Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Assessment of aquifer vulnerability to contamination in Khanyounis Governorate, Gaza Strip—Palestine, using the DRASTIC model within GIS environment

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Arabian Journal of Geosciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Groundwater is a very important natural resource in Khanyounis Governorate (the study area) for water supply and development. Historically, the exploitation of aquifers in Khanyounis Governorate has been undertaken without proper concern for environmental impact. In view of the importance of quality groundwater, it might be expected that aquifer protection to prevent groundwater quality deterioration would have received due attention. In the long term, however, protection of groundwater resources is of direct practical importance because, once pollution of groundwater has been allowed to occur, the scale and persistence of such pollution makes restoration technically difficult and costly. In order to maintain basin aquifer as a source of water for the area, it is necessary to find out, whether certain locations in this groundwater basin are susceptible to receive and transmit contamination. This study aims to: (1) assess the vulnerability of the aquifer to contamination in Khanyounis governorate, (2) find out the groundwater vulnerable zones to contamination in the aquifer of the study area, and (3) provide a spatial analysis of the parameters and conditions under which groundwater may become contaminate. To achieve that, DRASTIC model within geographic information system (GIS) environment was applied. The model uses seven environmental parameters: depth of water table, net recharge, aquifer media, soil media, topography, impact of vadose zone, and hydraulic conductivity to evaluate aquifer vulnerability. Based on this model and by using ArcGIS 9.3 software, an attempt was made to create vulnerability maps for the study area. According to the DRASTIC model index, the study has shown that in the western part of the study area the vulnerability to contamination ranges between high and very high due to the relatively shallow water table with moderate to high recharge potential, and permeable soils. To the east of the previous part and in the south-eastern part, vulnerability to contamination is moderate. In the central and the eastern part, vulnerability to contamination is low due to depth of water table. Vulnerability analysis of the DRASTIC Model indicates that the highest risk of contamination of groundwater in the study area originates from the soil media. The impact of vadose zone, depth to water level, and hydraulic conductivity imply moderate risks of contamination, while net recharge, aquifer media, and topography impose a low risk of aquifer contamination. The coefficient of variation indicates that a high contribution to the variation of vulnerability index is made by the topography. Moderate contribution is made by the depth to water level, and net recharge, while impact of vadose zone, hydraulic conductivity, soil media, and Aquifer media are the least variable parameters. The low variability of the parameters implies a smaller contribution to the variation of the vulnerability index across the study area. Moreover, the “effective” weights of the DRASTIC parameters obtained in this study exhibited some deviation from that of the “theoretical” weights. Soil media and the impact of vadose zone were the most effective parameters in the vulnerability assessment because their mean “effective” weights were higher than their respective “theoretical” weights. The depth of water table showed that both “effective” and “theoretical” weights were equal. The rest of the parameters exhibit lower “effective” weights compared with the “theoretical” weights. This explains the importance of soil media and vadose layers in the DRASTIC model. Therefore, it is important to get the accurate and detailed information of these two specific parameters. The GIS technique has provided an efficient environment for analysis and high capabilities of handling large spatial data. Considering these results, DRASTIC model highlights as a useful tool that can be used by national authorities and decision makers especially in the agricultural areas applying chemicals and pesticides which are most likely to contaminate groundwater resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Added A, Hamza MH (2000) Evaluation of the vulnerability to pollution in Metline aquifer (North-East of Tunisia). Master Thesis, University of Tunis II, Geologic Department, Tunisia

  • Al Hallaq AH (2002) Groundwater resources depletion in Gaza strip: causes and effects, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cairo: Ain Shams University (in Arabic)

  • Albinet M, Margat J (1970) Groundwater pollution vulnerability mapping, 2nd series. Bull Bur Res Geologicques Minieres Bull BRGM 3(4):13–22, In French

    Google Scholar 

  • Aller L, Bennett T, Lehr JH, Petty R, Hackett G (1987) DRASTIC: a standardized system for evaluating groundwater pollution potential using hydro-geologic settings. US EPA, Cincinnati, p 622

    Google Scholar 

  • Almasri M (2008) Assessment of intrinsic vulnerability to contamination for Gaza coastal aquifer, Palestine. J Environ Manage 88:577–593, ELSEVIER

