SAFE YIELD OF GROUNDWATER
Jorge F. Talavera
External sources and sinks to this geohydrological inventory are clearly the atmosphere and the ocean. The atmosphere is the main source
by giving up precipitation and it is the sink for evaporation or evapotranspiration. The ocean will be the main sink as it is the
continuous receptor of water from the continents due to its lowest altitude. Groundwater eventually joins surface water discharging to
the ocean except for a small amount -- equivalent to 2% of the precipitation -- which will percolate very deep into the land and be
highly immobilized. This water will ultimately also reach the ocean but will take a period of time several orders of magnitude higher
than what the shallow water takes, and therefore may be considered external to the geohydrological inventory which is fairly dynamic in nature.
Groundwater is tapped extensively throughout the world for agriculture use and human consumption. Similar to natural discharge, human
intervention displaces the equilibrium of the surface-ground exchange to a different point such as an extra discharge would. The
difference with natural disturbances is that the human intervention is not aleatory but instead a permanent and pervasive extraction
of groundwater and will therefore cause to build a time trend into the system. Net extraction for domestic use will for example diminish
the hydraulic level and therefore, baseflow, which variables in turn will influence vegetation and most sensitively, riparian vegetation.
Human net extraction and use therefore, will mean a net loss of geohydrological inventory brought about by precipitation and diligently
kept stored by nature to deal with all these natural aleatory disturbances. Thus knowing that human extractions will have predictable
effects, the evaluation of the effects turns to be only a matter of quantification related basically to the magnitude of the extraction
and the capacity of the system being extracted upon to absorb the disturbances and still regain a new equilibrium state, albeit a poorer
one, or yet to instead deteriorate indefinitely affecting severely other uses of water and the ecosystem. It is imperative to know
therefore the technical and social criteria to elucidate what can be considered a safe or sustainable yield.
On one extreme the most classic and utilitarian meaning of "safe yield" was a withdrawal rate that will equate statistically with the
recharge amount of groundwater. This criteria has been discredited by facts and experience because it treats groundwater as an static
entity instead of what it really is: a moving part of the total geohydrological inventory that permanently discharges naturally to the
surface, as well as tries to maintain optimum levels that will sustain vegetation.
On the other extreme the most restrictive and environmentally friendly meaning of "safe or sustainable yield" is a zero net withdrawal
rate or such a minimal rate that will equate to the deep percolation rate and therefore equate to a magnitude that is already lost to
the geohydrological inventory and does not affect it.
Between the two extremes, there are several criteria that range between 10% and 40% of the average recharge as plausible rates of yield
or utilization. These might be better called "reasonable compromise yields" than safe yields. While there is no general answer that will
satisfy all cases, the approximation to the optimal solution on each particular case will depend on the degree of detail of study of the
system and a benefit-cost tradeoff of social expectations and environmental consequences. Specifically, groundwater systems are encased
in fairly complex geological structures and observations quite frequently will require decades to establish a clear trend and or to make
clear and patent the detailed consequences to the environment.
Finally, if a general rule need be proposed, it may be suggested that the initial rate of net utilization should not be greater than 20%
of the recharge value which fraction is about average of many successfully managed systems reported in the literature. This usage rate
should be evaluated subsequently for its impact on the base flow and the whole watershed ecosystem. Fine tuning to an optimal value will
require several years of feedback information.
|
081008 |