4.5 Article

The role of interbasin groundwater transfers in geologically complex terranes, demonstrated by the Great Basin in the western United States

Journal

HYDROGEOLOGY JOURNAL
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages 807-828

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10040-014-1104-6

Keywords

Groundwater recharge/water budget; Carbonate rocks; Conceptual models; USA; Groundwater flow

Funding

  1. Brigham Young University
  2. Department of Geological Sciences
  3. College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the Great Basin, USA, bedrock interbasin flow is conceptualized as the mechanism by which large groundwater fluxes flow through multiple basins and intervening mountains. Interbasin flow is propounded based on: (1) water budget imbalances, (2) potential differences between basins, (3) stable isotope evidence, and (4) modeling studies. However, water budgets are too imprecise to discern interbasin transfers and potential differences may exist with or without interbasin fluxes. Potentiometric maps are dependent on conceptual underpinnings, leading to possible false inferences regarding interbasin transfers. Isotopic evidence is prone to non-unique interpretation and may be confounded by the effects of climate change. Structural and stratigraphic considerations in a geologically complex region like the Great Basin should produce compartmentalization, where increasing aquifer size increases the odds of segmentation along a given flow path. Initial conceptual hypotheses should explain flow with local recharge and short flow paths. Where bedrock interbasin flow is suspected, it is most likely controlled by diversion of water into the damage zones of normal faults, where fault cores act as barriers. Large-scale bedrock interbasin flow where fluxes must transect multiple basins, ranges, and faults at high angles should be the conceptual model of last resort.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available