Detecting Inter-Aquifer Leakage in Areas with Limited Data Using Hydraulics and Multiple Environmental Tracers, Including 4He, 36Cl/Cl, 14Cand87sr/86Sr
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Report to Office of Water Science, Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation, Brisbane
Lake Eyre Basin Springs Assessment Project Hydrogeology, cultural history and biological values of springs in the Barcaldine, Springvale and Flinders River supergroups, Galilee Basin and Tertiary springs of western Queensland 2016 Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation Prepared by R.J. Fensham, J.L. Silcock, B. Laffineur, H.J. MacDermott Queensland Herbarium Science Delivery Division Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation PO Box 5078 Brisbane QLD 4001 © The Commonwealth of Australia 2016 The Queensland Government supports and encourages the dissemination and exchange of its information. The copyright in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia (CC BY) licence Under this licence you are free, without having to seek permission from DSITI or the Commonwealth, to use this publication in accordance with the licence terms. You must keep intact the copyright notice and attribute the source of the publication. For more information on this licence visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en Disclaimer This document has been prepared with all due diligence and care, based on the best available information at the time of publication. The department holds no responsibility for any errors or omissions within this document. Any decisions made by other parties based on this document are solely the responsibility of those parties. Information contained in this document is from a number of sources and, as such, does not necessarily represent government or departmental policy. If you need to access this document in a language other than English, please call the Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS National) on 131 450 and ask them to telephone Library Services on +61 7 3170 5725 Citation Fensham, R.J., Silcock, J.L., Laffineur, B., MacDermott, H.J. -
Hydrochemical Zoning and Chemical Evolution of the Deep Upper Jurassic Thermal Groundwater Reservoir Using Water Chemical and Environmental Isotope Data
water Article Hydrochemical Zoning and Chemical Evolution of the Deep Upper Jurassic Thermal Groundwater Reservoir Using Water Chemical and Environmental Isotope Data Florian Heine * , Kai Zosseder and Florian Einsiedl * Chair of Hydrogeology, Department of Civil, Geo and Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Arcisstr. 21, 80333 Munich, Germany; [email protected] * Correspondence: fl[email protected] (F.H.); [email protected] (F.E.); Tel.: +49-(89)-289-25833 (F.E.) Abstract: A comprehensive hydrogeological understanding of the deep Upper Jurassic carbonate aquifer, which represents an important geothermal reservoir in the South German Molasse Basin (SGMB), is crucial for improved and sustainable groundwater resource management. Water chemical data and environmental isotope analyses of δD, δ18O and 87Sr/86Sr were obtained from groundwater of 24 deep Upper Jurassic geothermal wells and coupled with a few analyses of noble gases (3He/4He, 40Ar/36Ar) and noble gas infiltration temperatures. Hierarchical cluster analysis revealed three major water types and allowed a hydrochemical zoning of the SGMB, while exploratory factor analyses identified the hydrogeological processes affecting the water chemical composition of the thermal water. Water types 1 and 2 are of Na-[Ca]-HCO3-Cl type, lowly mineralised and have been recharged 87 86 under meteoric cold climate conditions. Both water types show Sr/ Sr signatures, stable water isotopes values and calculated apparent mean residence times, which suggest minor water-rock Citation: Heine, F.; Zosseder, K.; interaction within a hydraulically active flow system of the Northeastern and Southeastern Central Einsiedl, F. Hydrochemical Zoning Molasse Basin. This thermal groundwater have been most likely subglacially recharged in the south and Chemical Evolution of the Deep of the SGMB in close proximity to the Bavarian Alps with a delineated northwards flow direction. -
Heritage of the Birdsville and Strzelecki Tracks
Department for Environment and Heritage Heritage of the Birdsville and Strzelecki Tracks Part of the Far North & Far West Region (Region 13) Historical Research Pty Ltd Adelaide in association with Austral Archaeology Pty Ltd Lyn Leader-Elliott Iris Iwanicki December 2002 Frontispiece Woolshed, Cordillo Downs Station (SHP:009) The Birdsville & Strzelecki Tracks Heritage Survey was financed by the South Australian Government (through the State Heritage Fund) and the Commonwealth of Australia (through the Australian Heritage Commission). It was carried out by heritage consultants Historical Research Pty Ltd, in association with Austral Archaeology Pty Ltd, Lyn Leader-Elliott and Iris Iwanicki between April 2001 and December 2002. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the South Australian Government or the Commonwealth of Australia and they do not accept responsibility for any advice or information in relation to this material. All recommendations are the opinions of the heritage consultants Historical Research Pty Ltd (or their subconsultants) and may not necessarily be acted upon by the State Heritage Authority or the Australian Heritage Commission. Information presented in this document may be copied for non-commercial purposes including for personal or educational uses. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires written permission from the South Australian Government or the Commonwealth of Australia. Requests and enquiries should be addressed to either the Manager, Heritage Branch, Department for Environment and Heritage, GPO Box 1047, Adelaide, SA, 5001, or email [email protected], or the Manager, Copyright Services, Info Access, GPO Box 1920, Canberra, ACT, 2601, or email [email protected]. -
