| Literature DB >> 32290197 |
Abstract
Shallow groundwater vulnerability mapping of the southwestern Nigeria sedimentary basin was assessed in this study with the aim of developing a regional-based vulnerability map for the area based on assessing the intrinsic ability of the aquifer overlying beds to filter and degrade migrating pollutant. The mapping includes using the established seven parameter-based DRASTIC vulnerability methodology. Furthermore, the developed vulnerability map was subjected to sensitivity analysis as a validation approach. This approach includes single-parameter sensitivity, map removal sensitivity, and DRASTIC parameter correlation analysis. Of the Dahomey Basin, 21% was classified as high-vulnerability and at risk of pollution, 61% as moderate vulnerability, and 18% as low vulnerability. Low vulnerability areas of the basin are characterised by thick vadose zones, low precipitation, compacted soils, high slopes, and high depth to groundwater. High-vulnerability areas which are prone to pollution are regions closer to the coast with flat slopes and frequent precipitation. Sensitivity of the vulnerability map show the greatest impact with the removal of topography, soil media, and depth to groundwater and least impact with the removal of the vadose zone. Due to the subjectivity of the DRASTIC method, the most important single parameter affecting the rating system of the Dahomey Basin DRASTIC map is the impact of the vadose zone, followed by the net recharge and hydraulic conductivity. The DRASTIC vulnerability map can be useful in planning and siting activities that generate pollutants (e.g., landfill, soak away, automobile workshops, and petrochemical industries) which pollute the environment, groundwater, and eventually impact the environmental health of the Dahomey Basin's inhabitants.Entities:
Keywords: DRASTIC; Dahomey Basin; groundwater; pollution sensitivity analysis; vulnerability mapping
Year: 2020 PMID: 32290197 PMCID: PMC7177962 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17072609
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Map of Dahomey Basin showing rock types, stratigraphy succession, and location within Nigeria.
Sources of data employed in the DRASTIC computation.
| Parameters | Description | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Depth–to–water | Represents the depth from the ground surface to the water table. Deeper water table implies lesser chance for pollution to occur. | Data were generated from the study area and from local drillers’ directories. |
| Net recharge | Represents the amount of water that penetrates the vadose zone and reaches the water table. Recharge water represents the vehicle for transporting pollutants. | Generated from rainfall data from Nigeria’s Metrological Agency and previous calculated evaporation and run-off. |
| Aquifer media | Refers to the saturated zone material properties, which controls the pollutants’ attenuation processes. | Field studies and interpretation of geological map of Nigeria on scale 1:50,000. |
| Soil media | Represents the uppermost weathered portion of the vadose zone and controls the amount of recharge that can infiltrate downwards. | Generated from field and laboratory studies. |
| Topography | Refers to the slope of the land surface. | Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the basin available at the Global Land Cover Facility (GLCF) of Maryland University and topography map. |
| Impact of vadose zone | This is defined by the vadose zone material, which controls the passage and attenuation of the contaminated material to the saturated zone. | Interpretation of the geological map of Nigeria from NGSA. |
| Hydraulic conductivity | Indicates the ability of the aquifer to transmit water, thus determining the rate of flow of the contaminants within the ground water system. | Derived from previous literature |
Dahomey Basin DRASTIC parameters and DRASTIC Index (DI).
|
|
|
|
| 1.5–4.5 m | 9 | 45 |
| 4.5–9 m | 7 | 35 |
| 9–15 m | 5 | 25 |
| 15–23 m | 3 | 15 |
| 23–31 m | 2 | 10 |
| >31 m | 1 | 5 |
|
|
|
|
| >250 mm/y | 10 | 40 |
| 50–100 mm/y | 3 | 12 |
| 0–50 mm/y | 1 | 4 |
|
|
|
|
| Sand and gravel | 8 | 24 |
| Massive sandstone | 7 | 21 |
| Bedded sandstone and limestone | 6 | 18 |
|
|
|
|
| Sandstone | 9 | 18 |
| Alluvium | 7 | 14 |
| Sandy loam | 6 | 12 |
| Loam | 5 | 10 |
|
|
|
|
| 3–4 m | 8 | 8 |
| 4–5 m | 7 | 7 |
| 5–6 m | 6 | 6 |
| 6–10 m | 5 | 5 |
| 10–12 m | 4 | 4 |
| 12–16 m | 3 | 3 |
| 16–18 m | 2 | 2 |
| >18 m | 1 | 1 |
|
|
|
|
| Sand and gravel | 8 | 40 |
| Gravel sand | 7 | 35 |
| Limestone, gravel sand and clay | 6 | 30 |
| Sandy silt | 5 | 25 |
| Gravel and sandstone | 4 | 20 |
|
|
|
|
| >2000 gpd/ft2 | 10 | 30 |
| 1000–2000 gpd/ft2 | 8 | 24 |
Net recharges estimation from precipitation and runoff (mm/year).
