Geophysical Hazards. Minimizing Risk, Maximizing Awareness (Tom Beer)

Environmental Engineering
Series Editors: U Forstner, R. J Murphy, W H Rulkens

Dieter Vogelsang
Environmental
Geophysics
A Practical Guide
With 113 Figures
Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg NewYork
London Paris Tokyo
Hong Kong Barcelona Budapest
Series Editors
Prof. Dr. U. Forstner Arbeitsbereich Umweltschutztechnik
Technische Universitat Hamburg-Harburg
EiBendorfer StraBe 40
D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
Prof. Robert 1. Murphy Dept. of Civil Engineering and Mechanics

College of Engineering
University of South Florida
4202 East Fowler Avenue, ENG 118
Tampa, FL 33620-5350, USA
Prof. Dr. ir. W. H. Rulkens Wageningen Agricultural University

Dept. of Environmental Technology
Bomenweg 2, P.O. Box 8129
NL-6700 EV Wageningen, The Netherlands
Author
Professor
Dr. rer. nat. Dieter Vogelsang
KampstraBe 70
D-30629 Hannover
Germany
ISBN-13:978-3-642-85143-8 e-ISBN-13:978-3-642-85141-4
DOl: 10.1007/978-3-642-85141-4
CIP-data applied for
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the
material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilm or in other ways, and storage in data
banks. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions
of the German Copyright Law of September 9, 1965, in its current version, and permission for
use must always be obtained from Springer-Verlag. Violations are liable for prosecution act
under German Copyright Law.
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1995
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence ofa specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
Typesetting: Data-conversion by Fototsatz-Service Kohler OHG, Wiirzburg

SPIN:I0085882 6113020-5432 I 0 - Printed on acid-free paper
Preface
Applied geophysics was developed to explore the raw materials required by civi-
lization. This book defines its new environmental task: to investigate the extent
and nature of buried contaminated waste and leachates. It describes the possibil-
ities, advantages and shortcomings of geophysics in detail and in plain words,
without referring to mathematical formulaes or scientific jargon. Environmental
Geophysics may also serve as a simple introduction to geophysics for students
inexperienced in mathematics.
Firstly, geophysical methods are described. Later, more than 80 environmental
case histories from the USA and abroad are discussed and documented with 113
figures. The last three chapters present the gist of the book through condensed,
lucid tables for the hurried reader. This briefing comprises cost estimates for geo-
physical surveys and offers advice for the proper choice of methods and for the
compilation of tenders.
This book will enable engineers, scientists and lawyers to appreciate the great
possibilities of geophysics in the assessment of environmental risks. This new
branch of science allows continuous spatial coverage, considerable cost and time
saving, is noninvasive and guarantees high standards of industrial safety.
This American edition is based roughly on the second edition of Geophysik an
Altlasten. The German book was completely revised and considerably enlarged to
meet the high American standards and requirements. The author would like to
thank Mrs. Barbara Eder for her help with the translation.
Hannover, March 1994 Dieter Vogelsang

Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Targets....
1.2 Fundamentals
1.3 Preconditions
1.4 Cooperation 2
2 Methods . . 5
2.1 Geomagnetic Methods. . . . . 5
2.1.1 Geomagnetic Ground Surveys. 5
2.1.2 Aeromagnetic Surveys 8
2.2 Geoelectric Methods . . . 9
2.2.1 Direct-Current Methods. . 9
2.2.2 Electromagnetic Methods . 20
2.3 Seismic Methods 31
2.3.1 General . . . . . . . . 31
2.3.2 Seismic Refraction . . 32
2.3.3 Air-Acoustic Seismics . 35
2.3.4 Seismic Reflection 35
2.4 Gravity . . . . . . 39
2.5 Geothermometry 40
2.6 Well Logging .. 41
2.6.1 General . . . . . 41
2.6.2 Logging Methods 43
2.6.3 Percussion Probing 50
2.7 Radioactivity . . . 51
2.8 Isotope Hydrology . 54
3 Case Histories . . . . . . . 57
3.1 Abandoned Hazardous Sites 57
3.1.1 Preconditions . . . . . . 57
3.1.2 Geomagnetics . . . . . . . . 57
3.1.3 Geoelectric DC Methods .. 65
3.1.4 Electromagnetic Methods (EM). 81
3.1.5 Seismics . 98
3.1.6 Gravity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
VIII Contents
3.1.7 Geothermy. 106

3.1.8 Radiometry 110
3.2 New Disposal Sites 114
3.2.1 General . . . . . . 114
3.2.2 Horizontal Stratification 114
3.2.3 Steep Dipping Structures 119
3.2.4 Nuclear Repositories .. 127
4 Costs of Geophysical Surveys 131

4.1 Cost Structures . . . . . . . . 131
4.2 Comparison of Geophysical Expenditures 132
5 Briefing for Geophysical Surveys . 137

5.1 Areas of Application . . . . . . . . 137
5.2 Objectives and Limitations . . . . . 138
5.3 Planning and Execution ofInvestigations . 141
5.3.1 Choice of Methods .. 141
5.3.2 Necessary Experience . . . . 143
5.3.3 Preparations . . . . . . . . . 144
5.3.4 Evaluation and Interpretation 144
5.3.5 Follow-up Activities . . . . . 144
5.4 Combination of Geophysical Methods 146
5.5 Research and Development 146
6 Geophysical Tenders . 151

6.1 Procedures... 151
6.2 Call for Tenders 152
6.2.1 Preparation. 152
6.2.2 Field Work. 152
6.2.3 Evaluation . 152
7 List and Origin of Figures and Tables. 153

7.1 List of Figures . 153
7.2 List of Tables 159
8 References 161
9 Index . . . 165
1 Introduction
1.1 Targets
This book was written to show how geophysics might be applied to the solution
of environmental problems. Investigations of ground water, soil and rocks are
described the subject of air pollution is not addressed, however.
Non-geophysicists who deal with environmental problems, like engineers,
scientists of other faculties, lawyers and community personnel, are introduced to
the application of geophysical methods. Complicated scientific elaborations and
mathematical formulaes are omitted. To contribute to a better understanding of
the practical feasibility and validity of these methods, many illustrated case
histories are presented.
Additionally, examples of tenders for geophysical surveys are included. Cost-
benefit analyses compare geophysics, drilling and probing programs and demon-
strate the economic advantages of using geophysical measurements to solve
environmental problems.
1.2 Fundamentals
Geophysical surveys of hazardous waste deposits are rarely published, since they
contain the classified data of companies, government offices and corporations.
Because of this, the high success rate of geophysical activities at contaminated
sites is as of yet known only to insiders.
Thanks to an intiative of the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, which
allowed a comparison of the results of 60 geophysical surveys at eight model sites
at hazardous waste dumps, essential high-quality information became available.
Geophysical results published by scientists from Europe and America plus
investigations carried out by the author have enlarged the scope of this book con-
siderably.
1.3 Preconditions
Over the past 75 years or so, geophysical methods have been developed, mainly
for the prospecting of deep-seated deposits of hydrocarbons and ores. During this
time, many instruments have been constructed and extensive experience in
evaluating and interpreting data has been accumulated.
2 1 Introduction
To cope with increasing rates of consumption of raw materials, the geophysical

exploration of the resources of fossil energy and ore has had to extend to greater
depths. Geophysics has thus helped to satisfy the raw material needs of our high-
tech civilization.
However, the task of controlling the disposal of the voluminous remnants
of used raw materials is a new one for geophysics. It necessitates a completely
new orientation. Now, the hitherto eliminated surface effects that have been
suppressing the signals of deep-seated deposits have become a new subject of in-
vestigation.
There is no need to develop completely new geophysical methods for the
exploration of hazardous sites. The above mentioned instruments and experiences
can be utilized fully. However, it is necessary to adapt the various methods to the
new environmental problems. It is, for instance, necessary to layout very fine
meshed grids, which allow high accuracy in shallow depths.
Since geophysical evaluations depend strongly on the geological and hydro-
geological structures of the ground, it is necessary to consider these when any
geological interpretation is derived from geophysical data.
1.4 Cooperation
Difficulties and misunderstandings may arise between geophysicists and
engineers due to the lack of mutual understanding. Good cooperation is essential,
since engineers control and finance most geophysical surveys.
The reason for this is mostly a different consideration of geophysical results.
While engineers regard every figure as "absolute", geophysical data may be rela-
tive, though they are based on the exact sciences of mathematics and physics.
This paradoxical phenomenon comes from the great variety and complexity of
the physical properties of geophysical targets. Their physical parameters must
often be smoothed and averaged before they can be treated by mathematical for-
mulaes.
Table 1.1 elucidates this dilemma. Furthermore, advice is included that
engineers should describe their environmental problems as exactly as possible, so
that the most suitable array may be chosen.
The geophysicist should, in return, inform the engineer precisely about the
limitations and restrictions of geophysical interpretation and should point out the
margins of error.
Further misunderstandings may arise from the presentation of data. They
should be readable and understandable, even for the geophysical layman. Most
impressive are certainly three-dimensional colored maps or sections. They por-
tray many details, and make complicated issues understandable.
Columns of numbers, pseudosections and contour maps are less comprehen-
sible. But it must be considered that a "beautiful" picture can rarely be used for
reinterpretation or upgrading, since it is mostly impossible to obtain precise data
from three-dimensional and/or color illustrations.
1.4 Cooperation 3
Table 1.1. Assessment of geophysical results
Engineers Geophysicists
Absolutely unerring Ambiguous, several equivalent solutions possible
All properties are exactly Properties can be determined only approximately

expressed in measuring units
No interpretation is neccessary Interpretation is essential
Clear and correct description of problems
.. Straightforward description of restrictions
It is best to combine the beautiful with the exact: geophysical reports should
contain the readable original data, perhaps on data carriers like PC discs or writ-
ten lists. Additionally, colored pseudo sections, 3D projections etc. should be
included.
Color has to be used with precaution: the nuances must agree with the data-
steps. Differences in colors are difficult to see in yellow or green, but provide
good contrasts in red or blue. The introduction of colours means also the opening
of an additional dimension for presentation; by colouring, one more set of data
can be shown in a drawing.
Depth data for engineers should be in meters or feet only. The tendency of
geophysicists to divide the y-axes for the vertical extension in ms, ns, mV, nT or
other physical units may be misleading because these units may be considered
equivalent to depth measures in meters. If it is not possible to reveal the actual
depth, the y-axes should not be marked at all. Naturally, the reason for this has to
be mentioned.
Overestimations of depth penetration may occur, especially in interpretations
of electromagnetic or radar measurements. One should bear in mind that false
depth declarations may cause expensive follow-up activities to fail. This may pro-
voke a general disregard of environmental geophysics. Further mishap may arise
through wrong handling of pseudosections. In some cases, the metric scale at the
surface (x-axis) was also used to determine the depth of sources. Accordingly, the
follow-up drilling was full of surprises.
To avoid this, pseudosections and similar presentations have to be described in
detail to the client. A special warning not to measure depths by the meter should
be included!
Geophysical anomalies are created not only by natural or artificial structures,
but also by human installations like cables or metal pipes, which produce un-
wanted disturbing anomalies. To avoid this, the area of investigation should be
4 1 Introduction
Table 1.2. Presentation of geophysical results
Medium Completeness Readability Follow-up Recollection

evaluation possible
tape, disc good difficult good bad

tabled figures good difficult good small
cross section acceptable good small good
contour lines acceptable good small good
3D pictures small good not suitable excellent
colouring enhanced enhanced not suitable excellent
checked painstakingly by an electromagnetic cable/metal detector before

geoelectric measurements commence.
To eliminate "external" anomalies by calculation is not only very difficult, but
often leads to wrong conclusions. If, for instance, a metal pipe crosses under a
waste dump, it is preferable to leave the corresponding anomalies in the presen-
tation and show the pipe position in the maps.
An additional obstacle is the meagre knowledge of geophysical methods by
environmental experts. This may lead to the wrong approach: "Geophysics must
be applied without any background information to find out whether it can really
detect the wanted structures." It is much better to disclose all available informati-
on to the geophysicist in charge. This will enable him to plan and to evaluate the
geophysical work much better and to overcome the ambiguity of some geo-
physical results.
Most useful is the description of geological, hydrological and tectonical struc-
tures and of the materials that have been deposited in a dump.
Geophysics should be employed within a loose frame: the width of the grid and
of the measuring array should not be stipulated because all unexpected alterations
of form, size and material content of the object, which come up during the survey,
must be met with different directions of sections or a change of array.
2 Methods
This chapter describes well-tried procedures that can be employed for the ex-
ploration of hazardous waste dumps and their vicinity. In addition, a short
description of the principles of measurements, the arrays and the possibilities of
application of geophysics to environmental problems are given. Case histories are
presented in Chap. 3. More detailed information about geophysical methods can
be found in the textbooks cited in Chap. 8.
2.1 Geomagnetic Methods
2.1.1 Geomagnetic Ground Surveys
Magnetic measurements deal with anomalies ofthe geomagnetic field, which are
caused by contrasts of the rock magnetization or by magnetic landfills or dumps.
The magnetization of rocks or iron-bearing waste contains shares of inductive
and remnant magnetization: the inductive magnetization originates from the
magnetic earth field at the waste location and depends on its actual strength and
direction and on the susceptibility X of rocks or of deposited material. In contrast,
the remnant magnetization is constant and is not changed by alterations of the
recent magnetic field.
The remnant magnetization is a long-term effect, which is independent of the
recent earth field. Only iron and ferrimagnetic minerals can be strongly magne-
tized. The latter are mostly oxides and sulfides of iron with "spinell structures."
Other materials may be ferro-, para- and diamagnetic. While the similarly
strong ferromagnetism is combined with high magnetic susceptibility, the para-
and diamagnetism are so weak that they can be ignored in field measurements.
The magnetic effects of magnetic bodies, which can be surveyed on the surface
of the earth, are dependent not only on their magnetization, form and size, but also
on their depth, because the magnetic field weakens with growing distance from
the reciprocal of the power cube.
It follows that the shape of magnetic anomalies flattens with increasing height
over the surface of the earth. Figure 2.1 shows this effect for the case of a waste
dump with various deposits of different magnetization and size.
The anomalies of singular bodies influence the curves, which are measured
close to the surface. Such small-scale anomalies lose their amplitudes rapidly
6 2 Methods
===--=--
[200nT
4m
---=====--
t400nT
..,c 2m
200
~ ~
::;)
0
'-
-----
CI
GI
> t400nT
/
0
.0
'"
Qj
1m
200
:.;;;;> ~ ......::
>
..!!l
.~ ~400nT ~
5 t200 / - ~
~ 0.5m'--::=========::;?T----------".;<c;;::===========
~
~!~r AT~
0.2m'-:=:::::::=~=-I-----=----\'--:-=========
Cross section
Fig. 2.1. Magnetic anomalies at different heights above ground
with growing height, until finally the curves become so smooth that only the
waste deposit as a whole may be discerned.
Therefore, singular iron objects can be located only near the surface. At a depth
of> 7 m, even a car wreck can be overlooked.
The shape of magnetic anomalies pertains furthermore to the inclination of the
magnetic field of the earth, or the geographical latitude of the location. This is
illustrated in Fig. 2.2 for a globe-shaped pile of iron scrap under inductive magne-
tization.
A typical curve for areas in the northern hemisphere, such as the USA, with
inclinations between 60° and 70°, is shown. This example discloses that in such
areas, maxima and minima of the magnetic total intensity do not occur over the
center of a magnetic source. A normal magnetized body has an anomaly with a
strong maximum in the south and a weaker minimum in the north. This must be
remembered when follow-up trenching or drilling is planned.
The strength of the magnetic field is measured in nT (nanotessla). Older
measurements were recorded in the same numbers, but in gamma. The total field
in the USA from the Mexican border to Canada grows from about 43000 nT to
55000 nT.
Different types of instruments may be used for magnetic measurements. Some
are equipped with permanent magnets, such as the magnetic field balance and the
2.1 Geomagnetic Methods 7
s N
Inclination 60-70°
~T
Scrap iron
Fig. 2.2. Magnetic section of the total intensity DT over a globe-shaped concentration of scrap
iron at 65° latitude
torsion magnetometer. They register the vertical and horizontal components of

the magnetic field of the earth. They are of robust construction, but the measure-
ments need a fair amount of time and care. They are used when special in-
formation about the shapes and structures of magnetic sources is required.
The Foerster probe relies upon the different magnetization of two ferro-
magnetic stripes, around which coils with opposing electromagnetic fields are
installed. If a magnetic field is applied, the zero point of the two hysteresis curves
moves in proportion to the measured field strength. This instrument is used main-
ly to determine separately the field strength in the horizontal and vertical direc-
tions with an accuracy of I nT. To achieve this, one Foerster probe is fixed in the
vertical and a second probe, in the horizontal position.
Most in use are proton magnetometers, which measure the total intensity T or
its variations as Ll T. The principle of measurement is the alteration of the spin
frequency of the cores of the atoms of hydrogen, the protons, by the magnetic
field. By a strong pulse of approximately I-second duration, an electromagnetic
field is produced in a coil surrounding a tin filled with water, or another suitable
organic liquid. This causes the protons of the liquid to spin. After switching off
the strong field, the frequency of the spinning protons is registered with an ac-
curacy of 0.5 nT.
Proton magnetometers are simple to handle and allow fast progress of the
survey. The measurements of two instruments are often combined to determine
the vertical gradient. Two magnetometers are held on the same rod, at different
heights above ground (for instance, at I m and 2 m). The obtained change of the
total intensitiy with increasing height provides the possibility to calculate the
depth of magnetic sources with greater exactness.
If a waste dump contains only very little iron or produces only weak magnetic
anomalies, the daily variations of the magnetic field have to be considered. They
8 2 Methods
should be continuously monitored at a non-moving base station for which a

second proton magnetometer for uninterrupted monitoring of data is needed. The
registered variations are eliminated by subtracting the differences in the general
total intensity level of the area from the values obtained in the field.
The depth of a magnetic body can be roughly estimated by the half-distance
between maximum and minimum of an anomaly. However, it should be observed
that the anomalies of only one source are included. For the comprehensive inter-
pretation of magnetic anomalies containing the calculation of form and depth of
model bodies, special software is available and should be used.
Geomagnetic data are well geared to localize covered waste dumps. The border
of a waste site containing domestic garbage can in most cases be mapped. The
same is valid for dumps with a high iron content. Even building refuse sites may
contain so much iron that a geomagnetic survey will meet with success.
Furthermore, it is possible to identify particular magnetic deposits in waste
dumps, such as bundles of metal drums or scrap iron, on condition that the rest of
the waste material is non-magnetic. But the limitations of magnetics are reached
when single magnetic objects, like metal drums with toxic fills, have to be locat-
ed within domestic garbage containing scattered iron objects.
The mesh width of survey grids must be determined by the expected extension
of anomalies. Measurements over disposal sites should cover the whole area of
rectangular grids meshed 1-5 m. For a preliminary overview, wider meshes can
be used.
The magnetic surveys are stJ;"ongly influenced by artificial magnetic installa-
tions like steelmasts, iron posts or steel-enforced concrete, which lie inside or
nearby the survey grids.
2.1.2 Aeromagnetic Surveys
Magnetic measurements can also be performed from helicopters or airplanes.