Groundwater Storage Dynamics in the World's
Interactive comment on “Groundwater storage dynamics in the world’s large aquifer systems from GRACE: uncertainty and role of extreme precipitation” by Mohammad Shamsudduha and Richard G. Taylor Marc Bierkens (Referee #1) [email protected] Received and published: 2 January 2020 Reviewer’s comments are italicised, and our responses (R) and revisions (REVISION) are provided in normal fonts. General comments The authors use the results of three different GRACE-based TWS methods and 4 Land surface models to generate an ensemble of groundwater storage anomalies. These are subsequently analyzed by a non-parametric statistical method to separate seasonal signals from non-linear trends and residuals. The main message of the paper is that trends in GWS anomalies (ΔGWS), if existing, are non-linear in the vast majority of main aquifer systems and that rainfall anomalies play an important role in explaining these non-linear trends. I enjoyed reading the paper. I find that it is a well-written with an important message that deserves publication. However, I have a few comments. Moderate comments: 1. I find the lack of reference to estimates based on global hydrological models (GHMS) remarkable. The first spatially distributed global assessment of depletion rates where based on such models and, albeit indirect, should be used in the discussion. They are the basis for the “narratives on global groundwater depletion” that are mentioned in the discussion and the abstract (See https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748- 9326/ab1a5f/meta for an overview of these studies). This is the more remarkable, given that the authors do use Land Surface Models (LSMs) to estimate ΔGWS from GRACE ΔTWS. -
Galilee Basin Thermal Coal Prohibition Bill Submission
Galilee Basin Thermal Coal Prohibition Bill Submission This submission relates to the proposed Bill for an Act to prohibit the mining of thermal coal in the Galilee Basin. The Black-throated Finch Recovery Team is a community-based group whose mission is to secure the conservation of the Black-throated Finch (southern subspecies) Poephila cincta cincta which is listed as Endangered under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) as well as under Queensland and New South Wales state legislation. The proposed Bill is relevant to the conservation of the Black-throated Finch because of the vital importance of the Galilee Basin as a stronghold for the species. Portions of the Galilee Basin provide high quality habitat in narrow-leaf ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra) and other woodlands and these areas support the highest know densities and largest known surviving populations of the bird. The only other area known to support relatively large populations is the Townsville Coastal Plain where the species is threatened by urban expansion, intensive livestock grazing and vegetation change, including weed invasion. The species is rare, if not extinct, further south in Queensland and in New South Wales. Open-cut and underground coal mining present a major threat to the populations of Black- throated Finch in the Galilee Basin. These threats relate to mine footprints themselves, which can be substantial, especially in the case of open-cut mining, and to the direct and indirect effects of mining-related infrastructure. Offsets, as proposed for as part of the conditions for approval of developments, such as the Carmichael Mine, do not compensate for loss of habitat and populations of Black-throated Finch and there is the very real risk that there are inadequate areas suitable for offsets. -
Why Do Coal Mines Need So Much Water? 13 April 2017, by Ellen Moon
Why do coal mines need so much water? 13 April 2017, by Ellen Moon as a water-based slurry for further processing. Mines also need water for things like equipment maintenance, and for consumption by the mining communities themselves. In total, about 250 litres of freshwater are required per tonne of coal produced. This freshwater makes up around a quarter of the total water demand during coal production, the rest being "worked" (recycled) water. Coal mines, such as this one near Bowen, use water for What other industries use lots of water? everything from equipment cooling to dust management. Credit: CSIRO, CC BY The Great Artesian Basin is one of the largest underground water reservoirs in the world. It underlies 22% of Australia's land area, beneath the arid and semi-arid parts of Queensland, New South From accidental water spills into coastal wetlands, Wales, South Australia and the Northern Territory. to proposed taxpayer-funded loans, Adani's planned Carmichael coal mine and the associated Its aquifers supply water to around 200 towns or Abbot Point coal terminal can't keep out of the settlements, most of which are allowed to draw news at the moment. between 100 and 500 million litres (ML) per year. Last week, the granting of an unlimited 60-year water licence to the Carmichael mine, in Queensland's Galilee Basin, rattled environmentalists, farmers and community groups alike. In a region experiencing prolonged drought conditions, the provision of unlimited water for one of the largest mining operations in the Southern Hemisphere seems like a commitment at odds with current climate predictions. -
