taylor Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovatt, M. J. 2008. Assessing the Importance of Depth to Groundwater in a Methodology for Prioritising Threats to Groundwater Quality from Surface Contaminants in the Clyde Gateway. Unpublished MSc Thesis, University of Strathclyde, UK.Google Scholar
Luo, X.-S., Yu, S., Zhu, Y.-G. & Li, X.-D. 2012. Trace metal contamination in urban soils of China. Science of the Total Environment 421–422, 1730.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacDonald, N. & Jones, P. 2006. The inclusion of sustainable drainage systems in flood management in the post-industrial city: a case study of Glasgow. Scottish Geographical Journal 122, 233246.Google Scholar
McBride, M. B. 1994. Environmental chemistry of soils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McBride, M. B., Richards, B. K., Steenhuis, T. & Spiers, G. 1999. Long-term leaching of trace elements in a heavily sludge amended silly clay loam soil. Soil Science 164, 613623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCuaig, R. 2011. Validation of a GIS-based tool for prioritising threats to shallow groundwater quality from soil pollutants in Glasgow. Unpublished MSc Thesis, Birmingham University, UK.Google Scholar
McGrath, S. P. & Loveland, P. J. 1992. Soil geochemical atlas of England and Wales. Glasgow: Blackie Academic and Professional.Google Scholar
McKinley, J. M., Hron, K., Grunsky, E. C., Reimann, C., de Caritat, P., Filzmoser, P. & Tolosana-Delgado, R. 2016. The single component geochemical map: fact or fiction? Journal of Geochemical Exploration 162, 1628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaren, R. G., Clucas, L. M. & Taylor, M. D. 2005. Leaching of macronutrients and metals from undisturbed soils treated with metal-spiked sewage sludge. 3. Distribution of residual metals. Australian Journal of Soil Research 43, 159170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrington, G. & Alloway, B. J. 1994. The flux of Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn in mining polluted soils. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 73, 333344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meteorological Office. 2013. Meteorological Office Rainfall and Evaporation Calculation System (MORECS). http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/ (accessed April 2013).Google Scholar
Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Ball, D. F., MacDonald, A. M., Lilly, A., Fitzsimons, V., Del Rio, M. & Auton, C. A. 2005. Mapping groundwater vulnerability in Scotland: a new approach for the water framework directive. Scottish Journal of Geology 41, 2130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Graham, M. T. & MacDonald, A. M. 2007. A summary of groundwater work within the Clyde Basin Project, 20052006. Internal Report, IR/07/042. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Fordyce, F. M. & Bonsor, H. C. 2009. Developments to GRASP 2008/09. GRASP: a GIS tool to assess pollutant threats to shallow groundwater in the Glasgow area. Internal Report, IR/09/026. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Bonsor, H. C. & Bricker, S. H. 2012. Project progress report 2011–12: groundwater monitoring in urban areas – a pilot study in Glasgow, UK. Internal Report, IR/12/027. Edinburgh: British Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Ó Dochartaigh, B. É., Bonsor, H. C. & Bricker, S. H. 2018. Improving understanding of shallow urban groundwater: the Quaternary groundwater system in Glasgow, UK. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. DOI: 10.1017/S1755691018000385.Google Scholar
Palmer, R. C. & Lewis, M. A. 1998. Assessment of groundwater vulnerability in England and Wales. In Robins, N. S. (ed.) Groundwater pollution, aquifer recharge and vulnerability, 130, 191198. London: Geological Society.Google Scholar
Paterson, E. 2011. Geochemical atlas for Scottish top soils. Aberdeen: Macaulay Land Use Research Institute.Google Scholar
Robins, N. S., MacDonald, A. M. & Allen, D. J. 2007. The vulnerability paradox for hard fractured Lower Palaeozoic and Precambrian rocks. In Witkowski, A. J. & Vrba, J. (eds) Selected papers from the Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment and Mapping International Conference, Ustron, Poland, 2004, 1319. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Rowell, D. L. 1994. Soil science: methods and applications. London: Longman Scientific and Technical.Google Scholar
SEPA. 2005. Drainage assessment – a guide for Scotland. Stirling: Scottish Environment Protection Agency.Google Scholar
Spijker, J., Groenenberg, J. E. & Comans, R. N. J. 2014. Evaluation of metals leaching from soils to groundwater using a geochemical modelling approach. In Oral Presentation Abstracts of the 30th International Conference of the Society for Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 30 June–3 July 2014, Newcastle University, UK, 1718.Google Scholar
Sposito, G. 1989. The chemistry of soils. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tait, N. G., Davison, R. M., Whittaker, J. J., Leharne, S. A. & Lerner, D. N. 2004. Borehole Optimisation System (BOS) – a GIS based risk analysis tool for optimizing the use of urban groundwater. Environmental Modelling and Software 19, 11111124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A. & Tellam, J. H. 2006. Modelling of recharge and pollutant fluxes to urban groundwaters. Science of the Total Environment 360, 158179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
US-EPA. 1996. Soil screening guidance: user's guide. EPA/540/R-96/018. Washington: US Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
Whalley, C., Hursthouse, A., Rowlatt, S., Iqbal-Zahid, P., Vaughan, H. & Durant, R. 1999. Chromium speciation in natural waters draining contaminated land, Glasgow, UK. Water Air and Soil Pollution 112, 389405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcke, W., Müller, S., Kanchanakool, N. & Zech, W. 1998. Urban soil contamination in Bangkok: heavy metal and aluminium partitioning in topsoils. Geoderma 86, 211228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods-Ballard, B., Kellagher, R., Martin, P., Jeffries, C., Bray, R. & Shaffer, P. 2007. The SuDS manual. C697. London: CIRIA.Google Scholar
Wuana, R. A. & Okieimen, F. E. 2011. Heavy metals in contaminated soils: a review of sources, chemistry, risks and best available strategies for remediation. International Scholarly Research Notices Ecology 2011, 120.Google Scholar

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Assessing threats to shallow groundwater quality from soil pollutants in Glasgow, UK: development of a new screening tool
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Assessing threats to shallow groundwater quality from soil pollutants in Glasgow, UK: development of a new screening tool
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Assessing threats to shallow groundwater quality from soil pollutants in Glasgow, UK: development of a new screening tool
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *