بررسی منشأ و عوامل مؤثر بر تغییرات غلظت سولفات و مقادیر ایزوتوپی 34S و 18O آن در منابع آب منطقه سرپل ذهاب

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• حسین محمدزاده ¹
• مهدی بنیابادی ²
• فائزه جنگ جو ²

¹ استاد دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد و مدیر گروه پژوهشی تحقیقات آب‌های زیرزمینی و ژئوترمال (متآب)، پژوهشکده آب و محیط زیست، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

² گروه زمین‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم پایه، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.2021.70540.1056

چکیده

غلظت زیاد سولفات یکی از آلوده­کننده­های آب‌های زیرزمینی در بسیاری از مناطق جهان بشمار می­رود و از منابع مختلفی (لیتولوژی، اتمسفر، صنعتی و...) وارد آب‌های زیرزمینی می­گردد. با استفاده از تکنیک­های ایزوتوپی و هیدروژئوشیمی می­توان ضمن تشخیص منشأ، به فرآیندها و واکنش‌های مؤثر بر غلظت سولفات و تولید گاز سولفید هیدروژن پی برد. در این مقاله، برای اولین بار به مطالعه منشأ سولفات و عوامل مؤثر بر تغییرات غلظت آن و مقادیر ایزوتوپی‌  d³⁴Sو d¹⁸O در آّب­های­زیرزمینی منطقه سرپل ذهاب پرداخته شد. تعداد 13 نمونه آب از منابع آبی منطقه در دی 93 و مهر 94 برداشت گردید و در آزمایشگاه هیدروژئوشیمی و ایزوتوپی دانشگاه واترلوو آنالیز گردید. غلظت سولفات در منابع آبی منطقه بین 5 تا 950 میلی‌گرم بر لیتر (در فصل تر و خشک به‌ترتیب دارای میانگین 110/1 و 106/9 میلی‌گرم بر لیتر) متغیر بوده، اما در نمونه­های آب چشمه گنداب به دلیل ارتباط با مواد هیدروکربنی و تونل پاتاق به دلیل خروج آب از سازند گچساران زیاد بود (به‌ترتیب 339/6 و 950/1 میلی­گرم بر لیتر). مقادیر d³⁴S و d¹⁸O سولفات به‌ترتیب بین VSMOW 9/5 تا 31/8 ‰ و 5/8 تا 13/1‰ متغیر به دست آمد. در چشمه گنداب، به دلیل احیای سولفات توسط میکروارگانیسم­ها، علاوه بر استشمام بوی نامطبوع H₂S، مقادیر ایزوتوپ­های  ³⁴Sو ¹⁸O غنی­تر از سایر منابع آبی (به‌ترتیب حدود 31/8‰ و 10/3 ‰) بوده و نمونه آب چشمه گلودره تحت تاثیر فاضلاب حمام و مواد شوینده (1 ‰≈d³⁴S) بالادست چشمه سبب تهی­شدگی ایزوتوپی و آلودگی آن شده است. نتایج نشان می­دهد که عوامل زمین­شناسی، اتمسفری، انسانی و مواد هیدروکربنی بر غلظت و ایزوتوپ­های سولفات در منابع آبی منطقه موثر است به طوری‌که عوامل انسانی و هیدروکربنی به‌صورت محلی و لیتولوژی در تمامی منابع آبی منطقه در غلظت و ایزوتوپ­های سولفات تاثیرگذار بوده‌اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• آب‌های زیرزمینی
• تکنیک‌های ایزوتوپی
• سولفات
• سرپل ذهاب

20.1001.1.20084757.1400.35.5.3.6

موضوعات

• علوم آب

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the Source and Factors Affecting Sulfate Concentration and Isotopic (34S and 18O) Variations in Water Resources of Sarpol-e Zahab Region

نویسندگان [English]

• H. Mohammadzadeh ¹
• M. Bonyabadi ²
• F. Jangjoo ²

¹ Full Professor at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad and Head of Groundwater and Geothermal Reeasrch Center (GRC), Water and Environment Research Institute, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

² Department of Geology, Faculty of Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

چکیده [English]