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atiqur R (2007) A GIS Based DRASTIC model for assessing groundwater vulnerability in shallow aquifer in Aligarh, India. Appl Geogr 28(1):32–53, Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • Baalousha H (2006) Vulnerability assessment for the Gaza Strip, Palestine using DRASTIC. Environ Geol 50:405–414, Springer Berlin/Heidelberg

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baalousha H (2010) Assessment of a groundwater quality monitoring network using vulnerability mapping and geostatistics: a case study from Heretaunga Plains, New Zealand. Agric Water Manage 97(2):240–246, Elsevier B. V

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babiker I, Mohamed M, Hiyama T, Kato K (2005) A GIS-based DRASTIC model for assessing aquifer vulnerability in Kakamigahara Heights, Gifu Prefecture, central Japan. Sci Total Environ 345(1–3):127–140, Elsevier B. V

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chae G, Kim K, Yun S, Kim K, Kim S, Choi B, Kim H, Rhee CW (2004) Hydrogeochemistry of alluvial groundwaters in an agricultural area: an implication for groundwater contamination susceptibility. Chemosphere 55(3):369–378, Elsevier Science Ltd

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corwin DL, Vaughan PL, Loague K (1997) Modeling nonpoint source pollutants in the vadose zone with GIS. Environ Sci Technol 31:2157–2175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans BM, Myers WL (1990) A GIS-based approach to evaluating regional groundwater pollution potential with DRASTIC. J Soil Water Conserv 45(2):242–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Fobe B, Goossens M (1990) The groundwater vulnerability map for the Flemish region: its principles and uses. Eng Geol 29:355–363, Elsevier B. V

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritch TG, McKnight CL, Yelderman JC, Arnold JG (2000) Environmental auditing: an aquifer vulnerability assessment of the paluxy aquifer, Central Texas, USA, using GIS and a modified DRASTIC approach. Environ Manage 25(3):337–345, Springer

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammouri N, El-Naqa A (2008) GIS based hydro-geological vulnerability mapping of groundwater resources in Jarash Area—Jordan. Geofisica Int 47(2):85–97, University of Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasiniaina F, Zhou J, Guoyi L (2010) Regional assessment of groundwater vulnerability in Tamtsag basin, Mongolia using drastic model. J Am Sci 6(11):65–78, Marsland Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatchitt J, Maddox GL (1993) Using DRASTIC methods to monitor the quality of Florida’s groundwater. Geo Info Syst 3(1):42–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibe KM, Nwankwor GI, Onyekuru SO (2001) Assessment of ground water vulnerability and its application to the development of protection strategy for the water supply aquifer in Owerri, Southeastern Nigeria. Environ Monit Assess 67(3):323–360, SpringerLink

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jha MK, Sabastian J (2005) Vulnerability study of pollution upon shallow groundwater using drastic/GIS, A paper presented in the 8th Annual International Conference and Exhibition in India, Map India 2005 Geomatics 2005, New Delhi, 7–9 February

  • Kabera T, Zhaohui L (2008) A GIS DRASTIC model for assessing groundwater in shallow aquifer in Yunchenge Basin, Shanix, China. J Appl Sci 3(3):195–205, Medwell Journals

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaçaroglu F (1999) Review of groundwater pollution and protection in Karst areas. Water Air Soil Pollut 113(1–4):337–356, SpringerLink

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lake IR, Lovett AA, Hiscock KM, Betson M, Foley A, Sunnenberg G, Evers S, Fletcher S (2003) Evaluating factors influencing groundwater vulnerability to nitrate pollution: developing the potential of GIS. J Environ Manage 68(3):315–328, Elsevier Science Ltd

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loague K, Corwin DL (1998) Regional-scale assessment of non-point source groundwater contamination. Hydrogeological Process 12(6):957–965, WILEY

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant JW (1994) GIS-based groundwater pollution hazard assessment: a critical review of the DRASTIC Model. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 60(9):1117–1127

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Agriculture (2008) Rainfall Data, Unpublished data, Gaza

  • Ministry of Agriculture, Central Lab. For Soil and Water (2000) Laboratory Reports-Soil Analysis, Unpublished Data, Gaza

  • Napolitano P, Fabbri AG (1996) Single parameter sensitivity analysis for aquifer vulnerability assessment using DRASTIC and SINTACS. In: Proceedings of the Vienna conference on HydroGIS 96: application of geographic information system in hydrology and water resources management. IAHS Pub. No. 235. pp 559–566

