State of the art of karst vulnerability assessment: overview, evaluation and outlook

Iván, Veronika; Mádl-Szőnyi, Judit

doi:10.1007/s12665-017-6422-2

Cited by 56 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As resulting from the literature overview in this work, tracer tests or more physically based approaches were used by various authors [23,26] in order to validate the results of the vulnerability assessment with the EPIK method. In addition, the application and results of the EPIK method were compared to other methods which were applied in the same test site [8,10,[23][24][25]27,55,56].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors endorsed the combination with physically based methods in order to validate the results [23,26]. Another possibility was presented within the study of Kazakis et al [27] where authors used a general approach in combination with more specific approaches for special types of aquifers, e.g., EPIK for karstic aquifers while the AVI method was applied for porous aquifers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to compare universal methods, like DRASTIC and SINTACS, with more karst sensitive methods like EPIK, COP and PI, a universal vulnerability index was used. Results revealed that universal methods consider a high number of parameters, and thus, present results on a large scale, while karst-sensitive methods are more suitable for the test site [25,26].…”

Section: Literature Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, the EPIK method has been modified various times over the last decades. The RISKE method, presented by Petelet-Giraud et al [34], and further developed by Plagnes et al [35] to become the RISKE 2 method, was the first modification, mentioned by Iván und Mádl-Szőnyi [26]. RISKE was then further used as a base for the PRESK method, developed by Koutsi and Stournaras [36].…”

Section: Literature Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The present slope ranges from 0.02% to 71.36%. A more detailed overview of the differences between the significant studies is presented in the studies of Ravbar and Goldscheider [8], Younos et al [37], Iván and Mádl-Szőnyi [26] and Lenhare & Sallun Filho [30]. A summary of the case studies mentioned in this work is provided in Table S1.…”

Section: Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Groundwater Vulnerability and Risk Assessment in A Karst Aquifer of Greece Using EPIK Method

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was the assessment of groundwater vulnerability and pollution risk of the Perivleptos karst aquifer in the northwestern part of Greece. Hence, the EPIK method has been applied within the study area. Additionally, a detailed literature overview has been obtained, including the worldwide application of the EPIK method. The hazard map has been developed for the implementation of risk assessment. The resulting vulnerability map was divided into four classes and showed especially high to very high vulnerability. The subsequent hazard assessment has shown mostly low to moderate endangerment for the northern part of the study area, which is mainly covered by forest, while the areas covered by urban and industrial, as well as agricultural land, use primarily show high to very high endangerment. Concluding in the risk map, the study area consists of 13% of very high, 48% of high, 36% of moderate and 4% of low risk of contamination. According to the literature overview, the EPIK method was mostly used in combination with other vulnerability assessment methods, and results have been validated through tracer tests, sensitivity analysis or comparing to other methods. In this study, an additional single parameter sensitivity analysis was obtained for validation of the EPIK parameters.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Groundwater Vulnerability and Risk Assessment in A Karst Aquifer of Greece Using EPIK Method

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

COST Action 620 Approach: Application to a Karst Aquifer, SE Mexico

González-Herrera

Albornoz‐Euán

Sánchez-Pinto

et al. 2020

CLEAN Soil Air Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The EU Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action 620 Group approach is applied to evaluate the risk of groundwater contamination of a karstic aquifer located southeast of Mexico, to get information of potentially threatened areas. Subsurface contaminant loads, the aquifer vulnerability, as well as, the interaction between them are considered to define the aquifer risk to contamination. The hazard and risk indexes are calculated from an inventory of contaminant sources, creating their maps using geographic information system. Under the COST 620 approach, any method can be used to analyze aquifer vulnerability to contamination and new ones can be developed. This allows to model the karst groundwater vulnerability to contamination in the study area, applying a modified version of the DRASTIC method, where considerations are given to hydraulic conductivity and land use, as parameters in the model. The results indicate a more conservative differentiation when compared to similar studies carried out in the study area with the moderate vulnerability class occupying the greatest extent. Areas of high hazard and risk are in the main urban areas.

show abstract

An Interpretation of Karstification and Karst Processes by Hungarian Researchers

Veress

2022

Cave and Karst Systems of Hungary

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State of the art of karst vulnerability assessment: overview, evaluation and outlook

Cited by 56 publications

References 81 publications

Groundwater Vulnerability and Risk Assessment in A Karst Aquifer of Greece Using EPIK Method

Groundwater Vulnerability and Risk Assessment in A Karst Aquifer of Greece Using EPIK Method

COST Action 620 Approach: Application to a Karst Aquifer, SE Mexico

An Interpretation of Karstification and Karst Processes by Hungarian Researchers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About