Impact of brackish groundwater and treated wastewater on soil chemical and mineralogical properties

dc.contributor.authorTahtouh, Jeffry
dc.contributor.authorMohtar, Rabi H.
dc.contributor.authorAssi, Amjad T.
dc.contributor.authorSchwab, Paul Arthur
dc.contributor.authorJantrania, Anish
dc.contributor.authorDeng, Youjun
dc.contributor.authorMunster, Clyde L.
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Agriculture
dc.contributor.facultyFaculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences (FAFS)
dc.contributor.institutionAmerican University of Beirut
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-24T12:18:14Z
dc.date.available2025-01-24T12:18:14Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractThe long-term effect of using treated wastewater is not clearly defined: some researchers argue that it is better than freshwater for the soil health; others disapprove, claiming that irrigation with unconventional water resources causes soil degradation. This study assesses the impact of irrigation with non-traditional water on the chemical and mineralogical properties of a calcareous clayey soil from West Texas. The exponential rise in population and the realities of climate change contribute to the global increase in freshwater scarcity: non-conventional water sources, such as treated wastewater (TWW) and brackish groundwater (BGW), offer potentially attractive alternative water resources for irrigated agriculture. For this research, the differences between TWW and BGW were addressed by collecting and analyzing water samples for salt and nutrient content. Soil samples from three horizons (Ap, A, and B) were obtained from three different fields: Rainfed (RF), BGW irrigated, and TWW irrigated. Soil was analyzed for texture, salinity, sodicity, and carbon content. Clay mineralogy of the three different fields was analyzed using the B-horizons. The outcomes from the analysis showed that the BGW from the Lipan aquifer has higher salinity and is harder compared to TWW. Although the exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP), sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), and electroconductivity (EC) increased marginally compared to the control soil (RF), the soils were in good health, all the values of interest (SAR < 13, ESP < 15, pH < 8.5, and EC < 4) were low, indicating no sodicity or salinity problems. Smectite, illite, and kaolinite were identified in the three B-horizon samples using bulk X-ray diffraction (XRD). Overall, no major changes were observed in the soil. Thus, TWW and BGW are viable replacements for freshwater irrigation in arid and semi-arid regions. © 2018 Elsevier B.V.
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.200
dc.identifier.eid2-s2.0-85050881498
dc.identifier.pmid30077859
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10938/33967
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.
dc.relation.ispartofScience of the Total Environment
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectBrackish groundwater
dc.subjectAgriculture
dc.subjectNon-traditional water sources
dc.subjectSoil chemistry
dc.subjectSoil mineralogy
dc.subjectTreated wastewater
dc.subjectTexas
dc.subjectUnited states
dc.subjectAquifers
dc.subjectClimate change
dc.subjectDegradation
dc.subjectHydrochemistry
dc.subjectIrrigation
dc.subjectKaolinite
dc.subjectSodium
dc.subjectSoil
dc.subjectWastewater treatment
dc.subjectWater treatment
dc.subjectAluminum silicate
dc.subjectBrackish water
dc.subjectFresh water
dc.subjectGround water
dc.subjectMica
dc.subjectSilicon dioxide
dc.subjectBrackish ground water
dc.subjectWater source
dc.subjectClay soil
dc.subjectGroundwater resource
dc.subjectMineralogy
dc.subjectWastewater
dc.subjectAquifer
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectChemical parameters
dc.subjectControlled study
dc.subjectElectric conductivity
dc.subjectExchangeable sodium percentage
dc.subjectHydropower
dc.subjectIrrigation
dc.subjectSalinity
dc.subjectSodium adsorption ratio
dc.subjectSoil analysis
dc.subjectSoil texture
dc.subjectWaste water management
dc.subjectWater quality
dc.subjectWater sampling
dc.subjectWater supply
dc.subjectGroundwater resources
dc.titleImpact of brackish groundwater and treated wastewater on soil chemical and mineralogical properties
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2019-7772.pdf
Size:
3 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format