Literature DB >> 28810511

Estimation of the proximity of private domestic wells to underground storage tanks: Oklahoma pilot study.

James W Weaver1, Andrew R Murray2, Fran V Kremer3.   

Abstract

For protecting drinking water supplies, the locations of areas with reliance on private domestic wells (hereafter referred to as "wells") and their relationship to contaminant sources need to be determined. A key resource in the U.S. was the 1990 Census where the source of domestic drinking water was a survey question. Two methods are developed to update estimates of the areal density of well use using readily accessible data. The first uses well logs reported to the states and the addition of housing units reported to the Census Bureau at the county, census tract and census block group scales. The second uses housing units reported to the Census and an estimated well use fraction. To limit the scope and because of abundant data, Oklahoma was used for a pilot project. The resulting well density estimates were consistent among spatial scales, and were statistically similar. High rates of well use were identified to the north and east of Oklahoma City, primarily in expanding cities located over a productive aquifer. In contrast, low rates of well use were identified in rural areas without public water systems and in Oklahoma's second largest city, Tulsa, each attributable to lack of suitable ground water. High densities of well use may be expected in rural areas without public water systems, expanding cities and suburbs, and legacy areas of well usage. The completeness of reported well logs was tested by counts from neighborhoods with known reliance on wells which showed reporting rates of 20% to 98%. Well densities in these neighborhoods were higher than the larger-scale estimates indicating that locally high densities typically exist within analysis units. A Monte Carlo procedure was used to determine that 27% of underground storage tanks that had at least one well within a typical distance of concern of 300m (1000ft). Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contaminated ground water; Geographical Information Systems; Private domestic wells; U.S. Census; Underground storage tanks

Year:  2017        PMID: 28810511      PMCID: PMC7391352          DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.124

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  11 in total

Review 1.  Dimensions and approaches for Third World city water security.

Authors:  Jan Lundqvist; Paul Appasamy; Prakash Nelliyat
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2003-12-29       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  Drinking water infrastructure and environmental disparities: evidence and methodological considerations.

Authors:  James VanDerslice
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Review of quantitative surveys of the length and stability of MTBE, TBA, and benzene plumes in groundwater at UST sites.

Authors:  John A Connor; Roopa Kamath; Kenneth L Walker; Thomas E McHugh
Journal:  Ground Water       Date:  2014-07-12       Impact factor: 2.671

4.  The American Cancer Society's Cancer Prevention Study 3 (CPS-3): Recruitment, study design, and baseline characteristics.

Authors:  Alpa V Patel; Eric J Jacobs; Daniela M Dudas; Peter J Briggs; Cari J Lichtman; Elizabeth B Bain; Victoria L Stevens; Marjorie L McCullough; Lauren R Teras; Peter T Campbell; Mia M Gaudet; Elizabeth G Kirkland; Melissa H Rittase; Nance Joiner; W Ryan Diver; Janet S Hildebrand; Nancy C Yaw; Susan M Gapstur
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  At the crossroads: Hazard assessment and reduction of health risks from arsenic in private well waters of the northeastern United States and Atlantic Canada.

Authors:  Yan Zheng; Joseph D Ayotte
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 7.963

6.  Meeting the public health challenge of protecting private wells: Proceedings and recommendations from an expert panel workshop.

Authors:  Mary A Fox; Keeve E Nachman; Breeana Anderson; Juleen Lam; Beth Resnick
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 7.963

7.  Description of calls from private well owners to a national well water hotline, 2013.

Authors:  Alison Ridpath; Ethel Taylor; Charlene Greenstreet; Margaret Martens; Heather Wicke; Colleen Martin
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 7.963

8.  Septic systems as sources of organic wastewater compounds in domestic drinking water wells in a shallow sand and gravel aquifer.

Authors:  Laurel A Schaider; Janet M Ackerman; Ruthann A Rudel
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-01-27       Impact factor: 7.963

Review 9.  U.S. drinking water challenges in the twenty-first century.

Authors:  Ronnie B Levin; Paul R Epstein; Tim E Ford; Winston Harrington; Erik Olson; Eric G Reichard
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Variability in the chemistry of private drinking water supplies and the impact of domestic treatment systems on water quality.

Authors:  E L Ander; M J Watts; P L Smedley; E M Hamilton; R Close; H Crabbe; T Fletcher; A Rimell; M Studden; G Leonardi
Journal:  Environ Geochem Health       Date:  2016-01-25       Impact factor: 4.609

View more
  1 in total

1.  Methods for Estimating Locations of Housing Units Served by Private Domestic Wells in the United States Applied to 2010.

Authors:  Andrew Murray; Alexander Hall; James Weaver; Fran Kremer
Journal:  J Am Water Resour Assoc       Date:  2021-10
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.