A Vulnerability Evaluation of the Phreatic Water in the Plain Area of the Junggar Basin, Xinjiang Based on the VDEAL Model

Author： Jia Ruiliang Zhou Jinlong Zhou Yinzhu Li Qiao Gao Yexin

Publisher： MDPI

E-ISSN： 2071-1050|6|12|8604-8617

ISSN： 2071-1050

Source： Sustainability, Vol.6, Iss.12, 2014-11, pp. : 8604-8617

Access to resources Favorite

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

A VDEAL (V is the lithology of the vadose zone, D is the groundwater depth, E is the degree of groundwater exploitation, A is the aquifer characteristics and L is the land use pattern.) model, which is suitable for a vulnerability evaluation of the groundwater in arid inland areas, and that is based on the GOD (G is the groundwater status, O is overburden feature and D is groundwater depth) method and DRASTIC (D is the depth of water-table, R is the net recharge, A is the aquifer media, S is the soil media, T is the topography, I is the impact of the vadose and C is the conductivity of the aquifer.) model is proposed in this paper. Five indicators were selected by reference to the DRAV (D is the depth of water-table, R is the net recharge, A is the aquifer media and V is the impact of the vadose.) and VLDA (V is the lithology of the vadose zone , L is the land use pattern, D is the groundwater depth and A is the aquifer characteristics and.) models, namely, the lithology of the vadose zone (V), the groundwater depth (D), the degree of groundwater exploitation (E), the aquifer characteristics (A) and the land use pattern (L). According to monitoring data from 2003 and 2011, the variations of phreatic water quality in the plain area of the Junggar Basin were divided into three types: the water quality may have deteriorated, be unchanged or improved. Four groups of indicator weights were configured to calculate the vulnerability index using the VDEAL model. The changes of phreatic water quality were then compared against the vulnerability index. The normalized weights of V, D, E, A, and L were respectively 0.15, 0.25, 0.10, 0.10, and 0.40; this is according to the principle that the sampling sites of deteriorated water quality are generally distributed in a high-vulnerability region, and the sites of unchanged and improved water quality are distributed in middle vulnerability, low vulnerability and invulnerable regions. The evaluation results of phreatic water vulnerability in the plain area of the Junggar Basin based on the VDEAL model are as follows. The regions with vulnerability indexes of 2.0–4.0, 4.0–6.0, 6.0–8.0, and >8.0, respectively account for 2.2%, 61.0%, 35.9%, and 0.9% of the region. The regions with a higher vulnerability are mainly distributed in the farmlands and the sand and gravel regions with a phreatic water depth of <3 m. Moreover, the regions with a lower vulnerability are generally located in the non-irrigation regions with a sandy loam or silty fine sand and a phreatic water depth of >6 m. The phreatic water in these regions is deficient with regard to the infiltration of irrigation water and the recharge from precipitation.