  • National Research Council (NRC) (1993) Groundwater vulnerability assessment: predictive relative contamination potential under conditions of uncertainty. National Academy, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (2008) The Population, Housing, Establishment Census 2007, Press Conference on the Preliminary Findings, (Population, Buildings, Housing Units and Establishments), Ramallah: Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics

  • Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) (2000) Summary of Palestinian hydrologic data, vol 2. PWA, Gaza

    Google Scholar 

  • Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) (2001) Coastal aquifer management program: integrated aquifer management, 1. PWA, Gaza

    Google Scholar 

  • Piscopo G (2001) Groundwater vulnerability map explanatory notes-Castlereagh Catchment, Parramatta NSW, Australia NSW Department of Land and water Conversation

  • Rahman A (2008) A GIS based DRASTIC model for assessing groundwater vulnerability in shallow aquifer in Aligarh, India. Appl Geogr 28(1):32–53, Elsevier

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runquist DC, Peters AJ, Di L, Rodekohr DA, Ehrman RL, Murray G (1991) Statewide groundwater-vulnerability assessment in Nebraska using the DRASTIC/GIS model. Geocarto Int 6(2):51–58, Taylor & Francis

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samey, Amina A, Gang C (2008) A GIS based DRASTIC Model for the assessment of groundwater vulnerability to pollution in West Mitidja: Blida City, Algeria. J Appl Sci 3(7):500–507, Medwell Journals

    Google Scholar 

  • Shukla S, Mostaghimi S, Shanholtz VO, Collins MC (1998) A GIS-based modeling approach for evaluating groundwater vulnerability to pesticides. J Am Water Resour Assoc 34(6):1275–1293, Wiley

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesoriero AJ, Inkpen EL, Voss FD (1998) Assessing ground-water vulnerability using logistic regression. Proceedings for the Source Water Assessment and Protection 98 Conference, Dallas, TX.

  • Thapinta A, Hudak P (2003) Use of geographic information systems for assessing groundwater pollution potential by pesticides in Central Thailand. Environ Int 29(1):87–93, Elsevier Science Ltd

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thirumalaivasan D, Karmegam M, Venugopal K (2003) AHP-DRASTIC: software for specific aquifer vulnerability assessment using DRASTIC model and GIS. Environ Monit Softw 18(7):645–656, Elsevier Science Ltd

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tovar M, Rodriguez R (2004) Vulnerability assessment of aquifers in an urban-rural environment and territorial ordering in Leon, Mexico. Geofisica Interncional 43(4):603–609

    Google Scholar 

  • US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (1993) A review of methods for assessing aquifer sensitivity and ground water vulnerability to pesticide contamination, US EPA, Office of Water, Washington

  • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2008) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Soil texture calculator. Available at: http://soils.usda.gov/technical/aids/investigations/texture

  • Van Duijvenbooden W, van Waegening HG (eds.) (1987) “Vulnerability of soil and groundwater to pollution”. In: Proceedings/Int. N. 38 of the International Conference, Netherlands, TNO Committee on Hydrological Research

  • Vias J, Andreo B, Perles M, Carrasco F (2005) A comparative study of four schemes for groundwater vulnerability mapping in a diffuse flow carbonate aquifer under Mediterranean climatic condition. Environ Geol 47(4):586–595, SpringerLink, Berlin/Heidelberg

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrba J, Zaporozec A (1994) Guidebook on mapping groundwater vulnerability. Int Contrib Hydrogeol 16:131

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade HF, York AC, Morey AE, Padmore JM, Rudo KM (1998) The impact of pesticide use on groundwater in North Carolina. J Environ Qual 27(5):1018–1026, American Society of Agronomy

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worrall F, Besien T (2005) The vulnerability of groundwater to pesticide contamination estimated directly from observations of presence or absence in wells. J Hydrol 303(1–4):92–107, Elsevier B. V

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worrall F, Besien T, Kolpin DD (2002) Groundwater vulnerability: interactions of chemical and site properties. Sci Total Environ 299:131–143, Elsevier B. V

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Akram Hassan Al Hallaq.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Al Hallaq, A.H., Elaish, B.S.A. Assessment of aquifer vulnerability to contamination in Khanyounis Governorate, Gaza Strip—Palestine, using the DRASTIC model within GIS environment. Arab J Geosci 5, 833–847 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-011-0284-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-011-0284-9

Keywords

Navigation