My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Artifical Recharge of Ground Water in Colorado
CWCB
>
Publications
>
DayForward
>
Artifical Recharge of Ground Water in Colorado
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/27/2013 12:43:49 PM
Creation date
2/13/2013 2:55:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Publications
Year
2004
Title
Artificial Recharge of Ground Water in Colorado
Author
Colorado Geological Survey Department of Natural Resources
Description
A Statewide Assessment 2004
Publications - Doc Type
Other
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
158
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Artificial Recharge of Ground Water in Colorado <br />A Statewide Assessment <br />A weighted ranking system was established to evaluate the key physical properties of the state's <br />16 highest - potential unconsolidated aquifers and 29 highest - potential consolidated aquifers. <br />Hydrogeologic parameters taken into account in the "aquifer ranking value" include areal extent, <br />depth, saturated thickness, head freeboard, storage coefficient, and hydraulic conductivity. In <br />addition to calculating a final ranking for the aquifer, the quality of the input data was also <br />assessed. The alluvial deposits of the South Platte River, its tributary Bijou Creek, and the <br />Arkansas River are the top three ranked unconsolidated aquifers. The High Plains Aquifer, <br />Dakota - Cheyenne Group of southeast Colorado, and the Denver Basin aquifers are the top three <br />ranked consolidated bedrock aquifers. <br />The evaluation of the available storage capacity in Colorado's highest - potential aquifers was <br />guided by the desire to find opportunities to develop large -scale artificial recharge projects, i.e. <br />defined as having storage capacity in excess of 100,000 acre -feet. Thirteen of the 16 primary <br />unconsolidated rock aquifers have sufficient storage capacity to accommodate a large -scale <br />project. In aggregate, the lower South Platte River alluvium and the San Luis Valley alluvium <br />have the capacity to store in excess of one million acre -feet. All but two of the 26 primary <br />consolidated rock aquifers have sufficient storage capacity available to meet the 100,000 acre - <br />feet criterion. Because of their large areal extent and head freeboard, the majority of these <br />aquifers can store millions of acre -feet of water. <br />Three types of non - aquifer underground water storage possibilities were assessed statewide: <br />abandoned coal mines, abandoned metal mines, and caves. Storage of water in abandoned <br />underground coal mines is not a new concept, but has only recently been tried in Colorado, most <br />notably by the City of Arvada at the former Leyden coal mine. Overall, the estimated storage <br />capacities of non - aquifer alternatives are much smaller than those of aquifers. An estimated <br />55,000 acre -feet of underground water storage is available for artificial recharge in inactive coal <br />mines, statewide. Major technical challenges to water storage projects in coal mines include <br />maintaining hydraulic control of stored water, poor water quality (high salinity), and mine <br />subsidence. The potential water storage volumes for abandoned metal mines and natural cave <br />systems are much smaller than for coal mines. Metal mines and natural caves are not a viable <br />option for water storage because of their limited storage capacity, water quality issues, leakage of <br />stored water, and land ownership issues. <br />Artificial recharge projects can increase the total amount of stored ground water in a very <br />specific and calculated fashion. In addition, indirect or passive methods of ground -water <br />recharge such as vegetation control, storm -water retention basins, and leaky ditches are non- <br />specific in application, but can significantly increase overall ground -water storage. Similar to <br />water conservation measures, some changes in legislation and water facility design and <br />engineering, combined with passive recharge structures, would benefit both ground -water and <br />surface -water resources. <br />This study assesses the best aquifers in Colorado for their artificial recharge potential of ground <br />water based primarily on their hydrogeological suitability. Implementation of an AR project <br />must also consider several other factors, including (1) project objectives; (2) site - specific <br />hydrogeologic conditions; (3) source water availability; (4) water law and water rights; (5) <br />available land surface area and compatible land -use activities; (6) governing water- management <br />districts or entities; (7) facility design criteria; (8) capital costs to construct; (9) operation and <br />maintenance costs; and (10) general storage efficiency, recovery, and deliverability. <br />iii <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.