Instruments, mostly proton magnetometers or absorption cell magnetometers, are
either mounted on the outside of the airplane or are towed behind in an aerody-
namic bird. The length of the towing cable varies mostly between 20 and 30 m.
Towing has the advantage that the magnetic influence of the airplane must not be
compensated.
The flying grid should consist of parallel flight lines in distances of 50-200 m.
This line interval should tally approximately with the flying height inside the tar-
get area. The points on the ground, to which the magnetic values are to be attri-
buted, should only be spaced 5 - 20 m. Cross-control lines should be flown in
distances 5 -1 0 times the line spacing. At the crossings, the measured data should
agree. If this is not the case, the accuracy of the survey may be lacking.
The air survey may be flown in constant topographical height above sea level
or at a constant height above ground. The latter is preferred when magnetic bodies
near the surface, like hazardous waste sites, are to be explored. The appropriate
flying height is 30-50 m. This height is monitored mostly by radar altimeters,
which reach an accuracy of 5 % of the flying height.
2.2 Geoelectric Methods 9
It is necessary to monitor the daily variations of the magnetic field at a base

station on the ground during the airborne operation and correct the data, as des-
cribed for ground surveys.
2.2 Geoelectric Methods
2.2.1 Direct-Current Methods
The DC methods utilize the different electrical resistivities of minerals, rocks

and waste deposits. By applying artificial fields of DC (potential fields), the
important physical property, the specific electric resistivity p, is measured
in Om.
This method is founded on Ohm's law. It describes the connection between cur-
rent and voltage if a direct current flows through a conductor of limited size. If a
direct current with strength I [A] (amperes) flows along the long axis through a
rectangular parallelepiped with cross section q and length b (Fig. 2.3), the voltage
between the ends of the parallelepiped is
U=I·R.
R is called the Ohm resistivity [0] and is proportional to the length b and in-
versely proportional to the cross section q of the conductor and pertains to the
specific resistivity [Om]. It is valid:
R=Eq r .
In different arrays of geoelectric surveys, a direct current or an alternating current
oflow frequency « 100 Hz) is fed into the ground by two metallic current elec-
trodes with low stake resistance. This causes a potential field (Fig. 2.4), which is
influenced by the distribution of the specific resisitivities in the earth. By in-
creasing the distance between the electrodes, alterations ofthe potential field will
reflect geoelectric structures at greater depth. Sudden changes of specific
resistivity when entering deeper layers of strata will cause characteristic altera-
tions of the curve.
I = Current (A)
U= Potential (V)
q = Cross section of rectangular parallelepiped
I b = Length of parallelepiped
Fig. 2.3. Current flow through a limited conductor
10 2 Methods
Data
Data registration and Qa
measurement controlr_==:::.::::-t Printer IPlotter
Laptop
A"log dolo I 1j ..
Analog data
U
Power control
Volt meter
V
Survey car and

power source Current electrode 2·10km
connecting cor B"""'-
I =Current (A)
U = Potential (V)
A, B =Current electrodes
M, N =Potential electrodes: non-polarizable
Fig. 2.4. Principle of measurement and potential field for geoelectric DC surveys
Measurements of differences of the potential field (voltage U [V]) are carried

out between two well-grounded, non-polarizable potential electrodes. By apply-
ing special evaluation software, or by comparing the data with calculated model
curves, information about the distribution of specific resistivities and the regard-
ing geological structures can be derived.
Geoelectric field data are normally evaluated and presented by the proportion
of voltage U to current I, as measured in the field over inhomogenous ground.
Schlumberger Array
t""'" ~~"1~"" "':j' "

Surface A M 0 N B
'''' m
=i
Wenner Array
A M 0 N B
""""" ""\1".." , "a":::' i" '::" ~ "",

Surface 1 ~ ~
Dipole-dipole Array
M N 0 A B
~ ~ ~ ~~
Surface
\\'\\\\~\: :;"""n;"\": :"~::..r'"
L = AS = Separation current electrodes
a = MN = Separation potential electrodes
0= Point of measurement
Fig. 2.5. Arrays for geoelectric mapping and sounding
These data are converted into values, which would be valid for a homogenous
half-space by considering the actual electrode array. These values are called
"apparent" specific resistivities pa and are expressed in [Om).
This transformation is done by multiplying the specific resistivity pa with the
geometric "K factor". Prominent K factors for customary geoelectric arrays
(Fig. 2.5) are:
Ps=K' VII [Om]
K Schlumberger = n/a[(L/2)2 - (a/2)2]
L = spacing of current electrodes
K Wenner = 2na a = spacing of potential electrodes
n = multiple of a
Kdipole-dipole =1ta·n(n+l)(n+2)a
This list of specific resistivities is based on various singular investigations in
Europe and the U. S.A. It is to be regarded as a rough guide only, since deposited
material may, for instance, be mixed, which may result in very different resisti-
vities. On the other hand, it shows how wide the scope of geoelectric surveys
can be.
Geoelectric DC methods are predominantly used for:
Geoelectric mapping: determination of the horizontal distribution in defined
depth horizons.
Geoelectric sounding (also electrical or resisistivity sounding ES): investiga-
tion of specific resistivity and thickness of horizontally layered strata.
12 2 Methods
Table 2.1. Specific resistivities
Rock typelMaterial Specific resistivity [!lm]
Rock type
clay, marl, rich 3 - 30
clay, marl, meagre 10 - 40
clay, sandy, silt 25 - 150
sand, with clay 50 - 300
sand, gravel in ground water 200 - 400
sand, gravel, dry 800 -5000
rubble, dry 1000 -3000
limestone, gypsum 500 -3500
sandstone 300 -3000
salt beds and salt domes > 10000
granite 2000 - 10000
gneis 400 - 6000
Deposited refuse
domestic garbage 12 30
debris and dumped soil 200 - 350
industrial mud 40 - 200
scrap metal 1 - 12
pieces of broken glass and porcelain 100 - 550
casting sand 400 - 1600
wastepaper (wet) 70 - 180
contaminated plume of domestic-garbage dump I - 10
used oil 150 - 700
tar 300 - 1200
cleaning clothes and materials 30 - 200
used lacquer and paint 200 - 1000
barrels (empty) 5 - 20
Geoelectric Mapping
Lateral differences in apparent specific resistivity are mapped for a distinct depth
level. Suitable targets are, for instance, the rims of disposal sites or of deposits of
contaminated materials. The data are obtained from a fixed array, which records
the potential differences between the potential electrodes and is moved step-by-
step along survey lines until the whole survey area is covered. The result is pre-
sented as a contour map or resistivity section.
The depth range of the survey should not extend beyond the body of the waste
deposit into the bottom rock. For this purpose, the Wenner array (Fig. 2.5.) is well
geared. It can detect the border of most domestic waste sites very accurately.
However, the condition has to be fulfilled that the low specific resistivities that
are common to domestic refuse do not agree with similar low resistivities of the
surrounding country rock.
This condition is met by rocks with apparent specific resistivities from 300
to > 2000 Om, which are much higher than the resistivities of waste « 20 Om).
Gravel, sand, limestone and sandstone are well suited, but clay and marl may
possess apparent specific resistivities of the same order. Waste deposits lying
within such low resistive rocks may therefore remain undetected.
Apart from this special case, even separate contaminations with deviating re-
sistivities, like casting sands with very high, or galvanic muds with very low
resisitivities, can be located by geoelectric mapping. The resistivity values in
Table 2.1 may be used as a guide to materials that can be found by geoelectric
mapping.
The chosen array influences not only the result but also the length of survey
time. The most efficient arrays for mapping are presented in Fig. 2.5.
Important obstacles for geoelectric mapping are metallic cables, pipes and
other installations. They must be located by special metal- or cable-detectors be-
fore the survey. If this is not done, their very strong artificial anomalies may
delude the geophysicist into making an erroneous evaluation.
It is certainly advantageous to carry out geoelectric mapping for more than one
depth. This is done by increasing the distance between the electrodes. However,
the following rules of thumb should be observed:
- The spacing of current electrodes should agree with the double depth of pene-
tration.
- The spacing of potential electrodes should tally with the desired depth pene-
tration.
Geoelectric mapping ought not to be confined to waste sites, but may also be use-
ful in their vicinity. The lateral extension of aquifers in unconsolidated rocks, like
water-saturated sands and gravel with high specific resisitivity, can be found
against low-resistive clays and marls. The spread of salty leachate plumes can also
be monitored.
Geolectric Sounding (VES)

This method is used to determine:
1. The apparent specific resistivities of horizontally bedded strata or deposited
material.
2. The thickness and/or depth of those boundaries where resistivities of beds or
dumped charges change.
In use are 4-electrode arrays that are based on an artificially produced stationary
electric field. An often applied electrode configuration is the "Schlumberger
array" (Fig. 2.5). But the Wenner and dipole-dipole arrays may also be used for
geoelectric sounding.
Two well-grounded current electrodes feed a DC current into the earth with the
current of I. The potential differences U are measured between two neighbouring
potential and non-polarizable electrodes in the center of the array. To successfully
gather information about the depth of the underlying beds, many (> 20) measure-
ments are necessary, with distances between the current electrodes increased
according to an approximately logarithmic scale.
14 2 Methods
From the obtained data of the current I, the voltage U and the geometric factor
K, the apparent specific resistivity pa is calculated. All pa-values are plotted on
log-log graph paper against the half-distance of the current electrodes (L/2). The
single points are then connected to a sounding curve (Fig. 2.6).
The evaluation of the sounding curve can be obtained in several ways:
1. by the manual auxiliary-point method for multilayered cases utilizing special
curve sets,
2. by comparison with sets of printed master curves,
3. by using digital software with inversion programs.
The result should always be the determination of the following:
1. the number of beds,
2. the thickness of individual beds,
3. the resistivity of individual beds.
Geoelectric sounding has two important limitations:
1. omittance of beds:
very thin beds cannot be derived from the sounding curves at greater depth.
2. the principle of equivalence:
An evaluation of a sounding curve may produce several equivalent solutions. The
geophysicist has to select the result that agrees best with the known geological
and hydrological structures of the ground. Another selective moment is the com-
parison with neighboring soundings. It must be possible to connect the depth
marks of the boundaries of single layers of one sounding to corresponding depth
marks of the next sounding in such a way that a geologically or environmentally
plausible section is created (Fig. 3.13).
Sounding curves of> 2 layers are subdivided into four types:

1. minimum (H),
2. maximum (K),
3. double-descending (Q),
4. double-ascending (A).
Graphs pertaining to the auxiliary-point method are available. When evaluating
ascending curves (nos. 2 and 4), anisotropy effects have to be considered.
When constructing geoelectric sections or isoline maps of the boundaries of
single beds, correlations must be limited to horizontal or flat, dipping strata. Steep
dipping horizons or fault planes cannot be constructed by one-dimensional
evaluation. They must be either drawn by using geological knowledge or by ap-
plying computer programs for two- and three-dimensional interpretation.
If a surveyed area does not possess a homogeneous, horizontally layered
ground, disturbing side effects may derange the evaluation considerably. It was a
surprise that the very inhomogenous dumps of domestic waste show unexpected-
ly uniform low resistivities (Table 2.1). Therefore, it is feasible to determine pre-
Schlumberger Array
A M 0 N B
S~~f~~~"l::"""'t:~L~t"""':t'"
Interpretation
E 100 Overburden
E (930hm.m)
.r::
o
\ ..... " E Waste
\ "....1" .r:: (60hm.m)
/"
C.
\
VI
QJ
'Vi o
QJ
I- 10
U
QJ
Substratum
0.. (44 Ohm. m)
VI
C
QJ
l- 93\ 6 44
e
0..
0..
« 1 I III II III II 11
10 100 1000
Distance L!2 (m)
Modelcurve
Measured values
Fig. 2.6. Geoelectric sounding curve (VES) of a Schlumberger array with digital interpretation
and computed model curve of the minimum type "H"
1+--1
(.!lm) 1
--~--r---~,,-----r-I 10 100
AB!2-
,---1000m
139 .!l m
o /,
m
50 o 0 0 0 0 50
---000 0 0 0 a a
a 0 0 0 a 0730 0 0 0 0 0
10 a all a a 10 a 01 a a 10 0 01
I a 0 110 a 01 a a 10 a 01 0 a I
Fig. 2.7. Equivalent digital interpretations of a Schlumberger sounding curve. Left column =
mathematically best model. The selection ofthe most suitable model has to consider neighbor-
ing curves and the known geology
16 2 Methods
-h 1=1-o-+I.....---h2/h1--~'1
Q1
112=JL
=
o =J11.000
oIi I
5
i I I I I I
10
I
15
I
<;3 '-= 7.000
0.100
o
or
0.1 L _ _ _-----=::::::=~~~~::...;;;;;~~~~~~_ _.J
Fig.2.S. Three-layer master curves in a log-log graph of the INGESO atlas. The resistivities of
the three beds are in the ratios 1: 7: 0.1; first layer: second layer: third layer. The sounding cur-
ve, which has been drawn on log-log graph paper in the field, is laid on top of the master curve
and moved around until one of the master curves tallies with the field curve. The thickness of
the second layer, which has here seven times the pa-value of the first layer (see the resistivity
values at the top right) can be found by the number of the curve no.l3. On the thickness beam
at the top left, which is divided from 0 to 16, the thickness h2 can be directly determined
cisely the depth, thickness and specific resistivities of a domestic disposal site by
geoelectric sounding.
Since ammonia and other gases of decay are emanated by domestic waste,
work safety is impaired if invasive methods of investigation, like drilling or pro-
bing, are applied, because the inevitable destruction of the top sealing often
results in outbursts of gases that might endanger the health and lives of the
workers.
As a non-invasive method, geophysics is therefore certainly less dangerous and
much safer to apply.
Induced Polarization
The IP method is based on an electrochemical reaction of a natural liquid solution
(for instance, ground water) with interfaces of minerals. Ions or electrons are
caught on the walls or the interior surface of the pore system of rock, when an
electric DC or AC field is applied. This creates an electric potential that could be
compared with the charging of a car battery. The process of decharging provides
the parameters, which are measured by IP surveys.
Two types of induced polarization are known:
1. Metallic Polarization
This occurs at the surface of minerals with high conductivity and metallic luster.
2. Boundary-Layer Polarization
It is much weaker than the metallic polarization and develops an accumulation of
cations at the boundary layer of the electrolyte, which spreads over the pore walls
of silicate rocks.
For environmental application, it is important that saline waters prevent induced

polarization, since their high conductivity does not allow for any ion accumula-
tion. This effect permits the discrimination between saline ground water and clay
with the same specific resistivity: IP signals disappear when they enter saline
water, but may grow or remain steady when going through clay beds.
The arrays of IP surveys are basically the same as for DC methods. Through
two current electrodes, a direct current is fed into the earth. This causes the indu-
ced polarization or the charging of the subsurface. When the current is cut off, the
voltage at the potential electrodes does not drop immediately to zero, but reaches
a secondary lower level within 30 ms. From there, the measurement of the tran-
sient voltage starts.
The curve of this transient decay is recorded by the IP receiver at several time
intervals. The measured parameter is called the chargeability M. It is defined as
the average of a specified time interval of the decay curve. Mostly, ten intervals
are registered at logarithmic intervals. The length of the measurements at the tran-
sient decay curve can vary from I to 8 s. Most common are the total decay times
of 2 and 4 s. At the end of the decay time, the current is switched on but reversed
to erase remanent charges, and the same procedure is repeated in the opposite
current direction. Figure 2.9 portrays this process.
Chargeability values are dependent not only on the distribution of chargeable
bodies in the earth, but also on the strength of the primary current. It is therefore
not possible to compare chargeabilities without knowing the primary current and
the length of the recorded time intervals.
The first section of the decay curve, up to lOs after the switching off of the
primary current, is dominated by electrodynamic processes. During this first
period, charging of the earth is weaker than the induction processes that disturb
the IP signal. Therefore, the registration of the transient timeintervals should start
only after this inductive period.
Every IP measurement includes not only the gauging of the chargeability, but
also the determination of the primary voltage Vp and of the self potential Sp. Vp is
used in the same manner as in the geoelectric DC methods to calculate the ap-
parent specific resisitivity ra (see Sect. 2.2.1). For this, no extra costs and no ad-
ditional time is necessary.
When planning an IP survey, it is important to know that the decay voltage
reaches generally only 1-2% of the primary voltage. Since in many areas in-
dustrial and/or telluric noise is very strong, the primary current should be in-
creased to keep the transient voltages above 1 m V. Otherwise, the recorded decay-
curves may reflect more noise than effects from underground.
All possible arrays known from DC geoelectrics can be used for IP surveys, but
the most employed IP array is dipole-dipole. Its advantage is its symmetry: the IP
18 2 Methods
Induced polarization (time domain)
.\1:
Primary current Decay curve
R ==
-I~--~--~--~--~----~--~--~--~-----. t
R ~-l :
I
I
I
Secondary potential I
+v
~
-v
~,
Measured value
App. spec. resistivity pc Chargeability M
IP - Pseudosection
11
n=5 _________ _
Fig. 2.9. Principle of induced polarization (IP)
sources lie under the center of the array and clues as to their depth and dip may
be derived. Additionally, better safety is reached, since a short dipole of
dangerous current electrodes can be more easily controlled than any current elec-
trode at great distance.
The depth penetration of IP surveys depends on the length of dipoles a and the
distance n . a of the two dipoles (Fig. 2.9). The length a should be at least twice
and at most ten times the thickness of the expected IP body to achieve a proper
result. The geometric depth-extension is calculated by
d~a·(n+l)/2.
Customary dipole lengths are n = 1 to n = 6. Further enlargements may lead to an

unacceptable signal noise relation, which may torpedo all IP measurements.
The evaluation starts with the conversion ofIP field data into the apparent spe-
cific resistivity, the chargeability and perhaps the self-potential. The latter is often
omitted because changing of potential electrodes after "salting" the current elec-
trodes may result in erroneous observations. The next step is the interpretation of
the evaluated data. It should result in estimations of depth and shape of the sur-
veyed body. From the chargeability values, decay coefficients and potential func-
tions may be derived, which makes it possible to draw conclusions about the
IP source.
Environmental applications of IP surveys are the determinations of the borders
between hazardous waste and the surrounding uncontaminated soil, the locating
of special deposits of chargeable material in a dump, and the mapping of
contaminated salty plumes in clayish country rock.
However, knowledge of specific chargeabilities of hazardous and toxic
materials is still lacking. Increased chargeabilities were hitherto observed in
galvanic mud, printed paper, glazed pieces of pottery, rusty scrap iron, non-iron
metal remnants, buried shells and grenades, casting sand and electronic refuse.
Self-Potential
Natural geoelectric fields are called self-potentials. They, or rather their distribu-
tion on the surface of the earth, may provide information about inhomogenities
underground. Self-potentials originate from electrochemical processes that occur
when ores or buried metals contact rocks, ground water or rock fluids. Such
reductions and oxidations are based on static contacts and are called "redox
potentials". They are normally> 30 m V and may reach> 200 m V.
Other self-potentials emerge from the rapid movement of water or gases in soil
or rock. They are called flow potentials and arise by fast ground water flow and
strong infiltration of waste-dump seepage. Flow potentials are mostly weak
« 10mV) and therefore difficult to distinguish from industrial and telluric noise.
Figure 2.10 shows the two potentials that may be found in a hazardous waste
dump.
Self-potential surveys may be used with some reservations for the detection of
oxidizing metals in dumps or soil. However, the overlapping redox and flow
potentials cause an element of uncertainty in interpretation that permits only
qualitative statements.
Nevertheless, the locating of gas eruptions through sealings by Sp measure-
ments has proved to be successful. The observed strong flow potentials vary
considerably with time and can thus be discriminated from redox potentials, pro-
vided a dense grid is laid and is often surveyed in minute intervals.
Daily variations of the natural potential field are overlaid by longer periodic
changes of telluric origin. Other disturbing influences are man-made. They often
come from electrified railroads, where locally short pulses (> 30 mV) were mea-
sured. To eliminate all of this, the continuous monitoring of the electric potential
at a base station is compulsary because the raw field data must be corrected. This
is especially necessary if a great number of non-polarizable potential electrodes
are registered simultaneously.
An advantage of Sp surveys is their simplicity: between two potential electro-
des, only the voltage must be registered accurately. One potential electrode has to
be the base for all measurements and should be grounded in an electrically un-
20 2 Methods
120
100
80
,
Redox- Potential
>
E 60
:§ 40
C Flow potential
Q)
20
"0
a.
0
-20
-40
Non-ferrous Seepage
metal scrap
., ?..,...---~..:.> -:.:::::::::> ~
.....=-- ~ -.S -= ~
/-~?' Landfill~_
......... :: .. : ....
- ~ - --- -==::.----..,... -: :.'.:
-~~
~
~ --=---e--
~ .,.;-------
. ..... : .'.:'
Sand::'
_=-===:;;;..,.;_=-_==",..:;_==_,c _ _ _ _
- _ - _ -_-_-_- _ - _ - _ - _ - _ - _ - _-_-Clay_
Fig. 2.10. Pattern of different Sp anomalies over a hazardous waste site
disturbed area. The second electrode could be moved along the survey lines, or
many secondary electrodes could be recorded at once when surveying by the
scanner method.
2.2.2 Electromagnetic Methods
Electromagnetic Mapping (EM)

