quality scientific analysis for the long term...evangeline aquifer "500-foot" sand lower...
TRANSCRIPT
Quality Scientific Analysis for theLong Term
Hydrogeology and Simulation ofHydrogeology and Simulation ofGround-Water Flow and Land-Ground-Water Flow and Land-
Surface Subsidence in the Chicot,Surface Subsidence in the Chicot,Evangeline, and Jasper Aquifers,Evangeline, and Jasper Aquifers,
Houston Area, TexasHouston Area, TexasMark C. Kasmarek & Eric W. StromMark C. Kasmarek & Eric W. Strom
In Cooperation with: Texas WaterIn Cooperation with: Texas WaterDevelopment Board, Harris-Development Board, Harris-
Galveston Coastal SubsidenceGalveston Coastal SubsidenceDistrict, San Jacinto River Authority,District, San Jacinto River Authority,
and the City of Houstonand the City of Houston
TWDB Ground-Water AvailabilityModels in Texas
Modified from TWDB website
Conceptual Chicot Aquifer Flow System
Conceptual Ground-Water Flow
Burkeville Confining SystemUndifferentiated Sediments
Numerous Clay Lenses
Hydraulic Connection
AQUIFER OUTCROPSNORTWEST HOUSTON-METRO
FRESHWATER
SOUTHEASTGulf of TexasCHICOTEVANGELINE
JASPER
SALINEWATER
Conceptual Ground-Water Flow
Upper Gulf Coast GAM AquiferOutcrops
Upper Gulf Coast GAM Grid
Stratigraphic and Hydrologic Sections
GAM Chicot TopGAM Chicot Aquifer Top
Contour Interval = 30 feetMax Elevation = 422 feetMin Elevation = 0 feet
GAM Chicot BaseGAM Chicot Aquifer Base
Contour Interval = 120 feetMax Elevation = 394 feetMin Elevation = -1,286 feet
GAM Evangeline Top
GAM Evangeline Aquifer Top
Contour Interval = 120 feetMax Elevation = 394 feetMin Elevation = -1,286
GAM Evangeline Base
GAM Evangeline Aquifer Base
Contour Interval = 401 feetMax Elevation = 377 feetMin Elevation = -5,243 feet
GAM Burkeville Top
GAM Burkeville ConfiningSystem Top
Contour Interval = 401 feetMax Elevation = 377 feetMin Elevation = -5,243 feet
GAM Burkeville Base
GAM Burkeville ConfiningSystem Base
Contour Interval = 237 feetMax Elevation = 544 feetMin Elevation = -2,768 feet
GAM Jasper Top
GAM Jasper Aquifer Top
Contour Interval = 237 feetMax Elevation = 544 feetMin Elevation = -2,768 feet
GAM Jasper Base
GAM Jasper Aquifer Base
Contour Interval = 296 feetMax Elevation = 457 feetMin Elevation = -3,712 feet
1977-1999
Chicot Water-Level Change
Map
GULF OF MEXICOGULF OF MEXICO
GALVESTON B
AY
GALVESTON
BAY
HOUSTONHOUSTON
95º96º
97º 31º
30º
29º
N
Up-dip limit of the Chicot aquifer
Down-dip limit of freshwaterDown-dip limit of freshwater
-250
-200
-200 -150-100
-150
-100
-100-150
-150
-200
-200
0
0
50
50
50
50
100
100
150
100
100
150150
200200
200250
250
300
200
100
150
-50
-50
-50
-50
-50
-250
-150
-150
-150-150
-100-100-150
-50 -100
0
1977 Measured and Simulated ChicotWater Levels
GULF OF MEXICOGULF OF MEXICO
GALVESTON
BAY
GALVESTON B
AYHOUSTONHOUSTON
95º96º
97º 31º
30º
29º
N
Up-dip limit of the Evangeline aquifer
Down-dip limit of freshwaterDown-dip limit of freshwater
100
100
100
100
150
150
200
200
250
200
250
300
250250
300
150
200
250250
300
300
50
-100
-50
-50-50
-50
-50
-300-300
0
0
0
-100
-350
-350
-300
50
50
-100-250
250200
1977 Measured and SimulatedEvangeline Water Levels
GULF OF MEXICOGULF OF MEXICO
GALVESTON B
AY
GALVESTON BAY
HOUSTONHOUSTON
95º96º
97º 31º
30º
29º
N
Up-dip limit of the Chicot aquifer
Down-dip limit of freshwaterDown-dip limit of freshwater
-200-200
-150
-150-150
-100
