2016
DOI: 10.1111/gwmr.12192
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rethinking Conceptual Site Models in Groundwater Remediation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
(13 reference statements)
0
7
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Fuel release sites typically have sparse monitoring networks installed for reasons other than estimation of mass discharge. Thus, the accuracy of any method to estimate GW‐NSZD rates will depend on the location and spacing of the wells relative to the lateral variations in concentrations and groundwater discharge within the contaminant plume (Mackay et al ; Suthersan et al ), a matter discussed further later.…”
Section: Conceptual Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fuel release sites typically have sparse monitoring networks installed for reasons other than estimation of mass discharge. Thus, the accuracy of any method to estimate GW‐NSZD rates will depend on the location and spacing of the wells relative to the lateral variations in concentrations and groundwater discharge within the contaminant plume (Mackay et al ; Suthersan et al ), a matter discussed further later.…”
Section: Conceptual Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such difference between directly measured‐ and Darcy's law‐estimated groundwater fluxes raises the question of considering representative hydraulic gradient and conductivity. In line with Suthersan et al (), a transition has to be done from the old era of a simplified bulk averaged parameters and steady state, to a more detailed high spatial and time resolution consideration of hydrogeological processes. This emphasizes the necessity of direct in situ groundwater flux measurements, especially in heterogeneous aquifers and in surface water connected‐aquifers affected by transient groundwater flow conditions (ITRC ; Cremeans et al ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…O LIF representa uma ferramenta eficiente para identificação semiquantitativa de hidrocarbonetos na fase móvel, trapeado ou residual em sub-superfície, como demonstrado por diversos trabalhos, incluindo Löhmannsröben & Roch (2000), Lamb (2012), Isler et al (2013), Suthersan et al (2016). As vantagens do emprego LIF incluem menor tempo de investigação, aquisição de informações de modo contínuo no intervalo de profundidade investigado e possibilitar a modificação da malha de amostragem em razão dos resultados obtidos em tempo real durante a investigação, possibilitando um diagnóstico ambiental mais consistente e conclusivo.…”
Section: Lifunclassified