Mostly in use are EM surveys with movable, horizontal and coplanar coils. Verti-
cally polarized sinus oscillations (also known as "Slingram") are transmitted and
received. An alternating primary field is transmitted, which induces in rocks with
dissimilar specific electric resistivities eddy currents or secondary fields. These
can be directed either against or parallel to the primary field, depending on
whether the resistivity of the body is lower or higher than the surrounding rock or
material. By interference of the primary and secondary field, the resulting field
is produced, which is finally received on the surface.
The principle of electromagnetic surveying is presented in Fig. 2.11. Changes
of the in- and outphase components allow conclusions as to the positions of espe-
cially good or bad conducting bodies underground. The inphase component (or
Spread 50,100,150,200 or 250 m
I"
Transmitter
"I
Receiver
Connecting cable
Oscillator Compensator - Amplifier
Transmitting coil
~/
"-
/
/
"\
I \
I I
\ I
I Secondary field
x
/
Dipole \
~/
" /
EM Source
EM Profile
\J
n EM Source
Fig. 2.11. Principle of electromagnetic mapping
real phase component) is this portion of the alternating field that oscillates in the
same phase as the primary signal. The part of the primary field whose phase is
rotated by 90° is called the outphase component (or imaginary component).
Determination of the depth of the investigated body can be based on the measure-
ment of many frequencies by the use of the "skin effect," as shown in the nomo-
gram in Fig. 2.12.
Some instruments can transmit up to 12 frequencies. The receiver amplifies the
received resulting field and compares it with the primary field, which is obtained
from the transmitter by a connecting cable. Even small changes in the distance
between the receiver and the transmitter may influence the values of the inphase
22 2 Methods
10- 3 10 3 E 10- 1 10
c:
E Q.,
'-
~
C 10-2
10 2 Vi
-
>.
.:;
a. N
.?:' ~ ~
.:; Vl
I-
30..0. (!i
u:::J ~. ~10
c 10-1 i5
u .;:
"c
0
OJ
a.
VI
OJ
:::J
r::r
OJ
a..
U 10- 1 10 OJ
L
lL. 102 10-2
10
3sss
10 3
It~
10- 3
II
Ii
10 4 10- 4
10
10 10-1
10 5 10-5
p= A=y«
271:
2 '
uflow
= 503.29'Vp
T 10 6 10-6
W= 271:' f = Circular frequency iii
"0
~
flo= Vacuum permeability 10 7 10- 7 , "0
c
:6
'(5
Fi. 2.12. Nomogram showing the relations of specific resistivity (left column), depth of pene-
tration (middle column) and frequency (right column) of a homogenous plane wave
component. Hence, all measurements in mountainous terrain must be slope-

corrected.
The point to which the surveyed data belong always lies in the middle of the
distance between the transmitter and the receiver. The separation of single survey
points should not exceed one-quarter of this distance. The positioning of the
survey can be done by compass and chain; directions and distances to landmarks
like crossings, railways, roads, buildings and trigonometric points must be enter-
ed into field maps with such accuracy that follow-up drills can be positioned in
an orderly way. In areas with no or faulty maps, the satellite-positioning system
GPS should be employed.
10 90"
2.0 -2.0
60"
·2.0
-2.0
-2.0
"',',"""',',",""""'"
Fig. 2.13. Typical EM curves over steep dipping, conducting sheets like faults or fracture zones
with different dip
Buried metallic cables or pipes create electromagnetic anomalies that disturb

any EM survey. To avoid this, the survey area has to be closely checked by a cable
or pipe detector before the measurements begin. If disturbing bodies are found,
the survey lines should be relocated with a minimum distance of one half the
transmitter-receiver distance from the disturbance.
The relation between the specific resistivity of rock, the depth penetration and
the frequency .of a flat homogenous wave is portrayed by the nomogram in
Fig. 2.12. The line from 30 Wm to 3555 Hz, for example, crosses, the depth of
50 m. If the frequency increases to 10000 Hz, the wave would propagate to a
depth of only 20 m. The conclusion to lower the frequency in order to reach
24 2 Methods
greater depths is correct but to transmit lower frequencies, more energy is needed.
For movable instruments, this is not possible. Therefore, most instruments do not
go below 100 Hz. The frequencies between 800 and 7000 Hz are the best to reach
appropriate depth penetration under field conditions.
EM surveys are especially adapted to mapping lateral differences of resistivity
or conductivity. Possible targets are the borders of waste dumps, singular objects
and steep dipping structures, such as faults, fracture zones or crevices, which may
guide contaminated leachates. By correlating EM anomalies from profile to pro-
file, "linears" of such zones of tectonic weakness can be constructed. But the
known tectonic pattern of the area has to be taken into account.
Since light-weight EM instruments have to be carried during survey, they can-
not be powered by strong and heavy batteries. The already mentioned limitation
of depth penetration results also from this fact.
Figure 2.13 shows typical electromagnetic models of the in- and outphase
components over steep dipping, good conducting sheets like faults or fracture
zones. The dip of these bodies obviously influences the shape of the EM curves.
Electromagnetics by Distant Transmitters (VLF)

A special EM application is the Very Low Frequency (VLF) method. It uses fre-
quencies between 12 and 25 kHz, which are very low from the point of view of
electromagnetic communication technology. For geoelectric use however, they
are very high because they do not penetrate deep into the earth (Fig. 2.12).
The VLF sinus waves are sent from several permanent, very strong trans-
mitting stations, which are scattered around the globe. Their mostly constant
signals are used mainly for the navigation of submarines. But besides this origi-
nal purpose, they induce secondary fields in electric conducting bodies in the
ground. These homogeneous fields can be utilized in the same way as the hetero-
geneous EM fields, which are produced by small portable field transmitters. The
following table lists some VLF stations:
In spite of the fact that VLF saves the application of a special transmitter, the
method has some disadvantages, the most important of which is its limited depth
penetration. In clay-bearing rocks with resistivities of < 30 Wm, only a depth of
Table 2.2. VLF Stations
Station Location Frequency Output

(kHz) (kW)
FUO Bordeaux, France 15, I 500

GBR Rugby, Great Britain 16,0 750
UMS Moscow, GUS 17,1 1000
NAA Cutler, Maine, USA 17,8 1000
NLK Seattle, Washington, USA 18,6 300
IVC Tavolara, Italy 20,3 500
NWC NW Cape Australia 22,3 1000
approximately 15 m can be reached. Apart from that, the nearly homogeneous

field often omits small random structures, which are common EM targets in
hazardous dump sites, however.
The survey lines should be laid at a right angle to the straight line between a
VLF transmitter and a survey area to achieve high anomalies and to avoid distor-
tions (Figs. 2.14a and b). When the described restrictions are followed, the VLF
method can be exercised in the same way as EM surveys with heterogeneous
fields.
The VLF-R method, also called VLF resistivity or radio ohm method, gauges
the resistivities of the ground. In addition to the horizontal alternating electric
field on the surface, the perpendicular horizontal component of the magnetic
field in the air is measured. The following parameters can be derived:
1. real part of the vertical and horizontal components of the magnetic field,
arising from currents that are induced in conducting bodies;
2. imaginary part of the vertical and horizontal components of the magnetic field,
arising from currents that are induced in conducting bodies;
3. magnetic total intensity;
4. apparent specific resistivity;
5. phase differences between horizontal electric and magnetic field components.
Such large topographical effects can be avoided in flat areas. Otherwise, those
effects have to be negated by special software to produce dependable and com-
parable results. In spite of this detrimental dependence on the direction of the
VLF station, one should not overlook the advantages of the method: it is rather
fast and very cheap; furthermore, it provides the possibility, when using many
VLF stations, plus long wave radio stations up to 240 kHz, of performing EM
multi frequency depth soundings.
The raw field data have to be corrected for diurnal and short periodic variations
of the intensitiy of the VLF field. It is therefore essential to monitor the alter-
nating electromagnetic field during the survey time. By doing so, all off-times of
VLF stations are recorded.
VLF is well geared to detect buried hazardous waste, even under extended
areas, quickly and accurately. The time needed for one measurement is only 1 m.
New instrument-combinations with proton magnetometers will make it possible
to kill two birds with one stone.
Magnetotelluric and Transient Electromagnetic Methods (MT + TDEM, TEM)

The audio magnetotelluric method (AMT) measures frequencies between 1 and
20000 Hz, which are abundant in the ground, stemming from lightning or other
natural sources. The ratio of the horizontal electric field to the magnetic field is
measured and calculated as a function of the applied frequency. The result is the
apparent resisitivity depending on the frequency. This method provides better
results if an artificial field source is applied by a remote grounded bipole trans-
mitter. This is called the controlled-source audio magnetotelluric method
(CSAMT). Both systems are rarely used in environmental explorations.
26 2 Methods
1000 100
Greenwood N- 5 slope
900 95
800 90
-
700 Topography 85
600 1.10
E..
"Q
~
01
E :500 75 ........-
.&:.
0 :I:
........- 4()0 70 .........
UJ
..,0CD
0
I 300 115
0
:I: 200 60 .c.
0:: Il.
laO Frequency: 19.0 kHz 5S

Angle: strike of slope- H vector =12 grad
0 50
0 SO 100 150 200 250 300
a Line 100 W-E-Protil (m)
1000 100
Greenwood N-S slope
900 95
800 90
Topography
- -
700 85
500 80 "Q
E ....0
it 01
E 500 .. _-- .... 75 ........-
.&:. .............. - ... \
0 :I:
........- 4()Q 70 .........
\,\ UJ
..,
0
I 300 65 CD
0 0
:I: 200 L.
0:: 60 Il.
100 Frequency: 20.3 kHz 55

Angle: strike of slope - H vector =66 grad
0 50
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
b Line 100 W-E-Profile (m)
Fig. 2.14 a. Influence of topography on VLF surveys. Pictured are the apparent resistivity rs and
the phase difference EIH between horizontal electric and magnetic fields. The VLF station
transmits a frequency of 19.0 Hz out of an angle of 12° to the strike of the slope, which runs per-
pendicular to the plane of the book [2]
Fig. 2.14b. Changing of VLF stations alters the topographical effects so much that results
cannot be compared among stations. The same terrain as in Fig. 2.14a was surveyed by a VLF
station with a frequency of 20.3 Hz and an angle of 66° to the strike of the slope
I-
Z
TlWE-ON --;-- TlWE-OFF -+ TlWE-ON --l
IU
a: _----.1 !I
a: ~I B) CURRENT IN TRANSMITTER LOOP
;:)
I.) -.1< ....
Ia:
oj:::
IU
> . I ONE PERIOD I -I
IU 0 IU
I.) ::E CJ
;:) 0 a:
I 1 17
b) .INDUCED ELECTROMOTIVE
o a:O 1 I
z 1-'" V- FORCE CAUSED BY CURRENT
I
-I.)
...
IU 1
IU
I I
~ I
~~ 1
1 1
MEASUREMENT
DURING
TIME-OFF -.I
1+----1 c) SECONDARY MAGNETIC FIELD
CAUSED BY EDDY CURRENTS
Fig. 2.15. System wave forms employed by the TDEM method
The time domain or transient electromagnetic system (TDEM or TEM) must

not be confused with the time domain IP. TDEM measurements are also based on
the transient decay of a current with time, but here the anomalous magnetic field
(not the transient voltage) is recorded in a very short period. The observations
commence only microseconds after the shut-off of the primary current, which is
induced into the ground by a transmitting loop of 5 to > 100 m diameter.
TDEM soundings have a wide scope from < 50 m to > 1000 m depth. Their
results are equivalent to YES (DC resistivity sounding); an advantage is the short
length of the total array and the very great depth penetration with a small loop
size. They have been successfully applied to map the extent of brine plumes and
to determine the encroachment of salt water into fresh water aquifers.
Airborne Electromagnetics
The sensors for electromagnetic measurements by airplane or helicopter are
mostly towed by a "bird", an aerodynamically shaped container, which is
suspended from an aircraft by a - 30 m cable. The bird is 6-10 m long and
encloses a transmitter and a receiver coil at both ends. The axes of the two coils
stand perpendicular to each other. The principle of this method is the same as for
EM ground surveys.
28 2 Methods
Transmitting coils
I
coaxial
~Planar I coaxial
~r
a
Receiving coils
Fig. 2.16. Diagram of an EM helicopter survey (Dighem system) with maximum coupling and
a coil separation of 8 m
Because of the small transmitter-receiver separation and the large distance be-
tween the transmitter in the air and the surveyed object on the ground, the mea-
sured values of the residual field are very weak. Therefore, a much higher degree
of accuracy is demanded; the precision of measurements has to be better than the
cube of3.
A grid of parallel lines is flown, whose distances have to match the size of
expected EM sources. Customary are intervals of30 to 50 m. The airborne results
are presented in contour maps of apparent specific resistivities. This parameter is
derived from the registered in- and outphase values by special evaluation soft-
ware. In addition, statements concerning the shape and depth of conductors can
be made by special model calculations.
Good results of airborne EM were obtained by the mapping of the freshwater
interface in arid areas and near coastlines. In general airborne EM surveys, good
conductors may be located at depths of up to 200 m, provided the overburden is
of high resistivity. When planning airborne EM for environmental purposes, its
high cost has to be taken into account. Only large areas should be flown under one
contract to achieve an economical return. For investigations of hazardous waste
sites, airborne methods are exceptional. If employed, airborne EM must be com-
bined with aeromagnetic and aeroradiometric surveys (Sect. 2.1.2).
Georadar
Georadar is also known as the ElectroMagnetic Reflection method (EMR). It is
employed as ground radar to investigate structures at very shallow depths. In salt
domes, permafrost areas and cristalline rocks of extremely high resistivities,
seepages or concentrations of lye are located by this method. It is based on the
reflexion of high-frequency electromagnetic waves, from 8 MHz (megahertz to
4 GHz (gigahertz), at interfaces of materials where the dielectric constant £ and
the conductivity change.
£ is a measure of the capacity of a material to store charges when an EM field
is applied. It is the dimensionless ratio of the capacitance of the material to that
of free space. Examples of dielectric constants are listed in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3. Dielectric constants (K), electric conductivity (a), electric velocity and attenuation
(a) at a frequency of 100 MHz. Davis and Anan (1989)
Material K a(mS/m) v (mlns) a (dB/m)
Air 1 0 0,3 0
Freshwater 80 0,01 0,33 2.10- 1
Seawater 80 3.0,10 4 0,01 0,1
Dry sand 4 0,01 0,15 0,01
Wet sand, Aquifer 25 0,1-1 0,06 0,03
Limestone 6 0,5- 2 0,12 0,04
Fat clay 5-35 0,05 0,06 1,0-300
Granite 5 0,1-1 0,13 0,01
Rock salt 6 0,1-1 0,13 0,01
Slate 5-15 0,03 0,09 1,0-100
The depth of penetration is limited by low conductivity (or by its reciprocal

high resistivity) ofthe ground. The signal is for instance attenuated by conducting
clays to a depth of only 0.2 m. But in salt, ice or dry granite, > 300 m may be pene-
trated.
Since water has a high dielectric constant of 80, changing moisture of soils and
rocks influences the radar response considerably. The same is valid for varying
conductivities by alternating clay contents of soil, which alters the depth of re-
flections. Therefore, radar measurements before and after rainfall may produce
very different results. Interpretations of ground radar should therefore be made
with these restrictions in mind and should, if possible, be verified by another
method.
The radar signals are transmitted as pulses of the high frequencies. The re-
ceiver antenna registers those pulses that were not absorbed by the ground but
were reflected in exact time dependence. In ground radar surveys, transmitter and
receiver are coupled and are pulled together across the terrain on a sledge. This
leads to the registration of continuous radar sections. The principle of measure-
ment is shown in Fig. 2.17.
The signals, which are reflected by horizons of discontinuity, are recorded after
a certain travel time, which depends on the surveyed material. This method is not
only similar to seismic reflection, but it is even possible to use the software for
seismic evaluation to interpret ground radar measurements. As in seismic work,
the depth of the reflector can be concluded if the velocity is known.
Radar measurements are a fast method to detect small objects close to the
surface of the earth (0.1 to - 3 m) with high resolution. Surveys should be made
only over a dry and nearly homogeneous ground with high electric resistivity, low
dielectric constant and shallow depth of objects.
The ground radar has been successful in locating non-metallic pipes, cables,
filled-in mineshafts, and underground hollows like adits, tunnels and caves. It can
find metallic and non-metallic objects, as well. It is most suited to investigating
30 2 Methods
Transmitter Receiver
® ® Amplitude
'-----.. I
-- ~ -
Depth Time
= Transmitted radar - pulse