-100-200
-100
-100
-150
-50
-50
-50
0
0
0
00
0
0
50
50
50
50
100
100
150
100
100
150150
150
200
200200
250250300
200
-100
-50
1996 Measured and Simulated ChicotWater Levels
GULF OF MEXICOGULF OF MEXICO
GALVESTON B
AY
GALVESTON
BAY
HOUSTONHOUSTON
95º96º97º 31
º
30º
29º
N
Up-dip limit of the Evangeline aquifer
Down-dip limit of freshwaterDown-dip limit of freshwater
100
100
100
100
150
150
200
200
250
200
200
250
300
250250
250
300
150
200
250250
300
300
50
-100-100 -150
-50
-50
-50
-50
-300
-150
0
0
0
0
0
-350
-250-250
-200
-200
-150
5050
-100
1996 Measured and SimulatedEvangeline Water Levels
1978-1995 Measured Land-SurfaceSubsidence
1978-1995 Simulated Land-SurfaceSubsidence
GULF OF MEXICOGULF OF MEXICO
GALVESTON
BAY
GALVESTON
BAY
HOUSTONHOUSTON
95º96º97º 31
º
30º
29º
N
1.0
3.04.0
5.06.0
4.0
2.03.0
9.0
8.0
7.06.0
5.0
2.0
1.0
6.0
5.04.0
7.0
8.0
10.09.0 9.0
8.0
7.0
1906-1995 Measured Land-SurfaceSubsidence
1891-1995 Simulated Land-SurfaceSubsidence
Long-Term Water-Level TrendsLong-Term Water-Level Trends
Hydrographs from Wells Screened in the EvangelineAquifer Used for Model Calibration
Hydrographs from Wells Screened inthe Chicot and Jasper Aquifer
Pre-Development Water-Budget-FlowRates
1996 Water-Budget-Flow Rates
Model Sensitivity to Changes inAquifer Parameters
Model Sensitivity to Changes in Clayand Sand Storage Parameters
Exhibit 19Figure 7. Map showing location of extensometer sites, Houston-Galveston Region, Texas.
Extensometer Sites in Harris and GalvestonCounties
Exhibit 20
Figure 8. Graphics showing measured compaction of subsurface material,1973-2000, at extensometer sites shown in figure 7.
2000 Line Graph Data from Extensometer Sites
Typical Extensometer Site
Conceptual Clay Compaction
Exhibit 11
Figure 1. Map showing approximate water-level altitudes inthe Chicot Aquifer, Houston-Galveston Region, Texas,January – February 2001
2001 Water-Level Altitude in the Chicot Aquifer
Figure 2. Map showing approximate water-level changes in theChicot Aquifer, Houston-Galveston Region, Texas, 1977-2001
Exhibit 12
1977-2001Water-Level Change Map in the Chicot Aquifer
Exhibit 14
Zero Water-Level Changes in the ChicotAquifer
Exhibit 15
Figure 4. Map showing approximate water-level altitudes in the EvangelineAquifer, Houston-Galveston Region, Texas, January – February 2001
2001 Water-Level Altitude in the Evangeline Aquifer
Figure 5. Map showing approximate water-level changes in theEvangeline Aquifer, Houston-Galveston Region, Texas, 1977-2001
Exhibit 16
1977-2001 Water-Level Change Map in the EvangelineAquifer
Exhibit 18
Zero Water-Level Changes in the Evangeline Aquifer
THE CHICOT AQUIFERSYSTEM OF
SOUTHWESTERNLOUISIANA
prepared by theU.S. Geological Survey
Surface extent of Louisiana’s aquifers and aquifer systems
GROUND-WATER WITHDRAWALS IN LOUISIANA BY PARISH, 2000
Withdrawals, in milliongallons per day
0 - 2
2 - 1 0
1 0 - 5 0
5 0 - 1 0 0
1 0 0 - 2 0 0
25
PUMPAGE BY MAJOR AQUIFER OR AQUIFER SYSTEM, 2000
374
9
821
290
19 423 7
7714 921
0100
200
300400
500600700
800900
Red R
iver A
lluvia
l
Mississ
ippi Rive
r Allu
vial
Upland
Terrac
eChic
ot
Southe
ast Lo
uisiana
Evang
eline
Jasp
erCata
houla
Cockfi
eldSpa
rtaCarr
izo-W
ilcox oth
erW
ITH
DR
AW
AL
RA
TE,
IN M
ILLI
ON
GA
LLO
NS
PER
DA
Y
PROBLEMS/CONCERNS
• Ground-water withdrawals are loweringwater levels in some areas of the Chicotaquifer systems.