Introduction: Sulfate is one of the important groundwater pollutant sources in many parts of the world and it can enter into groundwater from various sources, such as lithology (dissolution of evaporative and pyrite oxidation), atmosphere (sea water spray), industrial (combustion of fossil fuels, sulfide- minerals production, and agricultural fertilizers), and etc. Identifying sources of soluble sulfate in water sources is important.  The sulfate in groundwater can be investigated using isotope and geochemistry techniques. Using isotope (³⁴S and ¹⁸O) and hydro geochemical techniques, it can be possible to find out: sulfate origins and the effective processes/reactions on sulfate concentrations and hydrogen sulfide gas (H₂S) production. In this paper, for the first time, the sulfate source in groundwater of Sarpol Zahab and the parameters affecting sulfate concentration and its isotopic compositions (d³⁴S and d¹⁸O) in groundwater were studied. Sarpol-e Zahab is located in the catchment area of Alvand river in the west of Kermanshah province, west of Iran. The formations of the region, based on age from old to new, include the Ilam, Gurpi, Amiran, Telezang, Pabdeh, Asmari, Gachsaran, Aghajari, Bakhtiari and Quaternary alluvium formations. Asmari formation and Quaternary alluvial sediments form the largest area of the region. Gachsaran formation contains evaporative materials which is reducing the quality of groundwater in the region. Ilam formation is effective in providing the organic matter required for the bacterial sulfate reduction process.
Materials and Methods: 13 water samples were taken from the water resources (wells, springs and river) of Sarpol-e Zahab region in two steps (December 2014 and September 2015). Measuring field parameters (T, pH, Eh, Ec, and TDS) and sampling of water resources were performed according to the instructions of Groundwater and Geothermal Research Center (GRC), Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. Field parameters were measured by VWR Handheld Multi parameter Research meter at the location of each water source. The concentration of cations and the anions were determined by the devices inductively coupled plasma elemental analyzer (ICP-EA) and ion chromatography (IC), respectively. Chemical and isotopic analyses of all water samples were performed in Ottawa university geochemistry laboratory and Waterloo university isotope laboratory, respectively. The measurement reference for isotopic sulfate and oxygen were VCDT and VSMOW, respectively, and the value isotopic are expressed as permil ((‰.
Results and Discussion: The sulfate concentrations in different water resources of the region varied from 5 to 950 mg L, however, it is very high in Gandab spring’ water, due to the association with hydrocarbons, and in Patagh Tunnel water, due to discharging of water from Gachsaran Formation (339.6 mg L and 950.1mg L, respectively). Chenarpiran spring has the lowest sulfate concentration because it is located in highlands and is discharged from Asmari formation with good water quality. The amount of  d¹⁸O varied between 5.8 to 13.1 VCDT ‰ and the amount of  d³⁴S ranges from 9.5 to 31.8 VSMOW ‰. In Gandab spring’ water, due to sulfate reduction by microorganisms, in addition to the unpleasant smell of sulfide hydrogen (H₂S), the d³⁴S and d¹⁸O values were enriched than the isotopic composition of other water sources ( about 31.8 ‰ and 10.3 ‰, respectively). In other hand, the Gel va Darreh spring's water, due to the effect of upstream bath waste water (soap and detergent with a value of about 1 ‰ for d³⁴S), indicated depleted isotope values.
Conclusion: The concentration and isotopic composition of sulfate in the water resources of the Sarpol-e Zahab region are affected by the geological, atmospheric, human and hydrocarbon materials. The impact of human and hydrocarbon factors on the concentration and isotopes of sulfate is local, however, the lithology effects are on all water resources of the region. Since, Gachsaran formation forms the alluvial aquifer bedrock of Ghaleshahin plain, the dissolution of gypsum has an effective role in the hydro chemical evolution of the alluvial aquifer of this plain. The lithology of the area is often limestone and evaporation. Due to the high solubility of these materials in water, they have been able to have a significant effect on sulfate isotopic in water sources. The amount of measured isotopic values indicated that the origin of evaporators and atmospheric sulfate is in water. The dissolution of the evaporation formation has reduced the water quality. The association of bedrock in the Gandab spring has led to have a reduction environment and the occurrence of sulfate reduction and production of hydrogen sulfide gas (H₂S). The human activities (by making bath upstream) caused oxidizing conditions, isotopic depletion and contamination of the Glodarreh spring.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Groundwater
• Isotope Techniques
• Sarepole Zahab
• Sulfate