R1 , R2 = Reflected pulses
Fig. 2.17. Principle of ground radar measurements
abandoned industrial and military sites, where contaminations occur in shallow

ground.
To achieve more depth penetration, according to the nomogram of Fig. 2.12,
the transmitted frequency should be lowered, although lower frequencies
« 100 MHz) decrease the resolution. The frequency must therefore be chosen by
considering both the possible depth penetration and the desired resolution. In
addition, the electric properties of the survey area and the targets of the in-
vestigation must be weighed.
Ground radar surveys result mostly in a great number of reflections, which
pertain to small alterations in the textures and structures of bedded soil. It is
presumptuous to interpret such patterns as indications of contaminated waste: the
evaluation and the assessment of radar data must consequently be done with
special care and precaution.
Electromagnetic Sounding
It has already been stressed that a reduction of frequency increases the depth of
penetration (Fig. 2.12). This effect is used to carry out multi Frequency Electro-
Magnetic (FEM) Soundings. As many frequencies as possible between 1 and
60 Hz are sent into the earth. A receiver measures the horizontal (H r ) and vertical
(Hz) magnetic components of the stationary electromagnetic field for all trans-
mitted frequencies.
The EM field is induced by a big cable loop, acting as a coil, which is hori-
zontally laid on the surface. During one set of observations, transmitter and re-
ceiver remain fixed. Finally, the ratio of the two magnetic components Hr/H z and
their phase differences ~ <I> are registered.
The digital evaluation of the field data is complicated and can only be achiev-
ed by using computers or PCs with large memory capacities. The interpretation
leads to results, which are comparable to the DC depth soundings. However, FEM
sounding is more expensive and should be employed when DC sounding fails.
This may happen because of too high or too low resistivities of overburden.
Divining Rod
The divining rod has been used since the Middle Ages to localize strong minima
of the electromagnetic field, which are narrow and extended in the direction of
strike. Nowadays, the rods are applied to locate metal pipes and cables in shallow
ground. Most in use is a primitive instrument that consists of two welding rods
whose ends are bent by 90°. When the rods are held forward and horizontally by
hand, they will, according to Lenz's law, turn in the direction of the electro-
dynamic field, while the diviner crosses an EM anomaly.
This archaic electromagnetic method requires very dry palms and a steady pro-
gress of the diviner. The error rate is very high. Metallic pipes, for instance, must
be embedded in sand or other material of high resistivity to move the divining rod.
It is safer to use a commercial electromagnetic metal or cable detector. Statements
regarding depth and extension of aquifers or of geological structures are mere
speculations. Costly follow-up work, like drilling, should therefore not be based
on divining.
2.3 Seismic Methods
2.3.1 General
Seismic investigations are based on different elastic properties of the rocks ofthe
upper crust. A seismic wave can be created on the surface by artificial seismic
sources like hammer, weight-drop, vibrator or explosive charges. The wave runs
through the earth with a velocity that depends on the traversed rocks or materials.
At interfaces where the seismic velocity or density changes, seismic waves are
diffracted, refracted or reflected.
Portions of the primary wave return to the surface after travelling different
distances through the ground. There, the remaining seismic signals are registered
by a number of seismic receivers, called geophones. Mostly, they are arrayed on
a single line, but other arrays may also be used. By evaluating the travel time be-
tween the break and the recording of a seismic signal, the seismic velocities of
strata, their location and the depth of their seismic reflectors may be inferred.
32 2 Methods
Consequently, seismic work will provide special knowledge about the thick-
ness and extension of layered strata and structures of the earth, which is essential
to solve geological or hydrological problems. In addition, the shape and extension
of waste deposits can be comprehended.
The propagation of seismic waves follows the geometry of optical laws. The
refraction of seismic waves at the boundary between two beds with lower veloci-
ty at the top and higher velocity at the bottom layer is described in Sect. 2.3.2
"Seismic Refraction" (Fig. 2.18). In contrast, the "seismic reflection", delineated
in Sect. 2.3.3 and in Fig. 2.19, is based on the reflection of seismic waves at many
stratigraphical or structural boundaries.
At every seismic break, artificial or natural, the ground is submitted to com-
pressing and shearing processes. Accordingly, different types of elastic waves are
emitted, which travel at different speeds. A seismic wavefront expands from the
source in all directions through the rocks in the ground. Two types of waves are
discerned: the compressional or longitudinal wave and the shear or transversal
wave. Compressional waves travel faster than shear waves and reach their target
first. Therefore they are named primary or P-wave, the slower shear wave is called
secondary or S-wave.
The particle motion in S-waves is perpendicular to the direction of propaga-
tion. Due to their smaller velocity, they provide a better resolution of structures.
They cannot, however, penetrate liquids and are rapidly weakened when travelling
in loose sediments. The registration of this wave type is more difficult than for
Pwaves.
Besides these waves, which propagate through the ground, surface or interface
waves run along the surface of the earth and may travel by several modes. The
most common of these are Raleigh waves. Other surface waves include the fast
love waves, hydrodynamic waves and Stoneley waves. If they travel in a borehole,
they are called tube waves. Surface waves often disturb the seismic signals of near
surface layers.
Estimation of seismic velocities has to observe the following rules:
1. Inside most layers, the velocity increases continuously by growing depth. This
effect is especially strong near the surface, since the consolidation of strata
progresses there more rapidly.
2. Normally, the seismic velocity is faster in the underlying than in the overlying
layer.
3. Seismic velocities depend mostly on the geological age of the strata. The rule
is: the older the bed the higher its velocity. This does not apply to near surface
beds. Here reduction of pressure and weathering have led to too small veloci-
ties.
2.3.2 Seismic Refraction
Seismic rays are refracted upon passing into a bed with higher velocity. The waves
travel along the interface of the two beds and continuously emit seismic energy to
Travel time
Xc
Distance
/' /'
,G4
Z~3 l:
Direct wave
hOUndary
V2>Vl
Geophones
Seismic velocities
Critical distance
Fig. 2.1S. Principle of seismic refraction
the surface. The precondition is that seismic rays hit the interface at a critical
angle.
A schematic picture of seismic refraction is presented in Fig. 2.18. The lower
diagram describes the travel path of the waves, which run directly and by refrac-
tion. The upper diagram displays the travel time curve, which contains the regi-
stered data. The x-axis is divided by the distances between seismic source and the
geophones, the vertical y-axis is marked by the travel time. Fig. 2.19 shows
graphically the procedure of refraction field work and the steps of digital evalu-
ation.
At the earth's surface, geophones register the refracted waves and, in addition,
the direct wave, which travels along the upper layer. Since the refracted wave
moves with the greater velocity of the lower layer, it will overtake the direct wave
at a critical distance Xc from the seismic source point. This distance is a measure
ofthe depth of the boundary between the two beds. The seismic velocities may be
inferred by complex mathematical evaluation.
The total length of a seismic string and the geophone interval determine the
penetration. As a rule, the string should be at least five times longer than the de-
sired penetration. In case only shallow penetration is requested, the geophone
interval can be reduced to a few meters only.
Seismic refraction is especially geared for the investigation of boundaries in
shallow depth. The reflection method is not so well suited for this task. Its targets
are found in depths of> 50 m.
34 2 Methods
Seismic ref r action Seismograms
Travel time curve
Interpretal ion
v v v
" '" 4 30 4 00 - 320 ~ ~
~168 0 1700
-
1 450
~~~ 1600
1 400 • 1 550 1650

.c
0.
QI
o
Dist ance Figures; Se ismic velocities
Fig. 2.19. Pattern of seismic refraction

Figure 2.19 portrays at the top the refraction array in the field, the survey cars
and the raw seismic record. The middle section depicts the evaluation through the
construction of the travel time curves. The final result is presented at the bottom,
where seismic velocities and the depth of seismic reflectors are combined.
The seismic refraction method is well suited to investigate the geological beds
at the bottom and in the vicinity of hazardous waste dumps. Good results have
been obtained by the determination of the thickness of unconsolidated rocks or of
the weathered zone. Detailed isoline maps of the surface of impenetrable beds
(aquiclude) can be constructed by refraction data. Even ground water guiding
channels can be mapped, because they are filled with sand and gravel of low
velocity. They show clearly the paths any leachates or contaminated plumes will
follow.
Furthermore, seismic refraction provides knowledge about the extension,
thickness and depth of hazardous waste dumps, provided seismic velocities
distinguish well between dump material and the country rock. This is the case
when, at the bottom of a waste-deposit, hard bedrock is present. However, a
distinction between waste dump and unconsolidated or weathered rock is mostly
impossible.
2.3.3 Air-Acoustic Seismics
Seismic exploration of shallow targets is hampered or made impossible by stron-

gly varying conditions of propagation, which prevail directly under the surface of
the earth. Therefore, it is advisable to use several modified seismic signals. But
customary seismic sources mostly produce only one type of signal.
To employ seismics also in shallow ground, the air-acoustic method has been
developed. Its signals can be varied over a wide range and thus be adapted to the
seismic properties of soil and shallow strata.
Electronic signals of different wave forms are created by frequencies between
50 and 100 Hz. The seismic source is a big loudspeaker, which is placed upside
down on the surface to project the sound waves into the ground. The thus created
seismic waves are received by a conventional geophone.
The loudspeaker source is easy to move; the air-acoustic survey is therefore
performed in a mapping array with a constant distance between loudspeaker and
geophone (Fig. 2.20). As with other seismic methods, alterations of travel time
indicate the presence of discontinuities. They may be caused by buried material
or by reflecting layers.
2.3.4 Seismic Reflection
Seismic waves are produced by a source quite similar to the seismic refraction,
which is mostly located on the surface of the earth. At discontinuities in the
ground, i. e. horizons at which the seismic or acoustic impedance is altered, how-
ever, they are not refracted but reflected, and the reflected waves are received by
a string of geophones on the surface.
36 2 Methods
Loudspeaker Receiver
Fig. 2.20. Principle of air-acoustic seismics
The seismic impedance is the seismic velocity multiplied by the density of the
strata. This implies that seismic reflectors may occur at the interfaces of beds with
different lithology. It is important to know that these horizons must not agree with
changes of the specific electric resistivity. Therefore, discussions of different
depth estimates by seismic and geoelectric methods are futile.
The reflected waves, which have been registered at the surface, mostly along
survey lines, are converted by geophones into electric signals, which are evalu-
ated, formerly by graphic methods but nowadays by computing the travel times,
into seismograms. They already roughly display the structural pattern of the sedi-
ments, which contain seismic reflectors, but to calculate the depth of strata, the
seismic velocities have to be known (Figs. 2.21 and 2.22).
Figure 2.22 displays at the top the field array for seismic reflection with two
cars. One acts as the seismic source by means of a huge vibrator, which is installed
inside. The other car is a mobile station for registration, where the seismic signals
of the numerous geophones are filtered, stacked and stored on magnetic tapes or
disks.
In the middle, the outcome of filtering, stacking and other means of evaluation
is shown as a seismogram. The final result appears at the bottom, where reflectors
are coordinated with the boundaries of geological beds, according to their travel
times. A plausible picture of the geological structure of the section is drawn.
Travel time
Distance
G6
2. Boundary
Depth Seismic velocities

Densities
Fig. 2.21. Principle of seismic reflection
An advantage of seismic reflection is the short strings of geophones. Since the

geophones can be positioned near the seismic source, a greater depth of in-
vestigation can be reached than in refraction surveys, using the same length of
string.
Hitherto, the realm of reflection work was oil and gas prospecting, which dealt
with geological structures in depths from several hundreds to several thousands
of meters. The seismic field and evaluation technology was developed to per-
fection to explore this deep.
By contrast, the application of seismic reflection to near surface objects, like
hazardous waste dumps, is still under development. The special difficulty that
must be overcome is that reflected seismic signals return to the surface or to the
geophones so fast that Raleigh and related waves are not yet attenuated and
reflected signals will be suppressed.
38 2 Methods
ms
Demuliiplex ing
Noise suppression
200 'UlIlL.l>OWllL
Mut ing
CMP sorting
Velocity analysis
Stacking
1,001 1 1 1
oCMP 200 100

ms +-_______________
Quaternary
.~ 200 Tert iary 200 E
~ r---------===::=====:==::::~~~~~~'---------J
~ 1,00
.c.
a.
QJ
a
600
550
o Distance (m) 900 m
Fig. 2.22. Pattern of seismic reflection
2.4 Gravity 39
To make reflections from depths < 50 m visible, seismic receivers with ex-
tremely high sampling rates and high-frequency sources have to be used. This
high-tech equipment is now available and it is possible to obtain seismic reflec-
tions also in polluted areas near the surface. One should bear in mind, however,
the high costs of seismic reflection when planning such a survey. In many cases,
the cheaper refraction or geoelectrics will fulfill the same purpose.
Often, information about deeper layers is desired, even for the solution of en-
vironmental problems. For example, the structures that control the flow of con-
taminated plumes should be followed to greater depth to assess the danger of
widespread underground contamination. In such cases, reflection surveys are
well suited to trace stratigraphically and/or tectonically marked seepage paths.
The evaluation of digital registered reflections has to deal with huge amounts
of data. The following steps are customary:
I. Editing (control of field values)
2. Demultiplexing (lines ~columns)
3. Correction of amplitudes (~common level)
4. Static correction (topography, overlayers)
5. CDP sorting (reference to common midpoint)
6. Stacking (summation of singular seismograms)
7. Deconvolution (elimination of multiple reflections)
8. Bandpass filtering (elimination of noise)
After the evaluation follows the digital interpretation, which implies the proces-
sing of great volumina of evaluated data. It can be done only by very fast com-
puting systems with large memory capacities. The purpose is to extract only such
waves from a great number of uncoordinated oscillations as pertain to reflections
at the boundaries of layers. Out of many processing procedures, only the
migration can be mentioned. It is the computation of a theoretical wave front,
which exists at the moment of a seismic break.
2.4 Gravity
Gravity surveys are based on the variations in the gravity field ofthe earth, which
are caused by inhomogenities in the density of structures in the ground. To mea-
sure these density anomalies, raw field data have to be intensively corrected by
known reference values, which depend on the time and location of the survey.
These are: influence of tides (isostatic correstion), elevation above a reference
level (free air correction), topographical relief (terrain correction) and density/
thickness of rocks that are situated between survey and reference level (Bouguer
correction).
These corrections may be larger than the mostly weak gravity anomaly of a
hazardous waste dump. Faulty corrections, which can originate from a wrong
estimation of the density of dumped material, may lead to a false interpretation.
40 2 Methods
>-
-0
E
o
c
«
L-
ev
::J
C>
o
CD
Distance
777777777777 Surface
Pl ~ Pl>P2
Fig. 2.23. Principle of gravity
Pl • P2 Density measurements
The pattern of gravity surveys is displayed in Fig. 2.23. Gravity measurements

are made by gravimeters, which are basically highly sensitive spring scales. The
alterations in the length of the spring are directly related to changes of gravity.
The production of gravimeters demands the greatest precision and vast
mechanical skills. Gravity is measured by a unit of gravity acceleration equal to
0.1 mGAL (milligal) or 10-6 mls 2 •
The application of gravity surveys to environmental problems is limited be-
cause of high cost and small gravity anomalies. For example; the surveys need to
be prepared by precise levelling to eliminate the strong influence of minor
topographic features.
Some gravity investigations of hazardous waste dumps have nevertheless been
successful. In cases where a strong density contrast existed to the country rock,
they were able to find the border of the dumps and to outline the walls of sealed
basins. Gravity measurements are well suited to locate underground cavities.
For this, very dense (and expensive) grids of gravity stations have to be surveyed.
2.5 Geothermometry
Geothermal surveys from the surface of the earth consist of shallow measure-
ments oftemperature to map geothermal anomalies. Two methods are customary:
2.6 Well Logging 41
Infrared (IR) surveys of the surface.

Temperature measurements in flat boreholes or in probing holes from de-
cimeter to few meters depth.
The IR surveys gauge the temperature of the surface by contactless and mostly
airborne infrared detectors in thermal scanning devices. This method is expensive
and susceptible to all changes of weather, especially to the duration of sunshine.
Its applicability to environmental problems is therefore restricted.
The measurements in percussion probe holes or flat drill holes are made by
resistance thermometers, which are housed in the pointed end of special probes.
The temperature is transferred to the sonde by heat conduction. Such observations
should be performed only after the distortion of temperature caused by probing or
drilling has ceased. Normally, one should wait ten times the length of time that
was needed to sink the hole.
To eliminate the falsifying influence of sun rays, temperature surveys should
be performed only at night, preferably between the hours of 4 and 6 a. m. Strong
rain or periods of strong evaporation should not precede temperature observati-
ons, since they may alter the values considerably.
The application of geothermic work to the elucidation of environmental
problems like finding hazardous waste is limited. The reason is the too-small
density of heat flow on the surface. Even where strong heat was created by micro-
organic decay of cadavers inside dumps, only temperature anomalies, which were
weaker than those influenced by the weather, were found on top of disposal sites.
A proper temperature survey has therefore to be very precise. It is necessary to
monitor the diurnal variations of temperature at a base station continuously, and
to correct the raw values accordingly. Needless to say, the temperature base
should be installed at the same depth as the field measurements. The survey grids
should be small-meshed; the rectangular distances of stations should be < 5 m.
Since leachates or seepages coming from hazardous waste dumps are normaly
slightly heated, they may be traced by temperature determinations in flat bore-
holes> 3 m deep.
2.6 Well Logging

2.6.1 General
By geophysical well logging the physical properties of rocks, ground water or dis-
posed material are determined. The findings are valid only for the direct vicinity
of the hole. Every borehole should be logged, since this provides the best key to
the proper interpretation of geophysical field data and helps in the recognition of
contaminations from the surface.
In this chapter, an overview of the customary well-logging methods is given. It
is not necessary to run all the described logs in one borehole. The reader should
choose those combinations that will best suit his special environmental
problems.
o
~:~~~ ,~
r,/\ /\ ,. \./,/'''',/'./
" "
~j
8 1' ___' -
\/
...J - i\ t"I !'J'-J....._-)

~ e __ .. ~/ \ ~,I ' ... _. /
, I
,---- --~
o --------~~-----------------------------------------------
...J
w
LL
~lJ 0
o ---------
~]----~~~
0....
Vl
>
E
- :''0.,
____ freshwater saltwoter _
--:"
• >-.,
.
l
. . . . -:- 1
l ::·r
• . J J".
" ,~. , ....
"~'l
· ,'. 1 · ' c . '
.~ . ~
· o· .- • .
VI
~ ...
J ..
••
' •.
'. ~ J.. . I I~II . .. -g
o!:; ~J ...
CLI
I -;:.'
VI • • "ij;.Q o
c;'"
(I) U')
III
(;
o ..c:.
u III
Fig. 2.24. Comparison of different logs with the lithology of cores.

SP = self-potential survey; ES = electrical survey measures resistivity in 16" and 64" point
array; FEL = focused electrical log for thin layers; IEL = induction electric log measures elec-
tric conductivity; OR = gamma ray measures natural radiation; D = density log by artificial gam-
ma source and detector
2.6 Well Logging 43
Log data are recorded continuously while the probe moves in the hole with
constant cable speed. This speed is limited by the necessary resolution and the
time needed for one measurement. Fig. 2.24 presents examples of complex well
logging.
2.6.2 Logging Methods
Gamma Ray (GR)

The gamma-ray probe measures the natural gamma radiation, which originates
from the potassium isotope 4°K and from the uranium and thorium decay series.
This log enables the discrimination between layers of clay and sand; even the clay
content of clayish sediments can be estimated. Barrages by impenetrable minerals
may also be controlled by gamma-ray logs.
The probes contain scintillometers and can be operated in dry or cased bore-
holes. The logging speed should not exceed 5 mlmin. Beds of only O.3-m thick-
ness may still be resolved.
Density Log (D)

This is also a radiation log, but here variations of the radiation of an artificial
source are registered. This source (137CS, Casium 137) is placed at the low end of
the probe. The gamma detector is housed above, shielded by a lead column
against direct radiation from the source (Fig. 2.25).
The gamma radiation that is emanated into the surrounding rock is absorbed by
the latter, according to their density, by the Compton effect. The part of radiation
that still reaches the detector is recorded and is a measure of the rock density.
The source-to-detector distance is conventionally 40 cm. Then, a horizontal
expansion of roughly 15-20 cm is reached. The density log is applied to dif-
ferentiate among several dumped materials, to determine their boundaries, and to
locate fractured seepage paths in consolidated rocks.
Neutron Log (N)

An artificial neutron source (mostly americium-beryllium) radiates in the bore-
hole fast neutrons. They collide with atoms of the drilled rock and thereby lose
energy. When they reach a certain level of energy, some are caught by other
nuclei. These are excited to higher energy radiation.
Detectors that are arranged at the probe at some distance from the neutron
source measure the captured gamma radiation and/or the thermic neutrons. Need-
less to say, the detectors must be shielded against natural radiation.
Neutron logs depend on the hydrogen content. Therefore, water and hydro-
carbons are encountered as pore fluids. After borehole effects of diameter, mud,
etc., are corrected, the rock porosity and permeability can be estimated.
Electric Log (EL, ES)

This log determines the apparent resistivity of rocks in multiple point arrays.
Most probes allow also the simultaneous registration of the self-potential between
44 2 Methods
Table 2.4. Logging methods, measured parameters and objects of investigation
Symbol Parameter Result Object
GR count of natural natural radioacti- petrography

gamma radiation vity of rocks clay content
D counts of compton density of rocks fracturing,
scattered rays porosity
N counts of secondary lithology stratigraphy
neutron-neutron rays porosity
EL, apparent resisitivity true resistivity hydraulics,
ES lithology
ML, apparent resistivity true resistivity lithology,
MLL at borehole wall small scale hydraulics
IEL app. conductivity, true conductivity lithology
focused induction
FEL, focused electric true resistivity of lithology
LL log rock
SP self-potential (probe- sources of electric oxidizing
to-surface) potentials bodies
SAL resistivity of bore- salinity total salt content
hole fluid of fluid
TEMP temperature of bore- geothermal field thermal
hole fluid gradient
SONIC travel time of seis- seismic velocity seismic
SV mlC waves velocity
CAL borehole diameter shape of borehole correction of
walls other logs
FLOW revolutions of a velocity of fluid zones of in-
spinner flow and outflow
of water
DV compass and dipmeter inclination + azi- spatial drill path
muth of borehole
OPT video signals, state of borehole direct view
photography walls oflithology
a surface current electrode B and a potential electrode M in the hole. The mea-
sured apparent resistivities, also called mixed resistivities, are a combination of
the electric parameters of the borehole mud, the mud cake, and the flushed and
invaded zones of the rock. Figure 2.26 displays these conditions. Therefore, the
apparent resistivity must be converted into the true rock resistivity via correction