• In certain areas, these withdrawals arecreating conditions favorable for saltwaterencroachment.
Chicot aquifer system
Areal extent of freshwaterRecharge Area
WITHDRAWALS FROM THE CHICOT AQUIFER SYSTEM, 2000
Industry9%
Irrigation65%
Aquaculture11%
Other Uses2%
Power Generation
2%
Public Supply11%
WITHDRAWALS FROM THE CHICOT AQUIFER SYSTEM, 1946-2000
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
WIT
HDRA
WAL
RAT
E, IN
MIL
LIO
N G
ALLO
NS P
ER D
AY
2 4 6 8 10 MILES
2 4 6 8 10 KILOMETERS0
0
BEAUREGARDPARISH
CALCASIEUPARISH
CAMERONPARISH
VERNONPARISH GULF OF
MEXICO
NORTH SOUTH
FEETSEA LEVEL
-500
-1,000
-1,500
FEETSEA LEVEL
-500
-1,000
-1,500
Not to scale
Chicotaquifersystem
Evangeline
aquifer
"500-foot"sand
lowersand
"700-foot"sand
uppersand
base
of
Chicot
aquifer
system
"200-foot"sand
massivesand
Waterlevel
CALCASIEUPARISH
JEFFERSONDAVISPARISH
ACADIAPARISH
EASTWESTLAFAYETTE
PARISHST. MARTIN
PARISH
FEETSEA LEVEL
-500
-1,000
-1,500
FEETSEA LEVEL
-500
-1,000
-1,500
Not to scaleTrace of sections shown on figure 1
Evangeline
Atchafalayaaquifer
aquifer
lower sand
"500-foot"sand
"200-foot"
sand
"700-foot"sand
upper sandshallow sands
b a s e o h i c o t f C a q u i f e r s y s t e m
"700-foot" sand
lower sand
Waterlevel
5 10 15 20 MILES
5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS0
0
Lake Char les
Cameron
CrowleyJennings
Abbevi l le
Lafayette
St . Mar tinvi l le
New Iber ia
Frankl in
DeRidder
Leesvi l le
Oberl in
Vi lle Plat te
Alexandr ia
Marksvi l le
Opelousas
New Roads
POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR -- Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells. Dashed where
approximately located. Interval 10 and 20 feet. Datum is sea level
APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE CHICOT MASSIVE SAND TO THE
NORTH AND THE UPPER AND LOWER SANDS TO THE SOUTHAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE CHICOT MASSIVE SAND TO THE NORTH AND THE "200-," "500-," AND
"700-FOOT" SANDS TO THE SOUTHAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE UPPER AND LOWER SANDS TO EAST AND THE "200-" AND "700-FOOT"
SANDS TO THE WEST
LINE OF HYDROGEOLOGIC SECTION (see fig. 3)
-40
-50
-50
-70
-60
-60
LOCATION OF WELL FOR WHICH WATER-LEVEL GRAPH IS SHOWN
24
68
10 M
ILES
24
68
10 K
ILOM
ETER
S00
GROUND-WATER WITHDRAWALS IN CALCASIEU PARISH, 1955-2000
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
WIT
HD
RA
WA
LS, I
N M
ILLI
ON
GA
LLO
NS
PER
DA
Y
0
50
100
150
200 PUBLIC SUPPLYRICE IRRIGATIONINDUSTRIALTOTAL (all uses)
Upper Gulf Coast GAM AquiferOutcrops
Attendance list at the 3rd Stakeholder Advisory Forum for the northernGulf Coast aquifer Groundwater Availability Model, November 15, 2001
Names AffliationAli Chowdhury Texas Water Development BoardDavid W. Minze Bluebonnet GWCDEric Strom US Geological SurveyErnest Roebuck Texas Water Development BoardHaskell L. Simon Region K -Regional Water Planning GroupIan Jones Texas Water Development BoardJim Adams SJRAJoe Broadus US Geological SurveyJohn Nelson LBG-Guyton AssociatesMark C. Kasmarek US Geological SurveyRobert K. Gabrysch Consultant HydrogeologistRon Neighbors Harris-Galveston Coastal Subsidence DistrictSteve Musick Texas Natural Resources Conservation
CommissionTom Michel Harris-Galveston Coastal Subsidence District
Discussion at the 3rd Stakeholder Advisory Forum for the northern Gulf Coastaquifer Groundwater Availability Model; November 15, 2001
Question: What are the model boundaries?
