Search

• We summarize field observations of 14C age showing obvious GW aging in two basins. • Pumping causes not only rejuvenation, but also aging of GW in layered basins. • Although GW rejuvenation is larger in area, aging is greater in magnitude. • We identify two new mechanisms of pumping-induced GW aging in layered basins. • Topography-driven flow is the main cause of GW aging in the discharge area. As an indicator of the renewability of a groundwater basin, the spatial distribution of groundwater age has attracted intensive research. As reported in the literature, 3H measurements in 74 US aquifers showed pumping-induced groundwater rejuvenation, whereas 14C ages in two heavily developed aquifers in France and China indicated pumping-induced groundwater aging. Unfortunately, the mechanisms leading to the seemingly opposite behavior of pumping-induced aging and rejuvenation remain unclear. In this study, we conducted numerical simulations of groundwater age in layered aquifer-aquitard systems under different pumping scenarios and aquitard permeability to show that pumping-induced groundwater rejuvenation and aging always occur simultaneously. Groundwater rejuvenation widely occurs throughout the basin wherever the well is located, whereas groundwater aging mainly occurs to the downgradient parts of the basin. Although groundwater rejuvenation is larger in area, groundwater aging is greater in magnitude, and the magnitude of aging increases with pumping intensity and duration. Moreover, when pumping occurs in the discharge area, aging could occur in almost the entire aquifer to the downgradient of the pumping well, and the magnitude of aging is larger. The large area and large magnitude of aging in the discharge area is a direct result of upward leakage of old groundwater from underlying aquitards/aquifers, which is controlled by the topography-driven groundwater flow. By demonstrating the importance of topography-driven groundwater flow and underlying formations in groundwater age redistribution, this study has implications for determining the bottom of a groundwater flow and solute transport model and interpretation of various tracers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We separate the roles of upward discharge and aquitards in flowing artesian zone. • Basinal flow are coupled with well hydraulics to examine hydraulics of flowing wells. • A low K aquitard causes a large flowing artesian zone but low stable discharge rate. • Baseflow reduction is the main source of groundwater derived in flowing wells. Causes and water sources of flowing artesian wells attracted the interest of many hydrogeologists throughout history, however, a quantitative model that satisfactorily considers the roles of topography, groundwater recharge/discharge and aquitards on hydraulics of flowing wells is still lacking. In this study, a three-layer river-valley basin with a recharge boundary is used to obtain the basinal flow field, spatial distribution and transient discharge rates of flowing wells. Even if there is an aquitard separating the unconfined and the confined aquifers, groundwater discharge to the river still plays a critical role in occurrence of flowing wells. An aquitard with lower permeability would enlarge the zone with flowing wells, implying that flowing wells are more likely to occur in basins with continuous aquitards. By comparing flowpaths and inter-aquifer leakages before and after numerically installing a flowing well in a three-layer basin, we find decreased upward leakage in the discharge limb plays a much larger role than increased downward leakage in the recharge limb in the stable discharge rate of a flowing well. This recognition is different from previous studies where the stable discharge rate is supported only by downward leakage from the overlying aquifer. By considering well hydraulics in a basinal background flow field, this study improves understanding of the mechanisms of flowing artesian wells and the interaction of surface water and deep groundwater, indicating that flowing wells are valuable for sampling deep groundwater representative of deep and old groundwater in the discharge area of a basin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Three alternative conceptual models were constructed. • Each model was calibrated automatically and evaluated statistically. • Hydrogeological interpretations are the basis for the conceptualisation. • Modelling objectives determine the complexity of the conceptual models. Three alternative groundwater flow models were evaluated for Beijing Plain, China. The first model (AM1) was constructed with the "thin layer approach" in which all 9 model layers, including five aquifers separated by four aquitards, are continuously present in the same model area. The second model (AM2) was constructed with the "quasi-3D approach" in which the hydrogeological formations were classified into five aquifer units consisting of mixed permeable and semi-permeable layers at different depth ranges. The third model (AM3) was constructed with the "true layer approach" in which aquifers and aquitards were defined according to hydrostratigraphic properties, and model layers are absent in the area where corresponding hydrogeological formations intersect bedrocks. All 3 models were calibrated with the parameter optimization method under the steady state flow condition with the same hydrological stresses and observation data. All three models fit to observations well with the similar calibration criteria values. Furthermore, AIC and BIC information criteria could not distinguish three alternative models. Only KIC could identify AM3 as the best model. Major differences of the three alternative models were identified from a hydrogeological perspective. The AM1 model depicted an illusion through contour maps that groundwater was present everywhere in the deep aquifers. The model computed larger vertical leakages because more abstraction rates were assigned improperly in deep aquifers. The AM2 model was able to compute regional groundwater balances and depicted spatial groundwater level variations. However, the AM2 model computed longer groundwater travel times around the wellfield and should not be used for the delineation of the well field protection zones and contaminant transport simulation. The AM3 model could not only compute the regional groundwater balances and describe spatial groundwater distribution in deep confined aquifers, but also delineate the capture zone of the wellfield. It can therefore be used for simulating contaminant transport. Furthermore, the AM3 model is suitable to construct a coupled regional and local flow model for simulating a managed aquifer recharge scheme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]