programs or departure curves.
Gamma Ray
No ) crYltol slobiliud higt.-...Oltogo "'Plllr
p/Iolomultipli.r signal procusmg and dr i ~f't
Density
lource(C.137) lead column No) eryolol electronic section
II
bow spring
Electric (ES)
:c (II
"
A •B rnt-Qsur Ing current

z
104,11042 . H mea,ur ln g s ig nals
Induced Polarization (lp)

063- ftJ 1'O-
(~:J~U~=====JLJ~AJ'Dn=~[.CJ[AJ'========~
mol:
r:J I ================:]======~'========0~)~?=-==~r __
~o.• _--I-- - - - - - -- I."_- - - - - - - -·I-- - - a.•• _----+---- _
Salinity/Temperature
electrode cotr ler
open B ~ 8 late ra I s o
l ts
eron sectron
Cal iber
DC molor e lect ronic section

Sonic/ Acoustic
tr on~mitter acous tic Isolotor rece ivers
cenl rQI iter eentralizer centroiller
m icro log pad
Mi crolog
electronic section
arms
back-up pad
Fig. 2.25. Probes for geophysical well logging
46 2 Methods
• Adjacent formation
•• Adjacent formation·
~
o
~ Borehole
Di Formation resistivi ty
~ lnvaded zone
O Resistivity of the
pore fluid
Rxa
E
.,. Rm Rmt Rt
- - ......... - - - - - r....=...=..,.
Extension at right angles to the
borehole axis
Fig. 2.26. Distribution of resistivities around a borehole
The most common ES electrode array is the combination of the 16" normal and
the 64" normal (Fig. 2.25). The shorter has a small penetration and is strongly
influenced by mud and its infiltration into the surrounding rock. However, it re-
solves even small layers down to O.5-m thickness. The longer spacing reproduces
the rock resistivity better, but can resolve only layers> 2 m.
ES logs should always be run in environmental drilling programs, since the
measured resistivities provide knowledge about the sequence of deposits, the
depth and salinity of leachates and the clay contents of basal or top sealings, if
perforated by drillholes.
Monoelectrode Log (PRJ

Other than the multipoint ES log, a single-pointer electrode array may be used. It
is the simple determination of the resistivity between an electrode on the surface
2.6 Well Logging 47
and another at the probe. It has a fair resolution of thin beds but it is strongly in-
fluenced by the mud and the invaded zone, and therefore unsuitable to detect the
rock resistivity. Whereas ES logs are non-focused and of simple technology,
better resolution and deeper penetration is reached by focused methods; these,
however, require more complicated electronic guidance.
Microlog, Microlaterolog (ML, MLL)

The resistivity distribution in the immediate vicinity of a drillhole is measured by
an array with electrode spacings of 1- 2". The electrodes are pressed hard against
the borehole wall while moving; the mud is pushed away and the mud corrections
can be omitted.
The small electrodes may be arranged in the unfocused microlog or in the focu-
sed microlaterolog or similar arrays. The purpose ofthis fine-logging is to resol-
ve very thin layers, to locate single fractures, joints and fissures, and to determine
the resistivity of the mud-flushed volume.
Induction Log (IES, IEL)

This log, which is also known as the focused induction log, determines the reci-
procal of resistivity: the conductivity 110m. Its unit is the mho/m or S/m (Sie-
mens/ meter). Electromagnetic waves of the frequency 20 kHz are transmitted by
a coil on a probe. This causes eddy currents in materials or rocks of different con-
ductivity. They are received by another coil, which is located - 1 m away. Rock
conductivity is calculated from amplitudes and phases of the received secondary
field.
The advantage of IES is that it can work out true rock conductivities of very
low resistivities. It is suitable for the exploration of rocks that are infiltrated by
saline fluids or leachates.
Focused Electric Log, Laterolog (FEL, LL)

The electric current of one borehole electrode is focused to resolve beds, which
may be as thin as 0,2 m. The measuring electrode length of 4" is carried by a
probe of the total length of 2 m with the small diameter of - 14". In spite of this
minute array, its lateral penetration reaches as far as the 64" normal. This is
achieved by placing additional electrodes above and beneath the current elec-
trode.
However, these advantages of FEL are accompanied by drawbacks. Higher
resistivities cannot be recorded and the resolution is reduced by larger hole dia-
meters and by mud invasion.
Self-Potential (SP)
Such electric potentials are composed of electrochemical and kinetic potentials.
They may originate from dumped metals, or sulfidic ores, which undergo oxida-
tion or reduction processes, or from fast-moving gases or liquids. SP can also be
caused by the metal casing.
48 2 Methods
In principle, it is valid that positive SP hints at increasing salinity of the pore

fluid and that negative SP may indicate fresh water, provided the clay content
remains stable within the logged depth.
In combination with ES, GR and IP logs, estimations of the clay percentage
and the permeability of strata can be attempted. A precondition for a quantitative
interpretation is a clearly marked sand-clay interbedding and different salinities
of mud filtrate and pore water.
Salinometer (SAL)
The salinometer probe measures the specific resistivity (salinity) of the borehole
fluid. The electrodes are closely spaced and housed in an insulated metallic tube,
through which the borehole fluid passes. This arrangement is made to prevent the
influence of the resistivity of the drilled rock.
Knowledge of the salt content ofthe borehole fluid is necessary to calculate the
true resistivities of rock from various electric logs. In gauge wells or boreholes
sunk through hard rock, the salinity can indicate where water inflows or outlets
occur. The salinometer probe is often combined with a temperature tool and is
used on the down-hole run.
Temperature (TEMP)
The temperature of the borehole fluid is continuously monitored by an electric
resistance thermometer in relation to depth. The accuracy of the measurement
reaches 0.01 C (degrees centigrade). To obtain undisturbed temperatures, one has
to wait until the disturbances caused by drilling have subsided.
Because of the annual temperature variation, the natural depth increase can
first be observed from 20 m downwards. The geothermal gradient normally
averages 3 DC/IOO m. Deviations from this can indicate ground-water movements.
This is very pronounced at water inflows; there, the temperature log shows sharp
kinks. Especially at hazardous waste dumps, temperature anomalies in boreholes
may indicate exothermal chemical or biological reactions between the deposited
materials which occur near the borehole.
Sonic Velocity (SV)

This is also known as acoustic or sonic log and continuously records the travel
time of longitudinal waves between two points on the rocks of the borehole wall.
The sound transmitter is housed in the probe, as well as one or more detectors.
The measured travel time is related to the lithology and the porosity.
Sonic logging is difficult and expensive; the raw data have to be corrected for
many effects, like cycle skips, borehole parameter, etc. Sonic probes contain a lot
of electronic gear and are prone to disturbing influences.
The knowledge of sonic travel time or sonic velocity is important for the re-
cognition of seismically active horizons and for the calibration of seismic re-
fraction and reflection. Additionally, the porosity and the amount of fracturing
may be determined.
2.6 Well Logging 49
Caliper (CAL)
Caliper tools measure the borehole diameter continuously. The important result is
the deviation from the diameter of the drilling bit, which tells about cavings
caused by loose sediments, frayed material or fractured hard rock. Narrowing of
holes by swelling of clay or mud cake are also located.
Customary are caliper tools with three or four arms, which are pressed against
the borehole wall while moving upward. Their spreading is recorded and is
linearly connected to the depth. Caliper logs provide important data for the
corrections of other logging methods and can locate cemented zones, casing and
filters.
Flowmeter (FLOW)
This probe measures the vertical fluid flow in boreholes or wells. Its main pur-
pose is to locate the depth at which ground water flows into a well. During a
pumping test, the probe is lowered at a constant speed and continuously records
the velocity of vertical flow.
Whenever it passes a water-producing depth, the revolutions will decrease.
Thereby, the depth of the inflow is well marked. Flowmeter data, which are redu-
ced by the cable speed, allow the computation of the share of the total production
each producing layer has. This production can even be negative, if, for example,
water flows out of the hole into a zone of fractured hard rock.
It is necessary to run an additional caliper log in hard rock to aid the interpre-
tation of the flowmeter results. Preconditions for flowmeter logging are that the
borehole diameter be not much larger than the tool, and that the velocity of water
flow be sufficient. The vertical flow velocity has to be converted into pumping
rates by multiplication with the cross section of the hole, found by caliper.
Deviation (DV)
The purpose is to ascertain the deviation of the borehole axis from the vertical and
its azimuth towards north. The dipmeter probe is often a multishot instrument,
which registers the dip and the orientation by taking photographs at every se-
quence of still measurements. More advanced are continuously surveying dip-
meter probes, which record the spatial geometry of the borehole axis.
Deviation tools with a magnetic compass are restricted to open holes and do
not work in steel casing. In this case, the expensive gyrocompass has to be
employed. The deviation of a borehole should be measured as often as possible
during the drilling operation to allow for early recognition of an unwanted course
of the drill.
Other Logging Methods

There are a number of specific tools that are rarely used in environmental logging.
Just to mention a few: optical or video logging uses videocameras to view the
borehole walls. Needless to say, this works only in a dry hole or in clear water as
borehole fluid.
50 2 Methods
The borehole televiewer works also in mud. It is not an optical tool but the
borehole walls are scanned by pulsed, narrow sonar or ultrasound beams in a helix
while it moves upwards. From travel time and amplitude, information is gained
about fractures, fissures and strata with a very high resolution. A disadvantage is
the very slow progress of the tool, which makes it applicable only to special
zones, which are disturbed by tectonics.
2,6,3 Percussion Probing
This method is also known as geoprobing, drop penetration or driving. Shallow

holes are made by driving small steel rods by hammer or hydraulic pressure into
the ground without rotation. This is pertinent only for fine-to-middle-grained
unconsolidated beds like clay and sand or other loose material. Hard rock has to
be drilled in any case by rotating a bit. The depth of such probing is limited. In
most cases, < 10m are reached.
The probing rods have a deep groove, into which samples or small cores of the
probed loose material are pressed by the percussion. When retracting the rod, the
samples come to the surface for inspection and investigation (core probing).
In many cases, the pressure at the point of the rod is registered as a measure for
the hardness of the penetrated material. Furthermore, it is possible to do even geo-
physical logging in those short probing holes. This is done by pressing another,
smaller logging stem into the hole, after the percussion rod has been pulled out.
Resistivity and gamma ray logs have been run in percussion holes. There is no
doubt that here we have a cheap and fast process at hand to countercheck geo-
physical near-surface data.
Borehole log Probe log

100 1.00 Sl.m 100 1.00,Q,m
Soil
1.8 ~'~
Clay
, ,
,,
Gravel ,
"
Aquifer
','
·'0'
":
1..5 '"
••
Measuring distance: 16"
Fig. 2.27. ES (resistivity) logs run in a borehole and in a probe hole
2.7 Radioactivity 51
The rare case in which resistivity was logged in a borehole and a percussion
hole at the same spot is displayed in Fig. 2.27. In both holes, the resistivity was
logged by the 16" normal down to a depth of 4.5 m.
The differences in the resitivities of silt, clay and water-filled gravel range
about 350 Om, but only in the borehole log are their boundaries so distinct that
depths can be determined exactly. The percussion log has many more steep
anomalous peaks, which permit no precise decision as to where the boundaries
are situated.
2.7 Radioactivity
Chemical elements that possess more than 84 protons (atomic number Z > 84) are
called radionuclides or radioatoms. They are instable, i. e. their atomic nuclei can
disintegrate spontaneously under the emittance of radioactivity. During this pro-
cess, the number of protons of the nuclei is changed and another chemical ele-
ment is born. In addition, energy is produced, which is measured in electron-volts
(eV).
1 eV = 1.6· 10- 19 joule (1);
1 eV = 4,45· 10- 26 kilowatthours (kWh)
The disintegration of atomic nuclei creates a-, ~ and J'radiation (Alpha, beta
and gamma radiation). The a-radiation consists of helium nuclei; the ~radiation
is composed of electrons and neutrinos that have no mass. It reduces the number
of protons in the atomic nucleus by one. The J'radiation, however, produces an
extremely shortwaved and strong electromagnetic field. The wavelength of J'rays
(A-IO- ll m) is shorter than of visible light and of X-rays .
According to their very different nature, the three radiations possess varying
penetration rates. The a-particles ionize other molecules on their direct way and
lose their energy fast. They are not even able to go through a sheet of paper.
Because of its lower atomic mass, the ~radiation has a higher velocity than the
alpha particles; but for the same reason, the ~radiation path travels not straight,
but zigzag. Only 3 mm of aluminium or 15 cm of clay shields this radioactivity.
Most dangerous and most penetrating, though, is the J'radiation. It penetrates
matter quite easily and can be stopped only by a lead shield of > 30 cm or by a
3 -m thick layer of clay.
This means that radioactive waste cannot be detected by gamma-ray surveys if
it is sufficiently covered by soil. In this case, the detection by the radionuclid
radon (222Rn) may lead to success. It is formed by the nuclear disintegration in the
uranium-radium sequence, which starts from the most common uranium isotope
238 (Fig. 2.28). Radon has only a very short half-life period of 3.8 days. It moves
slowly through the overburden and may finally escape into the atmosphere if it is
not trapped by ground water. By determining the radon concentrations in the
ground air, radioactive material, which lies much deeper, can be located.
52 2 Methods
EXPLANATION
e Lung cancer attributed to these IX particles
Long-lived, geochemically independent
Measured in NURE airborne surveys
Fig. 2.28. 238U decay series
The measuring unit of radioactivity is the becquerel (Bq), which is named after
the French physicist who received the Nobel Prize in 1896 for the detection of
radioactivity. One becquerel corresponds to one radioactive decay per second.
Formerly the unit curie (Ci) was used (Table 2.5). 1 Ci equals 3.7' 10 \0 Bq.
Therefore, even very weak radiation will be reported in large figures and the
public may be frightened by an overestimated nuclear danger!
The number of atomic nuclei that disintegrate per second conveys nothing
about the effectiveness of radioactive rays. The measure for this is the energy dose
or the amount of absorbed radiation received by the radiated material.
Three kinds of radioactive doses are distinguished: the energy dose D,
<
the ionic dose J, and the equivalent dose H. They are different for a-, f3- and
~radiation. The time dependence of the dose is expressed in units of dose
performance (dose wattage).
The units of measurement presented in Table 2.5 are used mainly to describe
and compare the damages inflicted by radioactive exposure on living creatures.
Most important is the equivalent dose H, counted in mSv (millisievert), which
gauges the dose of radiation a human body may encounter. The threshold values
listed in Table 2.6 should not be exceeded.
The ionizing effect of radioactive radiation is used by the Geiger-Mueller
counter to count the number of ionizations by the sudden collapse of a static
voltage or potential field. Nowadays, a more precise and sophisticated method is
favored. It is based on the property of crystals of sodium jodide to sparkle under
radiation (radiophotolumincence). The brightness that is created is picked up by
the photodiodes of scintillation counters.
It is worthwhile converting the scintillation values into Bq. The scaling into
counts per second (cps) is less favorable, since this unit depends on the size ofthe
crystal. Surveys by different instruments are then difficult to compare, unless they
are calibrated in a test pit.
2.7 Radioactivity 53
Table 2.S. Units of Radiometric Doses
Dose Mark Definition Unit Conversion

class
Old New
D=~ J
Energy D rad Gy(Gray) I Gy= 1- = IOOrad
M kg
Ionic J J= Q
m
R
C
kg
I ;g = 3876R
J
Equivalent H H=D·q rem Sv (Sievert) I Sv = I kg = 100 rem
E =energy R =Roentgen
m =mass rem = Roentgen equivalent
rad = radiation absorbed dose q = evaluation factor for
C =Coulomb radioactive absorption
of biologic bodies
Table 2.6. Threshold values of radiation doses for human organs
gonads, uterus, red bone marrow 0.3 mSv

bone surface, skin 1.8 mSv
all other organs and tissue 0.9 mSv
Special scintillation counters are able to measure the abundant energy of radia-
tion by the strength ofthe sparkles, which is recorded in MeV. Most common are
the channels 1.46 MeV, 1.76 MeV and 2.62 for the natural radionuclides 4°K, 238U
and 232Th, which allow the differentiation of the three elements.
Radiometric surveys are carried out in the field in dense grids. The scintillo-
meters are either held close above the surface of the earth (0.2-1.0 m), or placed
in shallow percussion holes 0.5 -I, m deep. Even airborne surveys are common
from helicopters or airplanes, which fly very low. The results are presented most-
ly in colored isoline maps orland in radiometric sections of the f"intensity.
This method is used to locate buried radioactive waste and the f"radiation that
emerges from radioactive rain as fallout. But also geological rock complexes,
which contain radioactive minerals like granit or uraniferous lodes, can be pro-
spected. Radiometric results can tell about the spread of radioactive material on
the surface or very near to the surface. Radionuclides that sit deeper than 3 m in
the ground may already be out of reach. Some but not all domestic waste sites dis-
play weak f"activity, which can be used for detection.
Radon surveys count the a-radiation that is emitted by the decay of the radon
isotope. The datum is the content of radon gas of the ground air. A limited amount
of ground air is pumped out of 0.5 -l-m depth, after a hole has been sunk by per-
54 2 Methods
cussion. The number of radioactive decay events is measured at the air sample by
an a-scintillometer or an ionization chamber.
The emittance of radon by contaminated waste or by natural rock is based upon
geochemical and geodynamical processes. Radon enrichment of the soil indicates
the presence of preferred ascent paths. This can be leaking seals at dumps or
natural steep dipping structures, like fracture or fissure zones. In any case, gases
contaminated by radon will follow the path that is paved by higher permeabilities
of rocks or materials. Radon surveys are therefore well adapted to investigate
planned waste disposal sites in hard rock for potential transport paths of conta-
minants.
2.8 Isotope Hydrology

This method is based on isotopes, which may have a natural or geogenetic origin,
and environmental isotopes, which are created by human activities. Some isoto-
pes are radioactive; others remain stable. The first group consists of the isotopes
of the radioactive carbon 14e (half-life period 5730 years) and of radioactive
hydrogen 3H, called tritium (half-life period 12.43 Years, Fig. 2.29). The second
group includes the isotopes of hydrogen I Hand 2 H (deuterium), the isotopes of
oxygen 16 0 and 18 0 and of carbon 13c.
3H 14C
ITU] IpMC]
2000 r:2=0-,,-0--~f-- --+-----+------11°°°
1500 r-1_5_O_ _ _t-- --~r----+--~750
:---+-------1-------1 500
l,
500 50 : --+----+------1250
I
"
" I.. - , r,
-., ... .1 I
H
......... I
1.._-., 3
O~~_.--~~-,_--+--,--+----r-~--~O
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985
Fig. 2.29. Tritium eH) and radiocarbon C4 C) in CO' of European precipitation from 1950 to
1985
2.8 Isotype Hydrology 55
-4r-----~----+_----+_~~4_----4_----~
Mean
196[,- 69
o -8r-+-~~~~++~--~~~~~~~~-4~~
~
~
",0
t
~vO -10r4----~----~~---=+_----_H--~~_+--_4
~
~
15 ::J
-12r-----+---~~----_+------~----~--~ 10 "'§
W
0.
5 E
~
196[, 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 January

Fig.2.30. a- 180 content and mean yearly temperature in GroningeniHolland
Such isotopes are tools of the environmental geophysics that are used to
estimate the amount of ground water regeneration and its dynamics, to differen-
tiate ground water horizons by their genesis, and to estimate the share and the
origin of toxic constituents in ground water. The determination of the portions of
hydrogen and oxygen isotopes in ground water can be done fast and cheaply. The
180/ 16 0 relation of a water sample is called its a-value.
Stable isotopes are components of water molecules with different atomic
weights: IH 216 0, IH 2H I6 0, 2H 216 0 and IH/80. In these molecules, the atomic
masses 18,19 and 20 are predominant. Their environmental importance stems
from their different steam pressures, which lead to the enrichment of the lighter
molecules in the volatile phase by evaporation, condensation or sublimation of
water. This effect is called isotope fractioning.
The relation between hydrogen and oxygen isotopes is measured mostly not
by its absolute value but comparatively, by its VSMOW-delta-value. It comes
from Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water a-value, scaled in %0 (parts per thou-
sand). If ground water is accumulated by precipitation, it is called meteoric water.
Its a l8 0 and a2 H rates have a linear relation, which is called MWL or meteoric
water line. With open and stagnant water, this relation is no longer linear, since
evaporation leads to isotope fractioning.
The heavier water, molecules evaporate faster at higher temperature. Therefo-
re the isotope configuration of the precipitation shows a yearly variation, which
is distinctly different for summer and winter. This effect can be observed only in
ground water that is not older than 4 years. It is, for example, possible to assess
whether contaminated ground water is older than 4 years (Fig. 2.30).
Moreover, this temperature dependence allows the distinction of ground water,
that was formed during the cold Pliocene period from the more recent ground
water of the warmer Holocene.
56 2 Methods
The reduction of air temperature with growing altitude produces lower delta
values of the rain. This is the key to determining the topographic altitude of the
catchment area of spring water with an accuracy of ± 50 m.
The age assignment of hundreds to thousands of years-old ground water is sub-
stantially based on the radiocarbon isotope 14C, which is created by the omni-
present cosmic radiation. The radiocarbon is inhaled as the gas CO 2 by living
beings. After their death, the process of decay creates new CO 2 , which is dis-
solved as hydrogen carbonate in rainwater and later in ground water.
During the aging of ground water, its radioactivity decreases regularly, ac-
cording to the half-life time of radiocarbon. This means that by measuring the
radiocarbon content, the age of the ground water could be calculated. However,
not all carbon in the water comes from the sky. Other carbon molecules stem from
the weathering and dissolving of limestone. They are the culprits for the unwan-
ted permanent hardness of ground water.
This extra carbon may lead to ages of ground water that can be several
thousand years too high. Therefore these ages have to be corrected. The differ-
ence between corrected and non-corrected ages is constant and is used to identify
ground waters of equal origin or to follow-up movements of special ground water.
Lesser water ages are dealt with by the tritium eH) method. This has been
caused by nuclear testing in the atmosphere and has later seeped into the ground.
The nuclear test program reached its peak during the years 1963/64 (Fig. 2.29).
Today there is none of this tritium left and any age determinations can operate
only by the qualitative analysis of ground water that has been formed ever since.
The contents of tritium in water are scaled in tritium units = TV. 1 TU corre-
sponds to the very weak concentration of one tritium atom to 10 18 molecules of
water. In many countries, the International Atomic Agency of the United Nations
in Vienna performs continuous 3H monitoring to study the short-term ground
water circulation and to control the adherence to the nuclear test ban treaty.
In the environment, especially in the exploration of hazardous waste sites, the
isotope hydrology may be employed in many ways. Three examples illustrate this:
A) It can be decided whether the salinity of ground water originates from great
depths, or from dumps of salt mines.
B) At old watered mines, it can be established when its water reserves are ex-
hausted by pumping.
C) The age of contaminated leachate plumes can be determined.
3 Case Histories
3.1 Abandoned Hazardous Sites
3.1.1 Preconditions
Abandoned hazardous waste sites or old landfills may contain or emit substances
that contaminate the ground, the ground water and the biosphere. Geophysical
exploration is necessary for any risk assessment at hazardous sites and landfills.
An important factor of geophysical application is its industrial safety in field-
work. The protection of working personnel is better than at investigations by
mechanical penetration such as drilling, probing or trenching, since these may set
free harmful gasses or liquids. In addition, geophysics is not destructive, is non-
invasive and can cover the total lateral and spatial expanse of a waste site, whe-
reas boreholes can only inform about one point or a thin column.
Nevertheless, geophysical data should never stand alone. They should always
be supplemented and verified by limited drilling or probing. This combination
