Ver registro no DEDALUS
Exportar registro bibliográfico

Metrics


Metrics:

Methodology to assess groundwater pollution conditions (current and pre-disposition) in the São Carlos and Ribeirão Preto regions, Brazil (2009)

  • Authors:
  • USP affiliated authors: ZUQUETTE, LAZARO VALENTIN - EESC ; PEJON, OSNI JOSE - EESC
  • USP Schools: EESC; EESC
  • DOI: 10.1007/s10064-008-0173-y
  • Subjects: POLUIÇÃO; MAPEAMENTO GEOLÓGICO
  • Language: Inglês
  • Imprenta:
  • Source:
  • Acesso online ao documento

    Online accessDOI or search this record in
    Informações sobre o DOI: 10.1007/s10064-008-0173-y (Fonte: oaDOI API)
    • Este periódico é de assinatura
    • Este artigo NÃO é de acesso aberto
    • Cor do Acesso Aberto: closed
    Informações sobre o Citescore
  • Título: Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment

    ISSN: 1435-9529

    Citescore - 2017: 2

    SJR - 2017: 0.896

    SNIP - 2017: 1.229


  • Exemplares físicos disponíveis nas Bibliotecas da USP
    BibliotecaCód. de barrasNúm. de chamada
    EESC31100136117-SPROD-011858
    How to cite
    A citação é gerada automaticamente e pode não estar totalmente de acordo com as normas

    • ABNT

      ZUQUETTE, Lázaro Valentin; PALMA, Janaina Barrios; PEJON, Osni José. Methodology to assess groundwater pollution conditions (current and pre-disposition) in the São Carlos and Ribeirão Preto regions, Brazil. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, Heidelberg, v. 68, n. 1, p. 117-136, 2009. Disponível em: < http://www.springerlink.com.w10077.dotlib.com.br/content/b27r5779676x1t76/fulltext.pdf"_ > DOI: 10.1007/s10064-008-0173-y.
    • APA

      Zuquette, L. V., Palma, J. B., & Pejon, O. J. (2009). Methodology to assess groundwater pollution conditions (current and pre-disposition) in the São Carlos and Ribeirão Preto regions, Brazil. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 68( 1), 117-136. doi:10.1007/s10064-008-0173-y
    • NLM

      Zuquette LV, Palma JB, Pejon OJ. Methodology to assess groundwater pollution conditions (current and pre-disposition) in the São Carlos and Ribeirão Preto regions, Brazil [Internet]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment. 2009 ; 68( 1): 117-136.Available from: http://www.springerlink.com.w10077.dotlib.com.br/content/b27r5779676x1t76/fulltext.pdf"_
    • Vancouver

      Zuquette LV, Palma JB, Pejon OJ. Methodology to assess groundwater pollution conditions (current and pre-disposition) in the São Carlos and Ribeirão Preto regions, Brazil [Internet]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment. 2009 ; 68( 1): 117-136.Available from: http://www.springerlink.com.w10077.dotlib.com.br/content/b27r5779676x1t76/fulltext.pdf"_