5.4 Galilee Basin Survey 2012 Report.Doc Occur in Proximity to Intact Woodlands.) Waterhole Watches Were Not Used (More Useful in the Dry Season)
bulk email and a handout in Appendix 1 Notices. We were agreeably surprised at the positive response. Many landholders were concerned about the impact of mining on their properties, and made us very welcome. We were given the use of showers and toilets etc. in some delightful campsites. Paola Cassini at Bimblebox even provided us with great meals. One offer of hospitality came directly from the ABC Breakfast Session, and another as a response to the first bulk email in Appendix 1 Survey personnel Sixteen volunteers from BirdLife Southern Queensland (14) and BirdLife Townsville (2) took part. No members from the BTR Recovery Team, BirdLife Capricornia or BirdLife North Queensland were available. The volunteers worked as two independent groups. See Appendix 2 The Team Survey area Initially it had been planned to do three 500m surveys and twelve 2HA Atlas plus Habitat surveys each morning, and optional incidental searches in the afternoons. It soon became apparent that organisation time and distances between sites permitted less surveys – in many cases the 2HA and Habitat surveys were omitted. Survey Sites See list in Appendix 3 Survey Sites. In the Galilee Basin, BTFs had been found in grassy, open woodlands and forests of Regional Ecosystem 10.5.5 - Eucalyptus melanophloia (Silver-leafed Ironbark) open woodland on sand plains. When it became apparent that many of the property managers of the ten properties with this RE were happy to give permission for surveys, it was decided to concentrate on these. It was found that the Stock Routes in the area were all unfenced, and largely unused, so little attention was given to them, and there was no time for the rail corridors, National Parks or Nature Refuges. -
Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition)
Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition) Bill 2018 IEEFA’s submission to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee inquiry into the Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition) Bill 2018 January 2019 Tim Buckley, Director of Energy Finance Studies, Australasia ([email protected]) Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition) Bill 2018 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 3 1. The IEA Sustainable Development Scenario: Coal’s Collapse ............................... 5 2. Financial Institutions Pivot Away from Coal ............................................................... 9 2.1 Japan ..................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 South Korea ........................................................................................................................... 11 3. India’s Pivot to Renewables........................................................................................12 4. Inferior Galilee Coal Quality ......................................................................................14 4.1 6,000kcal Thermal Coal at US$100/t .................................................................................. 14 4.2 5,500kcal Thermal Coal at a 2018 Low .............................................................................. 15 5. Other Risks .....................................................................................................................18 -
Groundwater and Global Change: Trends, Opportunities and Challenges
SIDE PUBLICATIONS SERIES :01 Groundwater and Global Change: Trends, Opportunities and Challenges Jac van der Gun UNITED NATIONS WORLD WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME Published in 2012 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 7, Place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France © UNESCO 2012 All rights reserved ISBN 978-92-3-001049-2 The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. Photographs: Cover: © africa924 / Shutterstock © Rolffimages / Dreamstime © Frontpage / Shutterstock.com p.i: © holgs / iStockphoto p.ii: © Andrew Zarivny p.2: © Aivolie / Shutterstock p.4: © Jorg Hackemann / Shutterstock p.17: © Jac van der Gun p.31: © Aivolie / Shutterstock p.33: © Hilde Vanstraelen Original concept (cover and layout design) of series: MH Design / Maro Haas Layout: Pica Publishing LTD, London–Paris / Roberto Rossi Printed by: UNESCO Printed in France Groundwater and global change: Trends, opportunities and challenges Author: Jac van der Gun Contributors: Luiz Amore (National Water Agency, Brazil), Greg Christelis (Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, Nambia), Todd Jarvis (Oregon State University, USA), Neno Kukuric (UNESCO-IGRAC) Júlio Thadeu Kettelhut (Ministry of the Environment, Brazil), Alexandros Makarigakis (UNESCO, Ethiopia), Abdullah Abdulkader Noaman (Sana’a University, Yemen), Cheryl van Kempen (UNESCO-IGRAC), Frank van Weert (UNESCO-IGRAC). -