furthermore allows the direct calibration of a geophysical method to the special
conditions of a certain hazardous site and the preparation of appropriate remedial
techniques.
3.1.2 Geomagnetics
Geomagnetic Survey
Geomagnetic measurements by proton magnetometer, to determine the total
magnetic intensity, should be applied in most cases, since it is a cheap, fast-
progressing and simple field method. The following case history will prove this:
Figure 3.1 shows anomalies of the magnetic total intensity, which were sur-
veyed in a rectangular grid of 2 x 2 m over a buried hazardous dump, known to
contain industrial sludges, besides domestic waste. The result is plotted as a 3D
picture and one can distinguish two categories:
1. Extremely high singular anomalies> 1000 nT,
2. Weak anomalies 20 to 150 nT.
The high values are related to ferrimagnetic bodies, which lie less than I-m deep.
The weak anomalies originate either from similar small bodies, which are buried
up to 3 m deep, or from bigger, but less magnetic bodies. Such accumulation of
58 3 Case Histories
Fig. 3.1. 3D picture of the magnetic total intensity of a hazardous waste deposit containing
domestic and industrial waste
small, point-related magnetic anomalies is characteristic for most domestic waste

deposits. Their magnetic sources are manifold, consisting of tins, wire netting,
scrap of cars, etc., distributed at random throughout the dumped material.
The wider magnetic anomalies of Fig. 3.1 depict local assemblages of scrap
which should be situated in the southwest and in the northeast. In the same
area, a gas pipeline, made of steel, follows a forest trail and enhances the scrap
anomaly.
Over the same deposit, the vertical gradient of the total intensity was calculated
(Fig. 3.2 and Sect. 2.1.1) from two measurements, 0.65 and 1.65 m above ground.
Two protonmagnetometers were attached to a non-ferrous rod at these heights and
were simultaneously recorded. Compared with the simple measurement of the
total intensity, the gradient is less influenced by the small variations ofthe magne-
tic field, which are known as "magnetic noise." In areas of small magnetic
anomalies, it enhances those anomalies that originate from ferrimagnetic
material.
The border of the covered-up waste deposit can be derived from 3D presenta-
tions of both the total intensity and the gradient survey (Figs. 3.1 and 3.2) by
connecting all marginal magnetic anomalies.
Figure 3.3 shows the result of a geomagnetic survey of old gasworks. At this
abandoned industrial site, the geomagnetic survey met very difficult conditions
, nT/m
laee
0
-laee
-, "
<b
Gaspipe
V>
- Boundary by magnetic results
Fig. 3.2. 3D picture of vertical gradient of magnetic total intensity (hazardous waste deposit
Fig. 3.1)
Road
~ Magnetic objects
20m
,
Fig. 3.3. Magnetic map of old gasworks within built-up area

60 3 Case Histories
Fig. 3.4. Anomalies of magnetic total intensity over former landfill, now used as tennis club
due to magnetic sources above ground, such as houses, tanks and gasometers. The
gradient of the total intensity was surveyed at 1.0 and 2.0 m above ground in a
I x I-m grid.
The magnetic investigation pinpoints reinforced fundaments, steel pipes and
iron troughs in the shallow underground, in spite of the magnetic disturbances
created by the industrial buildings nearby. This result shows that narrow-spaced
magnetic surveys can be applied with success even in built-up areas.
Another magnetic target was an abandoned waste disposal site which, after
having been covered up with soil, is now used as a tennis club (Fig. 3.4). Here the
total magnetic intensity was measured in a quadratic pattern of 4 x 4 m Under
. the
anomaly "A" in the northeast, illegally dumped car wrecks were found. The other
magnetic indications have still to be unearthed. They are a mixture of the magne-
tic fields of undergound bodies and of the wire net fences of the tennis courts.
This example makes clear that magnetic interpretations have to consider the
influence of magnetic structures below and also above ground.
Figure 3.5 displays four steel barrels which have been put upright into non-
magnetic silt. The proton magnetometer recorded a concentric anomaly of 110 nT
at 0.5-m depth of the cover, which fades to 40 nT at 2.0-m overburden. The iso-
line interval is 10 nT.
Depth 2m 1.5m 1.0m O.5m (Cover)

r- .... 1-'"1
--.. --W
1\ -- II
I-
~ r-
~
./ ~
\
} J_
1/ fo'
i'. t---t-- V
1--1- r--.. V v
t-... V
Isoline- Distance 5 nT
Fig. 3.5. Magnetic total intensity over four steel barrels, buried upright at different depths
This shows that single barrels or bundles of drums produce only weak magne-
tic anomalies, which are often smaller than the common magnetic variations of
domestic or industrial waste. In addition, their magnetic response decreases
rapidly with depth. Barrels, perhaps with toxic fillings, can be located only when
they are embedded in non-magnetic material.
On the other hand, Fig. 3.5 shows that a I x l-m rectangular grid suffices to
find separate anomalies of singular magnetic objects, provided their magnetic
field is stronger than the background.
Other test measurements have revealed that single metal barrels may be
magnetically detectable down to a depth of 4 m and bundles of between 20 and
100 barrels down to 10m. However, the precondition must always be fulfilled that
no other magnetic materials have been buried nearby.
The next case history concerns a subterranean air-raid shelter that was known
to house metal containers filled with contaminant liquids. The outcome of the
geomagnetic investigation is shown in Figs. 3.6 and 3.7 as a magnetic map and
3D picture. The total intensity shows a negative anomaly in the north and a
positive in the south, as to be expected by a big magnetic object at a latitude of
approx. 55° north within an inclined magnetic earth field.
An air-raid shelter lies in between the two anomalies. The peak reaches
>2000 nT and complies totally with the magnetic field of the steel reinforcements
of the concrete roofs and walls. There is no trace of the expected containers. A
separate magnetic anomaly in the southwestern comer of the area must belong to
another buried magnetic object.
This abandoned air-raid shelter, whose position was only vaguely known, lay
under a dense forest. The survey lines had to be cut through dense scrub at
distances of 2 m to allow for the topographical and geomagnetical surveys. Such
additional preparatory activities are expensive and should be known before plan-
ning or even bidding for a survey. The same is valid for vegetation or agricultural
crops and topographical features like steep rocks or ravines.
The efficiency of a magnetic survey over a landfill in Indiana, USA, was con-
siderably increased by calculating the upward continuation of the magnetic field.
The observed magnetic data (Fig. 3.8a) display that off the landfill, anomalies
62 3 Case Histories
50 1.0 30 20 10 0
1~
1.0
E 30 30
QI
v
C
0
Ui 20 20
is
10 10
0 0
50 1.0 30 20 10 0
Distance ( m )
Fig.3.6. Contours of total magnetic intensity of buried air-raid shelter with reinforced concrete
roof and walls
./
2000 ~
>---
c
>-
1000
<5
E
0
c
0
"C 0
]i
v
Qj
C
g -1000
~
Fig. 3.7. 3D picture of magnetic total intensity, air-raid shelter Fig. 3.6
..,.
QO
..,.
Q
..,.
:s:
a 0 20 40 60 80 100
v
:s:
b 0 20 40 60 80 100
- APPROX . LANDFILL BOUNDARY

o 20 30 40 so
melers - - MAGNETIC SURVEY BOUNDARY
Fig. 3.8. a) Contours of magnetic total intensity at 1 m height, b) Contours continued at 6 m

upward, landfill Indiana, USA
64 3 Case Histories
remain beyond 100 nT, except for anomalies by iron surface objects in the south-
east.
The northwestern slope of the landfill is marked by local anomalies from
small, shallow sources, appearing within an intense magnetic minimum. This is
the negative counterpart to a strong, wide maximum over the landfill. The total
amplitudes of both reach over 1000 nT.
In Fig. 3.8b, the magnetic field has been continued upward by calculation to a
height of 6 m. This increases the distance of observation level to source and
allows the attenuation of the distorting magnetic fields of the small objects. The
landfill can now be viewed as a single magnetic source.
It is clearly demonstrated that simply by calculating upward continuations of
the magnetic field, the center and the shape of a magnetic body, which is strewn
with small intensive anomalies, can be clarified.
Airborne Magnetics
A magnetic survey by helicopter was flown in a height of 30 m over a big deposit
of domestic garbage. Figure 3.9 proves that this kind of waste possesses ferri-
magnetic properties and stands out as a special structure from the magnetic back-
ground. In the isoline map (Fig. 3.9), the total intensity reaches a maximum of
> 750 nT in the south of the waste dump. The corresponding minimum in the
north sinks down to <-560 nT.
The zero-line between them extends east-west and marks approximately
the middle of the dump heap. As in the case of the reinforced air-raid shelter,
this general structure is caused by the normal inductive magnetization of the
Fig. 3.9. Contours of magnetic total intensity by helicopter survey, piled-up domestic waste
dump, Hannover, Germany
magnetic field of the earth. But there are also separate anomalies, especially in
the southwest, which may pertain to concentrations of scrap iron that were
dumped in the vicinity of the main deposit.
In spite of the low flying height, only a few separate anomalies were recorded.
From this we must conclude that airborne magnetic surveys lack the resolution
necessary to find single magnetic bodies or concentrations in a waste site. This
task must be left to the more cumbersome ground surveys.
3.1.3 Geoelectric DC Methods
Like the magnetic, geoelectric methods are well adapted for sensing buried waste
and waste migration. They work fast, at low cost and with high efficiency, since
they not only can find the extension of a buried waste body, but also the location
of singular contaminations of special resistivity, even at a depth exceeding 10m.
Such contaminations may be scrap metal, toxic sludges, organics of higher re-
sistivity, or materials with low resistivity.
Geoelectric Mapping
Figure 3.10 shows the mapping of a domestic waste site by the Wenner array (see
Sect. 2.2.1). By using an electrode separation of 10 m, very low specific resisti-
vities between 13 and 30 Om have been surveyed over the dump. The lowest
values occurred in the center; towards the edges, the values increase continuous-
ly.
It is surprising that such a homogenous distribution of low resistivity was
found, in spite ofthe great variety of the many components ofthe domestic waste.
Perhaps the single, electrically active components of the garbage are too small to
create individual anomalies. Their geoelectric fields are obviously integrated into
an overall homogeneous anomaly of low resistivity. Nearly all domestic waste
sites display such a homogenous electric behavior and can be detected by this
overall low resistivitiy.
It is assumed that not only the solid components lower the resistivity of
domestic waste, but that leachates and seepages contribute as well. The general
reason for this is thought to be a general salt content of domestic waste. The
salinity of plumes, originating from waste sites, can furthermore be used as a geo-
electric tracer. Such plumes, often loaded with toxic freight, can be followed up
by geoelectric mapping.
The next case is a covered-up site of mixed domestic and industrial waste. It
was mapped by a Wenner array, using an electrode distance of 5 m and a line sepa-
ration of 7.5 m (Fig. 3.11). In agreement with the previous case, the waste is
characterized by a general low resistivity < 20 Om. The uncontaminated vicinity,
however, has resistivities> 60 Om. This pronounced difference allows the con-
struction of the border of the dump. In addition, hints about how seepage channels
may run are derived from the geoelectric map of Fig. 3.11.
Whereas the Wenner array is frequently employed for DC mapping because it
is symmetric and the resistivity data pertain to the center of the array, other arrays
66 3 Case Histories
~ Minimal resistivity
~ (ps < 150m)
-20- Isoohms
>-----; Profile
o 50m
I
\
\
"- '--_..-/ ...::.
...... ...... . •...•.
...
.........................
Fig.3.10. Contours of apparent specific resisitivity p" domestic waste dump in the alpine fore-
land
may be better suited for special tasks. The gradient array has better depth pene-
tration and better resolution of structural details. It should be chosen when addi-
tional information on the structural set-up and the geological barrier below waste
sites is requested. The fixed Schlumberger array has the advantage of gathering
specified information from a certain depth level, as shown in Fig. 3.12.
In the Panoche fan area of California ground water at the edges of the fan is
contaminated by Selenium. Figure 3.12 displays the contours of interpreted re-
sistivity at a depth of 20 m. It was constructed from 82 Schlumberger DC
soundings as a geoelectric map of a fixed Schlumberger array.
The fan was found to be composed of coarse-grained sediments with specific
resistivities >20Qm (dotted in Fig.3.12), while the surrounding clays are
characterized by specific resistivities <7 Qm (stippled in Fig. 3.12). The sele-
nium contamination is to be expected in the white area in between.
o 2 3 4 5 6
10 10
9 9
8 8
7 7
6 0- 6
q
0
z
5 0 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
Sri
0 2 3 4 6
lOr
0 0I 50m
I
Grid lines
Fig. 3.11. Contours of apparent specific resistivity p" industriaUdomestic waste dump. Area
hatched > 60 !lm, cross hatched < 20 !lm. arrows = possible seepage paths
vertical Electric Sounding (VES)
This method is the vertical complement of the lateral-directed geoelectric map-

ping. It has already been mentioned that the "Schlumberger array" mostly is used.
This array results in the construction of a column under its midpoint. As in a cored
drill hole, the boundaries or thickness of horizontal beds are recorded, but instead
of petrography, the apparent specific resistivities of layers are presented.
Over a hazardous waste deposit, situated on an island in the river Rhine,
lOVES with a maximum electrode distance of 260 m, were made in a section.
Figure 3.13 shows, at the top, two soundings with their results, obtained after
mathematical inversion. All data are correlated to the geoelectric section at the
bottom. The shapes of the sounding curves inside and off the waste site are com-
pletely different.
68 3 Case Histories
Fig 3.12. Contours of resistivity (Schlumberger soundings) 20-m depth, Panoche Fan, Cali-
fornia. Resistivities> 20 Urn are dotted, < 7 Urn are stippled, white areas are contaminated by
selenium
The curve 17 E in Fig. 3.13 was measured outside the dump. It has a strong
maximum, which is created by a bed of wet sand and gravel, - 10m thick with
650 Om. It is covered by soil of 0.8-m thickness and a resistivity of 90 Om. The
bed below this aquifer reaches 48 m deeper and must be clay or clayish silt, since
its resistivity drops to 48 Om.
Inside the dump, the soundings resulted in minimum curves: The YES BE
found a covering layer of 94 Om. Underneath, two beds of 8 and 23 Om were
assigned to the waste and are together - 20 m thick. The strata below again
reaches a resistivity of - 90 Om.
The interpreted geoelectric section at the bottom of Fig. 3.13 shows that the
same difference in curve shape exists for all curves, surveyed inside or around the
waste site. In spite of wider variations of resistivities inside the dump, the premise
of homogenous and low resisitivity for waste is again fulfilled.
Figure 3.13 is a good example for the application of geoelectric soundings to
waste sites. Not only the resistivity of the deposited material can be determined,
YES 17E YES 13E

1000 1000
~
:~
VI
"Vi __
/'
~ E 100 100
we::
aJ-
0..
VI
ci f-r
0..
<l: I
10 10
1 10 100 1000 10 100 1000
L 12(m) L 12(m)
...... Measured
- Calculated
Model:
Layer Resistivity Thickness Layer Resistivity Thickness
(.n.m) (flm)
1 91.12 0.77 94.35 1.02
2 651.39 10.10 2 8.00 0.93
47.78 3 22.69 19.25
3 47.87
4 86.58
4 63.92
W E
-50 50 1 0 250 650
HE HN lIE lIN Distance
18N (m)
90 91 -------91
500 651 9611~;;i229-~32==~~
33- 60 17 rfi!.l~~?J60
23 t141 55
~ 10
i
24 -
19/ 107 -...........-.
53 142
21 48
78--
50 / 227
148 76
64
10
Elevation (m)
Fig.3.13. Geoelectric soundings (Schlumberger array) of hazardous waste site on Rhine island.
Sounding 17E lies outside, sounding 13E inside the dump, displaying profound differences in
resistivity between waste and sediment
70 3 Case Histories
!..---./\. ~
~
Magnetfeldst6rung (nT)
Magnetic disturbance (nT)
400~ 0
Spez. elektr. Widerstand (Ohm. m) im Grundwasserhorizont
Electrical resistivity at ground water level
I
L-~
~ ~9~Om)
200 \ 0....-'1 - Poa
"- /<' (240 Om)
_--+-_"'---c,o .....----:::"............. i T
o ~a 0== -0--.,_ J. (5<tn':n)
Hydrogeologisches Profil (idealisiert)
Hydrogeological profile (ideal)
i I
o 100m
Fig. 3.14. Combined investigation of contaminated ground water by geomagnetic measure-
ments and YES
but also the thickness of the base and the extension of the dump can be worked
out. Soundings are helpful to pinpoint the location of special waste components.
In this case, the resistivities around 200 Om come from casting sands, which were
dumped many years ago.
Figure 3.14 describes the detailed investigation of a saline ground water con-
tamination, which stems from a recultivated hazardous waste dump. At first, the
rims of the site were located by geomagnetic mapping (upper section). Then the
thickness of the dump was delineated by electric soundings (VES) (lower, cross-
hatched section). Finally, the average specific resistivities at ground water level
were connected (middle section).
The intrusion of salty seepage water into the aquifer results in a rapid decrease
in the specific electric resistivity from> 300 Om to < 50 Om over a distance of
130 m from the left rim.
The ground water flows from the left to the right of the picture. The water
resisitivity remains low over the whole extension of the waste deposit of 800 m.
At its right end, the resistivity of the downwash plume increases again and reaches
280 Om at a distance of 250 m.
It is surprising that the concentration of soluble salts and perhaps of soluble
contaminants diminishes to 15 % of its maximum value over the distance of only
250m.
YES surveys can be applied not only to single plumes but also to regional dis-
tributions of briny ground water. This requires much greater depth penetration
reached by increased electrode separations up to 10000 m.
Figures 3.15 to 3.17 present YES results from the Upper Rhine Valley between
the extinct volcano Kaiserstuh1 (Whyl) in the south and the town of Strassbourg
in the north. Over a distance of 60 km, 11 soundings with a maximum electrode
distance of 4000 m were made. By this, a depth of > 1300 m below the surface of
the valley was reached.
The upper section of Fig. 3.15 shows the geology and block tectonics of the ter-
tiary and mesozoic strata, constructed by surface outcrops and drilling results.
This is confronted by the geoelectric section. In contrast to the multiple structures
of geology, it can be divided into three areas only:
1. Upper zone, down to 300 m. Within the tota11ength of the section, varying resi-
stivities up to 450 !lm prevail. They are attributed to gravel beds of quaternary
age.
2. Second zone. Its resistivities range from 20 to 80 !lm. In the south, they start
at a depth of 150 m, in the middle they sink at extension faults to 400 m, and in
the northern part they begin at a depth of approximately 1500 m. They are
assigned to the mesozoic series.
3. Northern zone. The lowest resistivities from 2.5 to 9!lm occur only in this
part. They extend to a depth of > 1000 m, above the downthrusted mesozoic
strata. They are correlated to beds of tertiary age, which normally have speci-
fic resistivities> 100 !lm.
The reason for this was detected by a drill hole at the village of Marlen near
the town Kehl, which lies at the north end of the section. It is subterranean
ground- and pore water of high salinity, which originates from naturally leached
salt deposits at the base of the tertiary series.
This geoelectric discovery of the great depth extension of saline ground water,
south of Strassbourg (Fig. 3.15) has proven that this contamination is of natural
origin and is not caused by old stocks of abandoned salt mines.
The YES 08 is located near the borehole of Kehl-Marlen. In Fig. 3.16, the
thickness of beds and their specific resistivities are shown for the soundings 08
and 09. At YES 08, the resistivities vary between 239 and 67 !lm, down to 215 m.
Below this they sink to only 9 !lm. This agrees very well with the result of the
borehole that was sunk at 215 m into saline ground water.
The maximum electrode separation of YES 08 was 1600 m, but even by this
considerable spacing the bottom of the saline water or the boundary between ter-
tiary and mesozoic strata was not reached. Only when the electrode spacing was
prolonged to 3800 m in the nearby YES 09 was the bottom of salinity finally
found at 1500 m. At this depth, the steep decline of the sounding curve to the
extremely low resistivity of2.5 !lm changes over into a minimum and an increase
to 20 !lm, thereby marking the top of the mesozoic impermeable series (see
middle beam of Fig. 3.16).
A strong contrast is displayed by the curve ofVES 04 in Fig. 3.17. It lies in the
southern part of the section. The lowest resistivities are 30!lm and belong to
mesozoic rocks. They extend from the depth of 163 to 113 7 m. The quaternary
and latest tertiary beds (Pliocene) show resistivities from 190 to 270 !lm. They
Wyhl1 Weisweil1 NNEISW NE ISE NWISSW KehL - MarLen ;j
SSW (proj.600mW) NNE
mNN 06 05 Ot. 10 03 11 02 01 07 09 08 mNN
20~ t ··t:,;·"'<:t··'-'" :'.. ....};. ;..~;~~.~ . ):; ·::~·d::;·\· ·3· t •• :••~ .•- . . ; . " ':;;";\SZ:z:::1~;~U15J ~OO
1000 1000
--------
06 05 U"'190 IU ... ....
280 _ _- 300 - - - '\10
80 60
--.. .......
25
IE
w
(j
Fig.3.IS. Geology and geoelectrical profile of the Rhine valley from the extinct volcano Kaiserstuhl to Strassbourg ~
::c
~.
::l .
~
til
GTS 09
E
~ 1~+---~~----~+-------------~--~~------~~
~
u
CII
c..
<11
~'- 1~t=~==~===r===±====~========~==~~====~I3==~
237
o
c..
c..
« 239 166
ABI2(m)
Fig. 3.16. YES curves 09 and 08 in north of Fig. 3.15, near Strassbourg
E
q
.~
~
~
c
CII
'-
~ ---..--
o
c.. 3399
c..
« 'I 190 I 272 1 30 1 160
1.18 17.2 163 1137
102
ABI2 (m)
Fig. 3.17. YES curve 04 in south of Fig. 3.15, near Kaiserstuhl
74 3 Case Histories
A A'
0 0
ena: -10 -10
W
I-
W -20 -20
~ -30
-30
W
(,)
<
LL
-40 -40
a:
~ -50 -50
en
0 -60
z
<
..J -70
~
0 -60
..J
W
aI -90
X
I- -100
Q,
W
0 -110
-120
SCALE EXPLANATION
o
I
1 MILE
f-I ---.--,1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
o ; KILOMETERS 144 WELL SCREEN WITH CORRESPONDING
Y
CL- CONCENTRATION Imgtl)
SEA WATER
Fig. 3.1S. Geoelectric profile north of Cross-Florida Barge Canal. Well data are included,
arrows mark YES
are underlaid by a thick succession of stratified rocks, which are correlated to ter-
tiary and mesozoic strata, as displayed in the geological section of Fig. 3.15. The
reascent of resistivity at the depth of 1137 m is probably caused by basement
rocks. But there is no trace of the very low resistivities < 5 Om, indicating the
high salinity of ground water as in the north of the section.
The spreading of this gigantic plume was controlled by repeating these 11
soundings two years later. The result was a surprise, since no change or extension
could be found. This confirmed the assumption of a deep-reaching salinization as
a remnant of intensive exhaustion of a tertiary salt deposit.
The investigation of a salt-water intrusion into an aquifer by direct current resi-
stivity soundings (VES) in Florida is presented in Figs. 3.18 and 3.19. A sea-level
canal is cut 4 minto karstic carbonate rocks comprising an important aquifer. This
causes the intrusion of saline water from above and the upwelling of mineralized
sulfate water from below (Fig. 3.19).
The sea-water seepage under the canal is outlined by the 25 Om contour. Its
total area of mixing and encroachment is narrow, but extends to a depth of 40 m.
It is characterized by resistivities < 75 Om. At a greater depth under the river, a
well detected that the 75 Om contour encloses ground water with low chloride but
high sulfate concentration (- 330 mg/l).
RIVER CANAL
-10 -10
,...
C/)
a:
w -20 -20
I-
W
::!: -30
...., -30
w
() -40 -40
c(
U.
a: -50 -50
:::>
C/)
o -60 -60
Z
c(
..J -70 -70
3:
o
..J
-80 -80
W
CD -90 -90
J:
I-
fu -100 -100
o
-110 -110
-120 L-_--'.--'._...L._L--L._L.....t.~_.....1... _ _L____1_ _ _ _ ____1 -120
EXPLANATION
SCALE
o 1 MILE
I
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
WELL SCREEN OR OPEN I I
144 HOLE, WITH CORRESPONDING o 1 KILOMETER
CL- CONCENTRATION (mgl/1
SEA-WATER MIXING
UPWELLING MINERALIZED
WATER
FRESH WATER/RECHARGE
Fig. 3.19. Geoelectric profile of Cross-Florida Barge Canal, perpendicular to Fig. 3.18
A dipole-dipole resistivity survey at two chemical disposal ditches in northern

Utah was very successful, despite its complicated structural background. Figure
3.20 shows the result at this disposal site of solvents. The profile was measured
by a single seven-electrode spread with a dipole length of 9.1 m.
While the upper section of observed data shows low resistivities from below
the ditches to the lowest level of measurement, the numerical model clearly shows
that resistivities < 10 Qm occur separately within a small area directly under the
ditches and again as a thick layer at greater depths.
From this model and the section of the computed apparent resistivity, a
geologic interpretation is derived. The complex structures consist oflayers of del-
76 3 Case Histories
APPARENT RE ISTIVITY· OBSERVED 65 EO

5
2 Io'tchos11 2 3 4 5 6
6 3
2 -
a
65 EO
6 7
75
.J::.
0..
a'"
27
b
APPARE T RESISTIVITY· CO IPUTED N 65 EO
6 543 0 23 56
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
n
3 -
7
N 65 EO
5 3 2 3 5 6
1.8
\
E 5,4
9.1 Sand -A\ DislurJed Zone
I
.r:
0..
a'"
13,7
18,3
--------,...-
1
__ ~Clay ______
\\ I
27 , 4~
Clay \ \
__________________________________________________________ ~
d
Fig. 3.20. Resistivity profile of chemical disposal ditches, northern Utah, dipole-dipole array,
Lake-bed sediments, disrupted by slump block
o SOm PROFIL 7255
SSE Apparent specific resistivity Rho a (Ohm. m) NNW

20
I
15
I
10
,
5
!
oI
+/~~~~.s
,,0+
~~~ +
+ + + + + + +
+ + + +
+~<f,~~+50
~,;..-"-
+ +
~ ~+
+
~o +
+
+
+
+
+
/.-:0,rd "--.Jo
+ +
+
+
+ + +
SSE Decoy coefficient M3/M1