مراجع

1. Aelion C.M., Höhener P., Hunkeler D., and Aravena R. 2010. Environmental Isotopes in Biodegradation and Bioremediation. CRC Press.
2. Appelo C.A.J., and Postma D. 2005. Geochemistry, groundwater and pollution, Leiden, The Netherlands: A A Balkema Publishers.
3. Arbabi M., Rafiei B., Bayati M., and Malekirad M. 2011. Determinateion of sulfuric acid (H₂SO₄) and dissolution wallrocks in Nosoud water supply tunnel (Ezgeleh, NW Kermanshah). 30^th Earth Science Conference. (In Persian)
4. Berner R.A. 1971. Bacterial processes affecting the precipitation of calcium carbonate in sediment, In: Carbonte Cements, O. P. Bricker. The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.
5. Bottrell S.H., Tellam J., Barlett R., and Hughes A. 2008. Isotopic composition of sulfate as tracer of natural and anthropogenic influences on groundwater geochemistry in an urban sandstone aquifer, Birmingham, UK. Applied Geochemistry 23: 2381–2394.
6. Brunner B., Bernasconi S.M., Kleikemper J., and Schroth H. 2005. A model for oxygen and sulfur isotope fractionation in sulfate during bacterial sulfate reduction processes. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta 69: 4773–85.
7. Canfield D.E., Olesen C.A., and Cox R.P. 2006. Temperature and its control of isotope fractionatio by a sulfate- reducing bacterium. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta 70: 548–61.
8. Clark I.D. 2015. Groundwater Geochemistry and Isotopes. CRC Press.
9. Drever J.J. 1997. The Geochemistry of Natural Waters. 3^nd ed. Prentice-Hall.
10. Detmers J., Bruchert V., Habicht K.S., and Kuever J. 2001. Diversity of sulfur isotope fractionations by sulfate-reducing prokaryotes. Applied Environmental Microbiology 67: 888–94.
11. Fritz P., and Drimmie R.J. 1991. Ground water. In Stable isotope: Natural and anthropogenic sulphur in the environment, SCOPE 43 (eds.). H. R. Krouse and V. A. Grinenko 228–41. Chichester: Wiley.
12. Jakobczyk-Karpierz S., Sitek S., Jakobsen R., and Kowalczyk A. 2017. Geochemical and isotopic study to determine sources and processes affecting nitrate and sulphate in groundwater influenced by intensive human activity - carbonate aquifer Gliwice (southern Poland). Applied Geochemistry 6: 168-181.
13. Hitchon B., and Krouse H.R. 1972. Hydrogeochemistry of the surface waters of the Mackenzie River drainage basin, Canada - III. Stable isotopes of oxygen, carbon an sulphur. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta 36: 1337–1357.
14. Saberi Nasr A., Dashti Barmaki M., and Mahmoudi N. 2014-1995. Water quality data analysis and interpretatio (Translated in Persian).
15. Knoeller K., Trettin R., and Strauch G. 2005. Sulphur cycling in the drinking water catchment area of Torgau-Mockritz (Germany): Insights from hydrochemical and stable isotope investigations. Hydrological Processes 19: 3445–65.
16. Krouse H.R., and Mayer B. 2000. Sulphur and oxygen isotopes in sulphate, in: P. G. Cook & A. L. Herczeg (ed.). tracers in subsurface In Environmental hydrology, p.195–231. Boston: Kluwer.
17. Man K., Zhenmin M., and Xiujin X. 2014. Research on the Mechanism of Sulfate Pollution of Groundwater in Jiaozuo Area. Applied Mechanics and Materials 665: 436-439.
18. Miao Z., Carroll K., and Brusseau M. 2013. Characterization and quantification of groundwater sulfate sources at a mining site in an arid climate: The Monument Valley site in Arizona, USA. Hydrology 504: 207–215.
19. Mizutani Y., and Rafter T.A. 1973. Isotopic behaviour of sulfate oxygen in the bacterial reduction of sulfate. Geochem 6: 183-191.
20. Mohammadzadeh H., and Aravena R. 2015. Investigating the Origin and Interaction between Karstic and Alluvial Aquifers in NW of Zagros Mountain Range, Iran, Using Isotopic and Geochemical Tools. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 13: 256–260.
21. Mor F., Modaberi S., and Forghani Tehrani G. 2011. Principles of Environmental Geochemistry. (Translated in Persian)
22. Pearson F.J., and Rightmire C.T. 1980. Sulphur and oxygen isotopes in aqueous sulphur compounds, In: Handbook of Environmental Isotope Geochemistry. Vol. I, eds. P. Fritz and J.-c. Fontes, Pp.227-258. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
23. Reuss J.O., and Johnson D.W. 1986. Acid deposition and the acidification of soils and water, Ecological Studies. Springer Verlag, New York.
24. Rightmire C.T., Pearson F.J., Back W., Rye R.O., and Hanshaw B.B. 1974. Distribution of sulfur isotopes of sulfates in ground waters from the principal artesian aquifer of Florida and the Edwards aquifer of Texas, United States of America. In Proceedings of an symposium on isotope techniques in ground water hydrology. ed. IAEA, 191–207 Vienna.
25. Schiff S.L., Spoelstra J., Semkin R.G., and Jeffries D.S. 2005. Drought induced pulses of SO₄^2– from a Canadian shield wetland: Use of δ³⁴S and δ¹⁸O in SO₄^2– to determine sources of sulfate. Applied Geochemistry 20: 691–700.
26. Torres-Martínez J.A., Mora A., Knappett P.S.K., Ornelas-Soto N., and Mahlknech J. 2020. Tracking nitrate and sulfate sources in groundwater of an urbanized valley using a multi-tracer approach combined with a Bayesian isotope mixing model. Water Research.
27. Wang H., and Zhang Q. 2019. Research Advances in Identifying Sulfate Contamination Sources of Water Environment by Using Stable Isotopes. Internationa Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.