Tracing Groundwater Flow Systems with Hydrogeochemistry in Contrasting Geological Environments

The importance of the chemical composition in evaluating groundwater flow is discussed. Two different geological environments, a felsic volcanic region around San Luis Potosí (SLPB), Mexico, and a sedimentary basin, part of the Pannonian Basin (PB), in Hungary, were chosen to explore the effect of local, intermediate and regional groundwater flows on the chemical evolution of water in different geological circumstances. In the study areas contrasting stable isotopes and groundwater temperature values, as well as the chemical composition of groundwater were convenient tools to propose groundwater flow direction and to study contamination processes in the different groundwater flow systems. Results indicate that regardless of the geological framework variability of the chemical composition of the shallow (<100 m) groundwater is significant; at depth the chemical content of groundwater becomes homogeneous, and the concentrations are smaller than at shallow depths. The Cl- and NO- ₃ concentrations indicate mainly up- and downward vertical flow directions suggesting local flow systems in the shallow layers. The linear regression between Cl- and Na⁺ suggests that evaporation processes are the main control of the Cl- concentration. Deviations from the regression line suggest processes such as pollution at shallow depths in both study areas. Based on the distribution of Ca⁺², Mg⁺² and Na⁺, a lateral flow can be traced. The large dimensions of the geological units involved with the regional flow systems implies a long groundwater flow path, also these flows remain isolated from anthropogenic contamination, then groundwater has not been altered by human influence, although in the SLPB a communication between the local and intermediate flows has been found. Recharge areas of the local and intermediate flow systems are more vulnerable to contamination processes than the discharge areas, where the expected low dissolved oxygen content of ascending water could play a control. Differences in the lithology between the PB (sedimentary basin) and the SLPB (felsic volcanic basin) explain the contrasting saturation indices calculated for chalcedony and calcite and the lack of the expected development of HCO- ₃, SO-² ₄ Cl- facies and contrasting aerobic/oxidizing conditions.