Chapter 22 Conclusion and Recommendations
Chapter 22 Conclusion and recommendations November 2013 Table of contents 22. Conclusion and recommendations ........................................................................................... 22-1 22.1 Purpose of this chapter .................................................................................................. 22-1 22.2 Rationale for NGBR Project ........................................................................................... 22-1 22.3 Economic justification .................................................................................................... 22-2 22.4 Project impacts .............................................................................................................. 22-2 22.4.1 Land use and tenure ........................................................................................... 22-2 22.4.2 Topography, geology, soils and land contamination .......................................... 22-3 22.4.3 Nature conservation ........................................................................................... 22-3 22.4.4 Matters of national environmental significance .................................................. 22-4 22.4.5 Greenhouse gas ................................................................................................. 22-5 22.4.6 Cultural heritage ................................................................................................. 22-5 22.4.7 Social and economic impacts ............................................................................ -
VARIATION of CONDITIONS ATTACHED to APPROVAL Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Infrastructure Project, Queensland (EPBC 2010/5736)
~£~" _A_u_st_r_a_Ji_a_D_G_o_V_C_I'"_D__ffi _e_"_t ~ Department of the Environment and Energy VARIATION OF CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO APPROVAL Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Infrastructure Project, Queensland (EPBC 2010/5736) This decision to vary conditions of approval is made under section 143 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Approved action Person to whom the Adani Mining Pty Ltd approval is granted ACN: 145455205 Approved action To develop an open cut and underground coal mine, 189 km rail link and associated infrastructure approximately 160 km north west of Clermont in central Queensland [see EPBC Act referral 2010/5736 and approved variations dated 19 April 2012, 9 October 2012 and 24 July 2013] Variation Variation of conditions The variation is: attached to approval Delete conditions 8 and 11 attached to the approval and substitute with the conditions specified below. Delete the definition of the Galilee Basin Strategic Offset Strategy. Insert a new definition of Galilee Basin Offset Strategy as specified below. Date of effect This variation has effect on the date the instrument is signed Person authorised to make decision Name and position Chris Videroni Acting Assistant Secretary Assessme and Post Approvals Branch Signature Date of decision Varied condition As varied on 8. The approval holder must legally secure the minimum offset areas detailed in Table 1 for the date of the rail (west) component within four years of commencement of the specified component of this notice the action. The approval holder must legally secure the minimum offset areas for the other specified components detailed in Table 1 within two years of commencement of those specified components of the action. -
Environment Management Manual
Procedure Document No. 2617 Document Title Environment Management Manual Area HSE Issue Date 23 August 2017 Major Process Environment Sub Process Management Review Authoriser Jacqui McGill – Asset President Version Number 16 Olympic Dam 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Glossary and defined terms ................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Purpose and scope .............................................................................................................. 3 1.3 How to use the EPMP .......................................................................................................... 4 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ..................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Key legal requirements ........................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Compliance with routine reporting obligations ..................................................................... 6 2.3 Amendments to the EPMP ................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Environmental outcomes and criteria .................................................................................. 7 2.5 Enforcement process (Indenture and Mining Code) ............................................................ 7 2.6 ALARA and best practicable