    Referências citadas na obra
    Albinet M, Margat J (1970) Cartographie de la vulnerabilite′ a la pollution des nappes d’eau souterraine. Bull BRGM 2ese′ r 3(4):13–22
    Aller L, Bennett T, Lehr JH, Petty RJ, Hackett G (1987) Drastic: a standardized system for evaluating groundwater pollution potential using hydrographic settings, US-EPA Report 600/2- 87-035
    Andersen LJ, Gosk E (1989) Applicability of vulnerability maps. Environ Geol Water Sci 13(1):39–43
    Andreo B, Goldsheider N, Vadillo I, Vias JM, Neukum C, Sinreich M, Jimenez P, Berchenmacher J, Carrasco F, Hötzl H, Perles MJ, Zwahlen F (2006) Karst groundwater protection: first application of a Pan-European approach to vulnerability, hazard and risk mapping in the Sierra de Líbar (Southern Spain). Sci Total Environ 357:54–73
    Bachmat Y, Collin M (1990) Management-oriented assessment of groundwater vulnerability to pollution. Israel Hydrological Service Report, vol 6/90. Jerusalem, p 20
    Banton O, Villeneuve JP (1989) Evaluation of groundwater vulnerability to pesticides: a comparison between the pesticide DRASTIC index and the PRZM leaching quantities. J Contam Hydrol 4:285–296
    Barradas JM, Fonseca EC, Silva EF (1992) Identification and mapping of pollution indices using a multivariate statistical methodology, Estarreja, central Portugal. Appl Geochem 7:563–572
    Bosanquet E, Cooper T, Hayden A, Krikelas V, Torrent M (2002) Wetland Mitigation Alternatives for the Casmalia Resources Disposal Site, Santa Barbara County, California. University of California, Santa Barbara
    Britt JK, Swinell SE, Mcdowell TC (1992) Matrix decision procedure to assess new pesticides based on relative groundwater leaching potential and chronic toxicity. Environ Toxicol Chem 11:721–728
    Carsel RF, Mulkey LA, Lorber MN, Baskm LB (1985) The pesticide root zone model (PRZM) a procedure for evaluating pesticide leaching threats to groundwater. Ecol Model 30:49–69
    Carter AD, Palmer RC, Monkhouse RA (1987) Mapping the vulnerability of groundwater to pollution from agricultural practice, particularly with respect to nitrate. In: Duijvenbooden W van, Waegeningh HG van (eds) TNO committee on hydrological research, the Hague. Vulnerability of soil and groundwater to pollutants, proceedings and information. vol 38, pp 333–342
    Civita M (1990) Legenda unificata per le carte della vulnerabilita dei corpi idrici soutterranei (unified legend for the aquifer pollution vulnerability maps). In: Studi sulla vulnerabilita degli Acquiferi. Pitagora, Bologna
    Civita M (1994) Le carte della vulnerabilità degli acquiferi all’inquinamento. Teoria and practica (Aquifer vulnerability maps to pollution) Pitagora, Bologna
    Civita M, De Regibus C (1995) Sperimentazione di alcune metodologie per la valutazione della vulnerabilità degli aquiferi. Q Geol Appl Pitagora, Bologna 3:63–71
    Collin ML, Melloul AJ (2003) Assessing groundwater vulnerability to promote sustainable urban and rural development. J Clean Prod 11:727–736
    Connell LD, van den Daele G (2003) A quantitative approach to aquifer vulnerability mapping. J Hydrol 276:71–88
    Crozier M, Glade T (2004) Landslides hazards and risks: issues, concepts and approach. In: Crozier et al (ed) Landslides hazard and risk. Wiley, Chichester, pp 1–40
    Dixon B (2005a) Applicability of neuro-fuzzy techniques in predicting ground-water vulnerability: a GIS-based sensitivity analysis. J Hydrol 309:17–38
    Dixon B (2005b) Groundwater vulnerability mapping: a GIS and fuzzy rule based integrated tool. Appl Geogr 25:327–347
    Doerfliger N, Zwahlen F (1995) EPIK: a new method for outlining of protection areas in karst environment. In: Günay G, Johnson I (eds) Proceedings of 5th international symposium and field seminar on karst waters and environmental impacts. Antalya, September 1995, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 117–123
