MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2256102675 · doi:10.3133/sir20145047

Hydrogeologic framework of the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins, United States and Canada

2014· article· en· W2256102675 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joanna N. Thamke, Gary D. LeCain, Derek W. Ryter, Roy Sando, Andrew J. Long

Notice bibliographique

RevueScientific investigations report · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesU.S. Geological Survey
Mots-clésAquiferGeologyStructural basinGroundwaterHydrogeologyOil shaleCoal measuresCretaceousGeochemistryDrainage basinHydrology (agriculture)GeomorphologyPaleontologyGeotechnical engineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins within the United States and Canada are the uppermost principal aquifer systems and most accessible sources of groundwater for these energy-producing basins. The glacial aquifer system covers the northeastern part of the Williston structural basin. The lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems are present in about 91,300 square miles (mi2) of the Williston structural basin and about 25,500 mi2 of the Powder River structural basin. Directly under these aquifer systems are 800 to more than 3,000 feet (ft) of relatively impermeable marine shale that serves as a basal confining unit. The aquifer systems in the Williston structural basin have a shallow (less than 2,900 ft deep), wide, and generally symmetrical bowl shape. The aquifer systems in the Powder River structural basin have a very deep (as much as 8,500 ft deep), narrow, and asymmetrical shape. The Williston structural basin has been an important oil and natural gas producing region since the 1950s, and production has increased substantially since the mid-2000s due to improved drilling and hydraulic fracturing methods from deep formations, such as the Bakken and Three Forks Formations. These improved methods require considerable volumes of freshwater mostly from shallow aquifers or surface water. Coal, lignite, and coal-bed natural gas are additional sources of energy in both basins that can affect the quality and quantity of shallow aquifers through strip mining and groundwater depletion. In 2011, the U.S. Geological Survey initiated a regional study of the glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins with the goal to quantify groundwater availability. This report, together with a companion report of the conceptual flow model, provides an improved understanding of the groundwater flow systems and a basis for a numerical, regional groundwater-flow model. This study combines the lithostratigraphic units of the glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems in the United States and Canada into 7 regional hydrogeologic units—glacial deposits, 4 bedrock aquifers, and 2 bedrock confining units—using general hydraulic properties. The glacial deposits are composed of till and glacial outwash sands and gravels with areas of cobbles and boulders. The four bedrock aquifers are the upper Fort Union, lower Fort Union, lower Hell Creek, and Fox Hills aquifers and are contained primarily in sandstone layers. The two confining units are the middle Fort Union hydrogeologic unit (shale) and upper Hell Creek hydrogeologic unit (contains less sandstone than the underlying lower Hell Creek aquifer). Water from hydrogeologic units in these three aquifer systems is relatively fresh and potable, whereas withdrawals seldom occur from units below the basal confining unit because of great depths (greater than 800 ft) and poor water quality. Analysis of about 300 electric (resistivity) and lithologic logs in the Williston structural basin and numerous existing publications for the Powder River structural basin were used to develop a three-dimensional hydrogeologic framework for both basins. Interpolated thicknesses of the glacial deposits, the lower Tertiary aquifer system, and the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system in the Williston structural basin are less than about 750; 2,250; and 1,050 ft, respectively. Interpolated thicknesses of the lower Tertiary aquifer system and the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system in the Powder River structural basin are less than about 7,180 and 5,070 ft, respectively. Interpolated horizontal hydraulic conductivity values for the Williston structural basin were as much as 25 feet per day (ft/d) in the glacial deposits and had smaller ranges in the lower Tertiary aquifer system (0.01–9.8 ft/d) and in the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system (0.06–5.5 ft/d). In the Powder River structural basin, the lower Tertiary aquifer system had a greater range of interpolated horizontal hydraulic conductivity values (0.10–11 ft/d) than the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system (0.02–5.7 ft/d). Transmissivity is greatest in the gravel zones of the glacial deposits (2,120 feet squared per day) and generally decreases with depth into the bedrock units. Regionally, water in the lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems flows in a northerly or northeasterly direction from the Powder River structural basin to the Williston structural basin. Groundwater flow in the Williston structural basin generally is easterly or northeasterly. Flow in the uppermost hydrogeologic units generally is more local and controlled by topography where unglaciated in the Williston structural basin than is flow in the glaciated part and in underlying aquifers. Groundwater flow in the Powder River structural basin generally is northerly with local variations greatest in the uppermost aquifers. Groundwater is confined, and flow is regional in the underlying aquifers.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,016
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,071

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0040,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,205
Écart entre enseignants0,196 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations17
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueScientific investigations report→Même sujetGroundwater flow and contamination studies→Travaux en français237 207→