| Parameters | Lagos | Ijebu-Ode | Abeokuta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rainfall (mm) | 1800 | 1600 | 1200 |
| ETR (mm) | 1367 1 | 1276.0 2 | 1133 2 |
| Run-off (mm) | 352 3 | 48.6 | 48.6 4 |
| Total recharge (mm) | 81 | 276 | 18.4 |
1 [40].2 [41].3 [47].4 [48].
Figure 2Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the Dahomey Basin showing surface water bodies in black.
Figure 3Annual rainfall of three areas of the Dahomey Basin.
Rating of net recharge for the Dahomey Basin.
| Location | Dahomey Recharge | DRASTIC Rating | DI × 4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lagos | 81 | 5 | 20 |
| Ijebu-Ode | 276 | 10 | 40 |
| Abeokuta | 18.4 | 2 | 8 |
Figure 4Maps of the seven DRASTIC parameters.
Figure 5DRASTIC vulnerability maps of Dahomey Basin.
Statistics of the DRASTIC parameters map.
| Descriptive Statistics | Parameters | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D | R | A | S | T | I | C | |
| Min | 5 | 8 | 18 | 10 | 1 | 15 | 12 |
| Max | 45 | 40 | 24 | 18 | 8 | 40 | 30 |
| Mean | 21.6 | 30 | 21 | 15.5 | 3.6 | 31.6 | 26.7 |
| SD | 15.7 | 12 | 1.9 | 2.7 | 2.8 | 8.4 | 6.3 |
| CV | 72.7% | 40% | 91% | 17.4% | 77.8% | 26.6% | 23.6% |
Statistics of map removal sensitivity.
| Co-Efficient of Variation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | Mean | Min | Max | SD | CV |
| D | 12.12 | 10.14 | 13.74 | 1.26 | 10.4% |
| R | 11.01 | 8.10 | 13.24 | 1.25 | 11.3% |
| A | 11.76 | 9.94 | 12.29 | 0.61 | 5.1% |
| S | 12.48 | 11.58 | 13.12 | 0.46 | 3.6% |
| T | 13.92 | 13.55 | 14.18 | 0.24 | 1.7% |
| I | 10.73 | 8.28 | 11.83 | 0.93 | 8.6% |
| C | 11.31 | 10.22 | 12.22 | 0.48 | 4.2% |
Statistics of the single parameters’ sensitivity analysis.
| Effective Weight | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | DRASTIC Weight | % DRASTIC Weight | Mean | Min | Max | SD |
| D | 5 | 21.7 | 13 | 3.2 | 24.8 | 7.5 |
| R | 4 | 17.4 | 19.7 | 6.2 | 37.1 | 7.5 |
| A | 3 | 13 | 15.2 | 11.9 | 26 | 3.6 |
| S | 2 | 8.7 | 10.8 | 6.9 | 16.2 | 2.7 |
| T | 1 | 4.3 | 2.2 | 0.6 | 4.4 | 1.4 |
| I | 5 | 21.7 | 21.5 | 14.7 | 36 | 5.5 |
| C | 3 | 13 | 17.8 | 12.3 | 24.3 | 2.9 |
Pairwise correlations matrix of the DRASTIC parameters.
| Parameters | Mean | SD | D | R | A | S | T | I | C |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D | 13.01 | 7.57 | 1.00 | ||||||
| R | 19.74 | 7.51 | 0.38 | 1.00 | |||||
| A | 15.24 | 3.68 | 0.45 | 0.14 | 1.00 | ||||
| S | 10.86 | 2.80 | −0.35 | −0.02 | 0.34 | 1.00 | |||
| T | 2.21 | 1.42 | 0.92 | 0.43 | 0.47 | −0.30 | 1.00 | ||
| I | 21.50 | 5.54 | 0.27 | 0.06 | 0.89 | 0.52 | 0.19 | 1.00 | |
| C | 17.88 | 2.91 | 0.52 | 0.47 | 0.39 | 0.49 | 0.45 | 0.44 | 1.00 |