    Doerfliger N, Zwahlen F, Meylan B Tripet JP, Wildberger A (1997) Vulnérabilité des captages en milieu karstique. Nouvelle méthode de délimitation des zones de protection—méthode multicritère EPIK. Gas Wasser Abwasser, Organ des Schweiz. Vereins des Gas- und Wasserfaches (SVGW) und des Verbandes Schweizer Abwasser und Gewässerschutzfachleute (USA) 5:295–302
    Doerfliger N, Jeannin PY, Zwahlen F (1999) Water vulnerability assessment in karst environments: a new method of defining protection areas using a multi-attribute approach and GIS tools (EPIK method). Environ Geol 39(2):165–176
    El-Naqal A, Hammouri N, Kuisi M (2006) GIS-based evaluation of groundwater vulnerability in the Russeifa area, Jordan. Revista Mexicana de Ciências Geológicas 23(3):277–287
    Enfield CG, Carsel RF, Cohen SZ, Phan T, Walters DM (1982) Method for approximating pollutant transport to ground water. Ground Water 8:339–357
    Foster S (1987) Fundamental concepts in aquifer vulnerability, pollution risk and protection strategy. In: Van Duijvenbooden W, Van Waegeningh HG (eds) Vulnerability of soil and groundwater to pollutants. Proc Inf TNO Comm Hydrol Res, The Hague 38:69–86
    Fredrick KC, Becker MW, Flewelling DM, Silavisesrith W, Hart ER (2004) Enhancement of aquifer vulnerability indexing using the analytic-element method. Environ Geol 45:1054–1061
    Gemitzi A, Petalas C, Tsihrintzis VA, Pisinaras V (2006) Assessment of groundwater vulnerability to pollution: a combination of GIS, fuzzy logic and decision making techniques. Env Geol 49:653–673
    Giupponi C, Eiselt B, Ghetti PF (1999) A multicriteria approach for mapping risks of agricultural pollution for water resources: the Venice lagoon watershed case study. J Environ Manag 56:259–269
    Gogu RC, Dassargues A (2000) Current trends and future challenges in groundwater vulnerability assessment using overlay and index methods. Env Geol 39:549–559
    Gogu RC, Hallet V, Dassargues A (2003) Comparison of aquifer vulnerability assessment techniques. Application to the Néblon river basin (Belgium). Env Geol 44:881–892
    Goldscheider N, Klute M, Sturm S, Hötzl H (2000) The PI method—a GIS-based approach to mapping groundwater vulnerability with special consideration on karst aquifers. Z Angew Geol 46(3):157–166
    Goossens M, Van Damme M (1987) Vulnerability mapping in Flanders, Belgium, Proceedings at “vulnerability of soil and groundwater to pollutants”. In: van Duijvenboode W, van Waegeningh GH (eds) TNO Committee on Hydrological Research, the Hague, Proceedings and Information, vol 38, pp 355–360
    Greene EA, Lamotte AE (2006) Development of spatial probability model to estimate, integrate, and assess groundwater vulnerability at multiple scales. USGS, ReVA—regional vulnerability assessment, San Jose
    Guo H, Wang Y (2004) Specific vulnerability assessment using the MLPI model in Datong city, Shanxi province, China. Env Geol 45:401–407
    Guo Q, Wang Y, Gao X, Ma T (2007) A new model (DRARCH) for assessing groundwater vulnerability to arsenic contamination at basin scale: a case study in Taiyuan basin, northern China. Env Geol 52(5):923–932
    Hartman D, Goltz M (2002) Application of the analytic hierarchy process to select characterization and risk-based decision-making and management methods for hazardous waste sites. Environ Eng Policy 3(1–2):1–7
    Hölting B, Haertlé T, Hohberger KH, Nachtigall, Villinger E, Weinzierl W, Wrobel JP (1995) Konzept zur Ermittlung der Schutzfunktion der Grundwasserüberdeckung. (concept for the determination of the protective effectiveness of the cover above the groundwater against pollution). Geol Jb C63:5–24
    Kabbour BB, Zouhri L, Mania J, Colbeaux JP (2006) Assessing groundwater contamination risk using the DASTI/IDRISI GIS method: coastal system of western Mamora, Marocco. Bull Eng Geol Environ 65(4):463–470
    Knox RC, Sabatini DA, Canter LW (1993) Subsurface transport and fate processes. Lewis Publishers, USA
    Lasserre F, Razack M, Banton O (1999) A GIS-linked model for assessment of nitrate contamination in groundwater. J Hydrol 224:81–90
    Le Grand HE (1964) System for evaluating the contamination potential of some waste sites. J Am Water Works Assoc 56(8):959–974
