Lyell Collection
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology
Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help

Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Owen, M.
Right arrow Articles by Greenfield, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology; 1982; v. 15; issue.1; p. 57-61;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.QJEG.1982.015.01.08
© 1982 Geological Society of London

Discussion

Discussion on ‘The use of a numerical model in the management of the Chalk aquifer in the Upper Thames Basin’ by E. H. Morel

M. Owen, B. J. Connorton & B. J. Greenfield

Thames Water Authority, , Nugent House, Reading, Berkshire RG1 8DB.

M. Owen writes: The area studied by the author is the location of the existing Stage 1 and proposed Stage 2 of the Thames Groundwater Scheme for augmenting river flow at times of severe drought. For an aquifer model to produce reliable forecasts of various management options for developing groundwater resources it must represent real conditions as closely as possible. This requirement is particularly difficult to achieve in an aquifer such as the Chalk which, except in conditions of restricted space and time, must be regarded as heterogeneous. The characteristics of the aquifer in the study area are well demonstrated by field evidence which should be the basis of the model. The representation of this evidence in the model is covered in the following discussion of this paper by Connorton.

In assessing the yield of a major groundwater resource development in relation to the aquifer and not the engineering works, the following criteria should be considered:

  1. Resources—natural and artificial recharge and volume in storage.
  2. Storage removal—regional drawdown in relation to effective saturated depth.
  3. Net gain—the proportion of pumped water which is added to supply.

Connorton later explains how Morel's basic approach to modelling produces unrepresentative distributions of transmissivity and storativity in relation to the operational conditions of the scheme. The over-optimistic predictions that are likely to arise from Morel's model apply particularly to the estimates of the volume in storage and regional drawdown, and therefore lead, under criteria (i) and (ii), to misleadingly high estimates of the quantity

...

This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.


Related articles in Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology:

The use of a numerical model in the management of the Chalk aquifer in the Upper Thames Basin
E. H. Morel
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology 1980 13: 153-165. [Abstract]