20
I
15
I
10
,
5
I
090 0
+>;m"'~"·+
+ +,.. + + + + .....:..
....~~ + + +. + + +:-::-J + _
,'j + + + + + + 1.0 +u,
• ~~~ + + + + + GJ
+
",9 "'~~~/~ + + ....---(.1' + + +
SSE Chargeability M2 (mV/V)
20
I
15
!
10
,
5
I
+~++++++++++++
++++++++++++
o+' + + + + + +~+
'lOT
~-~+o \}iiffi};;;;;n~;-;;; +
+ "" +
<v rJ 0
f-------Waste dump-----I
Fig.3.21. IP pseudosection of hazardous waste site. Dipole-dipole configuration with five dif-
ferent separations (12.5-62.5 m). High chargeabilities > 100 mVN come from galvanic sludge
taic sand, silt and clay, indicated by the resistivities of 75, 20 and 10 Qm, which
are disrupted by faults at the edges of a slump block. The high resistivites
> 1000 Qm near the surface are attributed to hydrocarbon residues, visible at the
surface and in monitor wells.
This case is an excellent illustration ofthe great amount of information that can
be obtained from simple resistivity measurements by mathematical processing
and painstaking consideration of known geological features.
Induced Polarization (IP)

The last two case histories have proven that YES enable the detection and deli-
neation of salt-water intrusions without disturbing sensitive contact zones. How-
ever, such conclusions are based only on low resistivities. There are no means of
discerning clays of equal low resistivity from saline ground water by DC methods.
To overcome this obstacle, the geoelectric method of induced polarization
described below should be employed. It determines the chargeability, which is
either strong on the surfaces of metals or weak on the boundary layer inside the
pore space of rocks. Salinity of fluids within the pore space prevents any charges.
Clay, in comparison, possesses moderate chargeabilities.
The technique of this method is more complicated than DC measurements and
should mainly be used where electrically chargeable materials or rocks are pre-
78 3 Case Histories
~ Maximal chargeability
~(M2>80mV/V)
-80- Contours M2 in mV/ V
I 7962 I Profile
o SOm
:-Soundary gravel pit
Fig. 3.22. Chargeability contours in m V N of a domestic waste site in the alpine foreland. Dipo-
le-dipole array, dipole width = 10 m, distance between dipoles = 50 m (n = 5)
sent. Known examples are: galvanic sludge, metals, glazed ceramics and printed
paper. This list is still very small and research work is necessary to determine the
chargeability/resistivity of many more waste components.
The pseudo section of chargeability in Fig. 3.21 shows a completely different
pattern from the section of the apparent specific resistivity. The extremely strong
chargeability of the galvanic sludges is accompanied only by a weak increase in
resistivity from 25 to 50 Om. In this and other cases, only the IP method is able
to provide knowledge about deposits of special materials within a dump.
The resistivity contours of the domestic waste site in the alpine foreland
(Fig. 3.10) evince only one center. The IP map of the same dump (Fig. 3.22) has
but two pronounced maxima, marked by chargeabiIities > 80 mVN. The IP pseu-
dosection of Fig. 3.23 crosses the southern maximum. The chargeabilities of the
dumped domestic garbage are, in contrast to the low resistivities, generally very
high, and sink rapidly from 100 mVN to < 20 mVN upon entering the country
rock of gravel and sand. These differences between resistivity and chargeability
in location and value prove that the IP anomalies must stem from other sources
than the anomalies of resistivity.
PROFll 7963
IP DIPOL-DIPOL ! I
A-10.0 m
o 50m
SE Apparent specific resistivity Rho a (Ohm m) NW
o, 5
! " I " , ! , ! "
10 15 I ,
20
, ! 1
25
, ! , , I
30
,
<0
+ +10+ + .
+++~+++
0 . ~/O
+ + + + + <p~+~
++++.++++ + +
..,~-,-++++ +.+ + + + 'l"A"'
r~,~ ~ + + + + + + + A +-,,~ :(\4
SE Decay coefficient M3/ M 1 I:) T.... NW
5 10 15 20 25 30
? , ! I , , ! ! , ! , I , 1 ! , , , ! , ! , , , , ! ,
1.06 - 1.08
+ + +
+ + + + + + .+ + + + + + + + + +
+
+ +
++ + +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + +
+
++++++++++++++++++++
+ + ++ + + + + + + + + + + ++++ + +
+ + + + ++ + + + + + ++ +++++ + +
SE Chargeability M2 (mV/V) NW
o, 5
! , , 1 ,
10
, , , , ,
15
, , , , !
20
, , ! , ,
25
, 1 I , ,
30
,
Fig. 3.23. IP pseudo section of domestic waste site Fig. 3.22. High chargeabilities show more
details of deposited material than low resistivities
It is not known, though, what kind of deposited material causes strong