    Mádl-Szonyi J, Füle L (1998) Groundwater vulnerability assessment of the SW Trans-Danubian Central Range, Hungary. Env Geol 35(1):9–18
    Mcdonald MG, Harbaugh AW (1984) A modular three-dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model: US geological survey open-file report 83–875, p 528
    Meeks YJ, Dean JD (1990) Evaluating ground-water vulnerability to pesticides. J Water Resour Plan Manage 116(5):693–707
    Mendoza JA, Barmen G (2006) Assessment of groundwater vulnerability in the Rio Artiguas basin, Nicaragua. Env Geol 50:569–580
    Neukum C, Hötzl H (2007) Standardization of vulnerability maps. Environ Geol 51(5):689–694. doi: 10.1007/s00254-006-0380-4
    Pietersen K (2006) Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA): a tool to support sustainable management of groundwater resources in South Africa. Water SA 32(2):119–128
    Rao PSC, Alley WM (1993) Pesticides. In: Alley WM (ed) Regional groundwater quality. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp 345–382
    Rao P, Hornsby A, Jessup R (1985) Indices for ranking the potential for pesticide contamination of groundwater. Con Soil Crop Sci Soc Florida 44:1–8
    Ray JA, O”Dell PW (1993) Diversity: a new method for evaluating sensitivity of groundwater to contamination. Env Geol 22:345–352
    Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15/3:234–281
    Soller DR, Berg RC (1992) A model for the assessment of aquifer contamination potential based on regional geologic framework. Environ Geol Water Sci 19(3):205–213
    Soper RC (2006) Groundwater vulnerability to agrochemicals: a GIS-based drastic model analysis of Carroll, Chariton, and Saline counties, Missouri, USA. A thesis presented to the faculty of the graduate school University of Missouri-Columbia
    Tesfamariam S, Sadiq R (2006) Risk-based environmental decision-making using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP). Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 21:35–50
    Thirumalaivasan D, Karmegam M (2001) Aquifer vulnerability using analytic hierarchy process and GIS for upper Palar watershed. 22nd Asian conference on remote sensing, Singapore
    USEPA (1987) Guidelines for delineation of wellhead protection areas. US EPA/440/6-87/010 report. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington
    USEPA (1993) A review of methods for assessing aquifer sensitivity and ground water vulnerability to pesticide contamination. USEPA, Office of Water, Washington
    Van Stempoort D, Ewert L, Wassenaar L (1993) Aquifer vulnerability index (AVI): a GIS compatible method for groundwater vulnerability mapping. Can Water Res J 18:25–37
    Vias JM, Andreo B, Perles MJ, Carrasco F (2005) A comparative study of four schemes for groundwater vulnerability mapping in a diffuse flow carbonate aquifer under Mediterranean climatic conditions. Env Geol 47:586–595
    Von Hoyer M, Sofner B (1998) Groundwater vulnerability mapping in carbonate (karst) areas of Germany, Federal institute for geosciences and natural resources, Archiv no 117854, Hanover, p 38
    Vrba J, Zaporozec A (eds) (1994) Guidebook on mapping groundwater vulnerability, International contributions to hydrogeology (IAH), vol 16. Verlag Heinz Heise, Hannover, p 131
    Wagenet RJ, Huston JL (1987) Predicting the fate of non-volatile pesticides in the unsaturated zone. J Environ Qual 15:315–322
    Worrall F, Kolpin DW (2004) Aquifer vulnerability to pesticide pollution-combining soil, land-use and aquifer properties with molecular descriptors. J Hydrol 293:191–204
    Zaporozec A (2002) Groundwater contamination inventory: methodological guide. International hydrological programme within project 3.1 (IHP-V)
    Zuquette LV, Pejon OJ, Collares JQ (2004) Engineering geological mapping developed in Fortaleza metropolitan region, state of Ceará, Brazil. Eng Geol 71:227–253
    Zwahlen F (ed) (2004) Vulnerability and risk mapping for the protection of carbonate (karst) aquifers, final report (COST Action 620). European commission, directorate-general XII science, research and development. Brussels, p 297