Response: The northern model boundary is the updip limit of the Jasper Aquiferoutcrop, the eastern boundary is the Sabine River, the southern boundary is theGulf of Mexico, and the western boundary is the surface water divide of theLavaca-Navidad River basins.
Question: You suggest that most of the water down-dip in the Jasper aquifer isbrackish/saline but in Matagorda County we produce fresh water from the Jasperaquifer – is there an inconsistency?
Response: In the outcrop areas, the waters in the Jasper aquifer are fresh but asthey move down-dip, they become more saline particularly near the coastline.
Question: Is there a vertical connection between the Burkeville and the Jasperaquifers?
Response: Yes, in some of the northern updip areas of the Burkeville ConfiningSystem, the Burkeville sediments contain greater percentages of sand thatallows the sediments to be more transmissive than the down-dip Burkevillesediments that have a large percentage of clay. When groundwater is withdrawnfrom wells in the updip outcrop areas of the Evangeline aquifer, water canpotentially flow from the Jasper aquifer upwards through the transmissive areasof the Burkeville Confining System and into the Evangeline aquifer.
Question: Is there no recharge from the rainfall into the Chicot aquifer near thecoastline?
Response: Most recharge into the Chicot aquifer enters through the updipoutcrop areas. Using Tritium isotope age dating of the ground water in the Chicotand Evangeline aquifers, it has been determined that the age groundwater isincreasingly older the further downdip the water is sampled. The time that itwould take for a drop of precipitation to enter the aquifer system at the coastwould be determined by the thickness of the clay beds as the water movedvertically down through the sediments. Additionally, the presence of theBeaumont Clay also impedes vertical flow rates. Groundwater travel time in theoutcrop areas on the other hand is relatively fast (50 ft/yr.).
Question: Can we use the model to determine spacing of wells or interferencebetween wells due to pumping?
Response: This is a regional groundwater flow model. On a county basis, themodel should yield groundwater availability values, but may not provide answersto address local issues unless the model is reconstructed with a finer mesh andpopulated with additional data. This regional model can be split up into smallones to address local concerns.
Question: What is the use of the model if we as a groundwater district cannot useit?
Response: The model should provide answers to regional groundwater issues.Countywide groundwater availability values can also obtained using this model.
Comments: A stakeholder indicated that the first model developed by the USGSis an analog model. With time, successive models are attempting to bettersimulate the groundwater flow conditions. Using better hydrogeologic data, eachsuccessive model increases our understanding of the hydraulic and stratigraphiccomplexities of the Gulf Coast Aquifer System. The Chicot and Evangeline modelthat was created with a cooperative agreement with the City of Houston and theUSGS is at present being finalized and prepared for publication. UsingMODFLOW with the Interbed Storage Package, transient model calibrationdetermined that considerable amounts of water are released from the numerousclay interbeds as these interbeds are depressurized and subsequently compact.Models improve over time with addition of new hydrogeologic data and increasedunderstanding of the aquifer system. The previous and current models are thefirst models to use subsidence interactively during transient model calibration.
Question: At this stage of model calibration and creation, do we need to meeteach quarter when not much new information is presented? It would make moresense if we have these quarterly meetings when some results are available inmid - 2002.
Response: We will look into this. If the contract allows, we will allow the nextmeeting to be held in 6 months.
Question: As a follow-up of a question from the previous SAF meetingconcerning the validity of the Sabine River being the eastern model boundarydue to the impact of ground-water withdrawal in the Lake Charles geographicarea.
Response: We have consulted with the Louisiana USGS Office on this matter.Ongoing cooperative agreements in western Louisiana and eastern Texas haveproduced water-level data from wells and subsequent interpretive Open FileReports showing recently created water level altitude maps for adjacent areaseast and west of the Sabine River. These data show conclusively that the SabineRiver is an appropriate eastern model boundary.