Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study
Although most recharge estimation studies apply multiple methods to identify the possible range in recharge values, many do not distinguish clearly enough between inherent uncertainty of the methods and other factors affecting the results. We investigated the additional value that can be gained from...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
Wiley
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/98422 |
| _version_ | 1855529407553208320 |
|---|---|
| author | Walker, D. Parkin, G. Schmitter, Petra S. Gowing, J. Tilahun, Seifu A. Haile, Alemseged Tamiru Yimam, A.Y. |
| author_browse | Gowing, J. Haile, Alemseged Tamiru Parkin, G. Schmitter, Petra S. Tilahun, Seifu A. Walker, D. Yimam, A.Y. |
| author_facet | Walker, D. Parkin, G. Schmitter, Petra S. Gowing, J. Tilahun, Seifu A. Haile, Alemseged Tamiru Yimam, A.Y. |
| author_sort | Walker, D. |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | Although most recharge estimation studies apply multiple methods to identify the possible range in recharge values, many do not distinguish clearly enough between inherent uncertainty of the methods and other factors affecting the results. We investigated the additional value that can be gained from multi-method recharge studies through insights into hydrogeological understanding, in addition to characterizing uncertainty. Nine separate groundwater recharge estimation methods, with a total of 17 variations, were applied at a shallow aquifer in northwest Ethiopia in the context of the potential for shallow groundwater resource development. These gave a wide range of recharge values from 45 to 814 mm/a. Critical assessment indicated that the results depended on what the recharge represents (actual, potential, minimum recharge or change in aquifer storage), and spatial and temporal scales, as well as uncertainties from application of each method. Important insights into the hydrogeological system were gained from this detailed analysis, which also confirmed that the range of values for actual recharge was reduced to around 280-430 mm/a. This study demonstrates that even when assumptions behind methods are violated, as they often are to some degree especially when data are limited, valuable insights into the hydrogeological system can be gained from application of multiple methods. |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace98422 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| publishDateRange | 2019 |
| publishDateSort | 2019 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| publisherStr | Wiley |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace984222025-10-14T15:09:09Z Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study Walker, D. Parkin, G. Schmitter, Petra S. Gowing, J. Tilahun, Seifu A. Haile, Alemseged Tamiru Yimam, A.Y. hydrogeology aquifers groundwater recharge groundwater flow water storage water resources development water levels water table uncertainty rain Although most recharge estimation studies apply multiple methods to identify the possible range in recharge values, many do not distinguish clearly enough between inherent uncertainty of the methods and other factors affecting the results. We investigated the additional value that can be gained from multi-method recharge studies through insights into hydrogeological understanding, in addition to characterizing uncertainty. Nine separate groundwater recharge estimation methods, with a total of 17 variations, were applied at a shallow aquifer in northwest Ethiopia in the context of the potential for shallow groundwater resource development. These gave a wide range of recharge values from 45 to 814 mm/a. Critical assessment indicated that the results depended on what the recharge represents (actual, potential, minimum recharge or change in aquifer storage), and spatial and temporal scales, as well as uncertainties from application of each method. Important insights into the hydrogeological system were gained from this detailed analysis, which also confirmed that the range of values for actual recharge was reduced to around 280-430 mm/a. This study demonstrates that even when assumptions behind methods are violated, as they often are to some degree especially when data are limited, valuable insights into the hydrogeological system can be gained from application of multiple methods. 2019-03 2018-12-04T04:49:21Z 2018-12-04T04:49:21Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/98422 en Open Access Wiley Walker, D.; Parkin, G.; Schmitter, Petra; Gowing, J.; Tilahun, S. A.; Haile, Alemseged T.; Yimam, A. Y. 2018. Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study. Groundwater, 14p. (Online first) doi: 10.1111/gwat.12801 |
| spellingShingle | hydrogeology aquifers groundwater recharge groundwater flow water storage water resources development water levels water table uncertainty rain Walker, D. Parkin, G. Schmitter, Petra S. Gowing, J. Tilahun, Seifu A. Haile, Alemseged Tamiru Yimam, A.Y. Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study |
| title | Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study |
| title_full | Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study |
| title_fullStr | Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study |
| title_short | Insights from a multi-method recharge estimation comparison study |
| title_sort | insights from a multi method recharge estimation comparison study |
| topic | hydrogeology aquifers groundwater recharge groundwater flow water storage water resources development water levels water table uncertainty rain |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/98422 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT walkerd insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy AT parking insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy AT schmitterpetras insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy AT gowingj insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy AT tilahunseifua insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy AT hailealemsegedtamiru insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy AT yimamay insightsfromamultimethodrechargeestimationcomparisonstudy |