Premium
Artificial Sweeteners Identify Spatial Patterns of Historic Landfill Contaminated Groundwater Discharge in an Urban Stream
Author(s) -
Propp Victoria R.,
Brown Susan J.,
Collins Pamela,
Smith James E.,
Roy James W.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
groundwater monitoring and remediation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.677
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1745-6592
pISSN - 1069-3629
DOI - 10.1111/gwmr.12483
Subject(s) - leachate , groundwater , environmental science , streams , modflow , hydrology (agriculture) , contamination , hyporheic zone , aquifer , baseflow , groundwater discharge , urban stream , plume , piezometer , environmental engineering , groundwater flow , wastewater , surface water , environmental chemistry , geology , drainage basin , streamflow , geography , ecology , chemistry , computer network , computer science , biology , geotechnical engineering , cartography , meteorology
Leachate‐contaminated groundwater from historical municipal landfills, typically lacking engineered liners and leachate collection systems, poses a threat to nearby urban streams, particularly to benthic ecosystems. Effective monitoring and assessment of such sites requires understanding of the spatial patterns (i.e., two‐dimensional footprint) of contaminated groundwater discharge and associated controlling factors. However, discharges from groundwater contaminated by modern wastewater can complicate site assessments. The objectives of this study were to (1) demonstrate the use of artificial sweeteners (AS): saccharin (SAC), cyclamate (CYC), acesulfame (ACE), and sucralose (SUC), to distinguish groundwater discharge areas influenced by historic landfill leachate (elevated SAC and sometimes CYC; low ACE and SUC concentrations) from those influenced by wastewater (high ACE and SUC concentrations), and (2) investigate contaminant discharge patterns for two gaining urban stream reaches adjacent historic landfills at base flows. Contaminant discharge patterns revealed by the AS were strongly controlled by hyporheic flow (low AS concentrations), particularly for the straight reach, and stream sinuosity, particularly for the meandering reach. These patterns were different and the contaminant footprint coverage (<25% of streambed area) much less than most past studies (typically >50% coverage), likely due to the homogeneous streambed‐aquifer conditions and shallow, narrow landfill plume in this setting.