3.9 Article Proceedings Paper

Managing environmental problems in Cuban karstic aquifers

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOLOGY
Volume 58, Issue 2, Pages 275-283

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00254-008-1612-6

Keywords

Karst; Karst aquifers; Vulnerability; Pollution; Cuba

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Cuban archipelago hosts some of the most typical karst features in the Caribbean, and has very important and high-quality resources of karst water. Carbonate rocks cover about 70% of the country area, with a great variety of karst features, and outstanding exokarstic landforms such as the cone karst; in addition, many caves are regarded as cultural and historical sites. Protection of the karst hydric resources is therefore essential. In karst, the intrinsic vulnerability of the environment makes it highly susceptible to pollution, which may result in dramatic consequences for both the quality of karst water and the amount of water available. Many anthropogenic activities produce negative changes in the karst aquifers, in some cases with unrecoverable effects. In Cuba, five main sources of pollution to karst aquifers have been identified: sea water intrusion, agricultural practices, waste disposal, industrial activity, and mining and oil production. Due to the narrow and elongated configuration of the main island, wide portions of the territory are mostly affected by seawater intrusion problems, exacerbated by the concentration of both population and human activities in the largest towns located along, or very close to, the coasts. Seawater intrusion, however, is not the only source of pollution for Cuban karst aquifers. The other aforementioned sources are important, and may locally prevail (e.g. pollution resulting from sugar cane factories). Considerations on the management of karst aquifers and a brief description of the water quality monitoring system of Cuban inland waters are also provided.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available