chargeabilities. To answer this question, it is necessary to determine the
chargeabilities and resistivities of different waste types by laboratory measure-
ments and field surveys on deposits of known composition. But it is already pos-
sible to discriminate between different waste components of equal resistivity by
an IP survey.
Self-Potential
A map of self-potential anomalies (Sp) is presented in Fig. 3.24. They cover the
landfill, the magnetic anomalies of which were described in Fig. 3.4. The survey
used a grid of 15 x 15 m 2 • While most magnetic anomalies were found in the
northwest part, negative Sp-values down to - 80 m V occur in the west of the land-
fill, positive anomalies up to 55 m V at its western side.
This anomaly pattern neither agrees with the extension of the landfill, nor with
the morphology of the site. It is possible that the whole body of the landfill acts
as one Sp-source with its plus pole in the west and its minus pole in the east.
Nevertheless, no conclusion as to the details of extension of this landfill can be
drawn.
This case history portrays the difficult interpretation of environmental Sp-data.
The anomaly pattern may also be caused by the buildings in the west and/or by
the outflow of leachates in the east.
A contaminated plume within the ground water downwash of a domestic waste
deposit was investigated by Sp (Fig. 3.25) and compared to the ammonia content
80 3 Case Histories
0 10 ______ '10 Sp contours (mV)

~
~ <-30 mV
~ > 30 mV
Fig. 3.24. Sp contours of landfill, next to built-up area
of monitoring wells. The Sp measurements followed a grid of 5 x 2 m 2 and were

corrected for spatial noise and time-varying potentials by constant monitoring of
a base line.
The Sp anomalies in Fig. 3.25 are regarded as the effects of the near-surface
water saturation in marshland. The low Sp values in the middle are caused by a
drainage system; the higher potentials left and right occur over water-saturated
land. This means that this plume, even with an increased ammonia content, could
not be traced by the Sp survey.
Figure 3.26 discloses the self-potential of a Bavarian domestic waste dump.
Predominant is a strong but small-scale anomaly on the left side of the dump. It
occurs in both cross sections, but its origin is not known. The margin of the waste
deposit is visible only in section P3 as a small minimum within a general Sp
decline. The cross section P4 is only 25 m away but shows no indication of the
lateral extension of the waste.
These obvious limitations of Sp measurements at waste sites are enhanced by
the strong influence of frequent local variations of the potential field near in-
dustrial areas, which are caused by the switching of high-tension lines or similar
man-made processes. Such variations often exceed the measured potentials. They
can be eliminated by the continuous registration of a base line, supported by the
simultaneous scanning of many potential electrodes.
2
1 Marsh Drainage
Ditch
o
E -1
-2
11
C -3
-
oa. -4
OJ
Qj -5
Vl
-6
-7
-8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (m)
Fig. 3.25. Sp cross section of ground water downwash, domestic dump, Bavaria
90
100
80
_ 70 80
> >
E 60 ..§ 60
-0 50 Waste dump boundary
-0
I
~ 40 ~ 40 Waste dump boundary
&. 30 I
OJ
2
~ 20
.e. 20
Qj
Vl Vl
10 0
0 -20
-10
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Distance (m) Distance (m)
Fig. 3.26. Self-potential profiles across domestic waste dump, feeding ground water to area of
Fig. 3.25
3.1.4 Electromagnetic Methods (EM)
Electromagnetic Mapping
EM results are comparable to those of DC mapping. However EM methods
progress faster and cost less, because there are no electrodes to be grounded. The
evaluation procedure is nevertheless more complicated, since instead of the sim-
ple Ohm's law, the complex formulae of Maxwell have to be used. However, there
are suitable digital programs for sale, which allow correct and fast interpretation.
In principle, EM mapping records resistivity or conductivity contrasts caused
by dumped material or geological structures, similar to the DC mapping. Its
82 3 Case Histories
o 50m
...J'
Profile 7151.
w
L '_ _ _
E
Waste dump
~ ~):
.[ 10 ~
Wire fence
"5
o
"- 0+'·'~~-~~$~_.~-~'-~2~5~~~~20'\~I~I~I~'~i~-T.11<5rl/~~~-~~10~~~~_"~'_·'_-~~_~~-_~~7-0~
"
Q)
'o"
.r::.
-10 \
~,I I I I,' I
Cl.
.s -20 I "",'&_'1!r'- ;,," I
I
LEGEND
-30
I I I I I I - INPHASE (') 3555 HZ
A 1777 HZ
+
-40
I I I I I - -- OVTPHASE 888 HZ
Interpretation: I I I I I I
-50 Iii Iii
Fig. 3.27. EM cross section: In- and outphases of industrial waste site, contaminated by orga-
nics and heavy metals
advantage, however, is better lateral discrimination, especially of steep-dipping

but long-stretching small structures. Extensions of hazardous waste dumps, non-
iron metals and salty leachates can be easily located.
Its depth penetration depends on the frequency (see Sect. 2.2.2). The fre-
quencies between 800 and 7000 Hz are most suitable. Higher frequencies
> 15 kHz may not be able to penetrate clayish barriers or seals.
Figure 3.27 presents the result of EM mapping on top of an industrial hazar-
dous waste dump containing heavy metals and CFC. Coplanar transmitting and
receiving coils were carried horizontally a distance of 50 m across the dump. The
in- and outphase data of the frequencies 888, 1777 and 3555 Hz were registered.
The hazardous waste dump stands out clearly as a wide, flat minimum of all
phases and frequencies. This is due to the low resistivity of the dumped material,
which is still lower than the resistivity of the surrounding clayish sediments.
Though the dump is covered by a plastic liner, there is no visible sign that this
insulating foil should influence the EM data: it did not cause the expected in-
crease in EM values. This is due to the measuring distance of 50 m. Either the
transmitter or the receiver were positioned outside the small dump at every mea-
surement. If both coils were located over the foil, high resistivities would have
been recorded.
The disturbance of EM mapping by artificial metal objects is also illustrated
by Fig. 3.27. A wire fence influenced the data so much that a gap of75 m had to
be included.
Figure 3.28 shows another case of EM mapping at a waste site. The dumped
material was a mixture of domestic and industrial waste. Coplanar horizontal
o 2 3 4 5 6
10 10
~
9 9
D~
8 8
7 7
~~~
6 6
5 5
4 4
~gC(
3 3
2 2
• ~ ~C>=<:::::;:;
0 2 3 4 5 6
10
r0
Grid lines
0
I
50m
I
- 50_ Conductivity contours (mS/m)
Fig. 3.28. Contours of conductivity (mS /m). Electromagnetic map of a hazardous mixed waste
dump
coils were moved at a constant separation of 20 m. The distance of survey points

was 5 m . By using the data of six frequencies between 110 and 10 000 Hz, the
conductivity in mS/m (millisiemens/meter = the reciprocal ofQm) was calculated
and a contour map constructed.
In these contours, the oval margin of the dump is clearly marked by the
30 mS/m contour. The conductivity increases inside the waste body with
> 100 mS/m as peak value. Again, the influence of a metallic installation is
stronger than the EM values of the dump. This is shown in the northeast corner,
where a metal gas pipe is dug into the ground (Fig. 3.21).
The successful application of EM mapping to an abandoned industrial site is
m
illustrated by Figs. 3.29 and 3.30. A 2 x 2 2 grid of 64 x 60 m2 was surveyed by
the coplanar coil instrument "Maxmin". The coil separation was 10 m; the fre-
quency, 7040 Hz. The contouring of the reinforced concrete foundations of a steel
84 3 Case Histories
.§ 30
>-
10
Fig.3.29. EM contours (inphase, 7040 Hz) of abandoned industrial site. Foundations are exac-
tly presented
10
10 30 l.0 50 60
:q",.l
Fig. 3.30. EM contours (outphase, 7040 Hz) of abandoned industrial site, Fig. 3.29. Founda-
tions are less prominent
mill is very precise. Additionally, an underground channel leading to the south-

west is clearly visible.
This good result should make it compulsory to survey abandoned industrial
sites by geoelectrical, and especially electromagnetic, methods. This will improve
the detailed planning of remedial work and save considerable costs.
In Figs. 3.31 and 3.32, an EM inphase map with a grid of 2 x 2 m 2 is laid over
a subterranean air-raid shelter, using the frequency of 3500 Hz. It was suspected
that several big metal containers were hidden inside the shelter, but the magnetic
survey (Fig. 3.6) revealed only the outline of the shelter. However, the EM survey
penetrated the thick roof of reinforced concrete and resulted in a trifold structure.
This is interpreted with great probability, as an EM response to the containers
with contaminated fills.
This case illustrates once more the better resolution of EM mapping compared
with a mere magnetic survey. Nevertheless, only the combination of magnetic and
geoelectric or other methods will provide all the details necessary to properly
mitigate or remedy contaminations.
The EM mapping (frequency domain) of a plume of a hazardous waste site in
the USA is demonstrated by Figs. 3.33 and 3.34. The continuously recorded EM
data were obtained at 6-m and 16-m depths, using two separate EM systems.
Thirty parallel profiles, each 1000 m long and spaced by 30 m, were measured.
In spite of the natural variation of the conductivity (inversed resistivity) by the
geology of the area, the conductivity contours and the three-dimensional picture
clearly portray the lateral extension of two contaminated plumes, to the west and
to the northeast, plus the location of monitor wells by minor lobes of anomalies.
A saline ground water plume was mapped by the electromagnetic instruments
Geonics EM 31 and EM 34 in Merced County, California USA (Figs. 3.35 and
3.36). Its chemical contamination comes from several ponds of a 1280-acre reser-
voir into which agricultural drainwater containing traces of selenium and other
toxic elements had been discharged. The purpose was to outline the underground
distribution of selenium contamination, which had already caused deformities of
birds (waterfowl) and might eventually enter the human food chain.
To remedy the area, the ground water contamination had to be precisely locat-
ed. It was necessary to differentiate between surface inhomogenities and the
saline plume at a depth of 5 m to 20 m below surface. To achieve this, three coil
separations of 3.7 m, 20 m and 40 m were used in a survey covering 2 km 2 •
Though the native ground water is already saline and has conductivities ranging
from 300 mS/m to 400 mS/m, the conductivity ofthe contaminated ground water
falls to < 1000 mS/m, due to the increase ofNa, Cl and S04.
The smallest coil separation 3.7 m (Fig. 3.35a) of EM 31 responded most to
topographic features and variations in soil moisture and salinity, caused, for
instance, by dry lake and creek beds. By increasing the intercoil separation of EM
from 34 to 40 m, those surface effects diminished (Figs. 3.35b and 3.36a). Final-
ly, an interpretation map was constructed from the EM data (Fig. 3.36b).
The leading edge of the plume has migrated up to 350 m from the discharge
ponds (areas Band D in Fig. 3.36b). At pond 1; where the release of saline drain-
86 3 Case Histories
50 1.0 30 20 10 o
o
1.0
30
E
OJ
u
C
o
VI 20
o
10
Distance (m)
Fig. 3.31. EM contours (inphase, 3500 Hz) of buried air-raid shelter with reinforced concrete
roof and walls (Fig. 3.6)
2250
2000
1750
.......
!!
'c:l 1500
i 1250
......
~
1) 1000
~ 750
:l
ILl
500
250
0
-250
0'/$ to
,.,c~
Fig.3.32. 3D presentation of Fig. 3.31. Three peaks disclose three metal containers, filled with
toxic liquids
Uncontrolled
hazardous
waste site
Fig. 3.33. Contours of EM conductivity data at a hazardous waste site with two plumes and
monitor wells (triangles)
Fig.3.34. 3D picture of EM data, Fig. 3.33. Low-conductivity plumes differ clearly from geo-
logical noise
88 3 Case Histories
.0
T Gtound ConcIuc:1M1y 5urYOy
G<ouno ec.".,,:tMly 5urYOy f'..... AoncI\ MorC»d Coonly
F,tstu RMdt.. Merced Cc:u\ty "'.."...... <leones EM3A -J
............ _EMJ' Ho'''''.... ~ Spocng • 40 m
~ ~
- _ ConcIuc:1M1y Con.... • ..... ConcIuc:. Iy Conlour
(mS/m) lmS/m)
l Eno 0' 5urYOy Une 6 t Eno 0' 5urYOy L.ne 6
1
10
a b
Fig.3.35. Contours of equal conductivity of plume adjacent to the Kesterson Reservoir, Merced
County, California.
water had ceased, the conductivities fell because native ground water had displac-
ed the plume. The low conductivity areas C, F and G further east are interpreted
as soil salinization and intrusions of subsurface saline water.
The combined application of electromagnetic and magnetic measurements is
described by Fig. 3.37. Buried paint waste, including metal drums, had to be
located rapidly. Its removal was necessary for the construction of a building. A
shallow electromagnetic survey of ground conductivity by the EM 31 m was
amended by measurements of the total magnetic intensity made using a proton
precession magnetometer.
A rectangular grid of 20 x 20-ft spacing was laid over the suspicous area of
400 x 700 ft. At 762 stations, data of the total magnetic intensity and of the con-
ductivity in north-south and east-west orientations were collected. In Fig. 3.37,
the resulting contour maps are presented with anomalies identified by capital
letters. The raw magnetic data of Fig. 3.37a have been corrected for the magnetic
field, created by a building in the east. The contours of conductivity were con-
Ground Conductivity SUNey

Freitas Ranch Merced County
Calculated Conductivities
legend
Near·Surface
Conductor
&I Saline Water
Ififi7 Plume
iiiI"'!!
a 100 meters
1~J.
c;;
10
J.
9
a b
Fig. 3.36. Evaluation of EM measurements at Kesterson Reservoir (Fig. 3.35).
structed from the N-S-oriented EM measurements in Fig. 3.37b. This approach

allowed the classification of the waste into 11 categories in Fig. 3.38.
Ponds are filled with saline drainwater. In Fig. 3.35a, a 3.7-m coil separation
reveals surface salinity. In Fig. 3.35b, a 40-m coil separation reports salinity of
plume penetrating 20 m.
As regards profiles of ground conductivity, Fig. 3.36a discloses a rapid de-
crease in conductivity away from the reservoir and a new increase -700 m east.
Figure 3.36b shows several origins of increased conductivity/salinity. Areas B
and D house plumes; C, F and G contain saline surface water
The successful verification of the geophysical results by follow-up drilling,
excavation and trenching is tabled in Fig. 3.38. This detailed list of the sources of
anomalies is based on the excavation work and proves the great advantages of
geophysical work at hazardous waste sites. Without geophysics, the whole build-
ing prospect would have been delayed because of the necessary drilling, probing
and trenching activities. This would also have resulted in a great increase in cost.
90 3 Case Histories
100
o
100 200
a CONTOUR INTERVAL 100 GAMMAS CONTOUR !NTERVAL 4 mmhos/m
Fig. 3.37a, b. Magnetic and EM contours of scattered hazardous waste. a Total magnetic field.
b Conductivity by EM survey (instrument axis N-S )
Transient ElectroMagnetic Soundings (TEM, TDEM)

The response of a contaminated, slightly saline plume to transient electromagne-
tic methods has been tested at a domestic waste disposal site near Perth in Aus-
tralia. This site was very suitable, since the general spread of this plume was al-
ready known by a dense drilling program.
In Fig. 3.40a, the dipole receiver was placed in the center of a transmitter loop
25 m in diameter. In order to define the complete extent of the leachate from a pit
of solid waste, 83 TEM soundings were made over a period of 6 months.
The soundings were extended beyond the known extension of contamination to
monitor the resistivity background.
TEM sounding is cumbersome because a large loop has to be laid on the
ground at every point of observation, but its result is most rewarding. The resisti-
vity contours in Figs. 3.39 and 3.41, which were derived from TEM data, agree
with the evidence of pollution by drilling of the holes M4, M5, M6, M7, M9 and
MIl. Since the drop in resistivity is less prominent than at other contaminated
Does Response Meet
Maximum Instrument Response EM Difference Statistical Criteria? EM ~
Anomaly Above Background N-S less E-W EM (\ 0 mmhos/m in north, MAG Difference Physical Description
~I EM (milliMhoslm) Mag (gamma) Orientation 4 mmhos/m in south)2 IISO gammas) > 3 3 mmhos/m Based on Excavation Work 3
~
A 28 250 28 Yes Yes Yes Waste pit: 12' x 50', 6' depth, §
2' below surface containing two drums. 0-
0
:::
<>
B 40 900 4 Yes Yes Yes Waste pit: 15' x 25', 7' depth 0-
2' below surface, no drums. ::I::
~
23 500 12 Yes Yes yes Waste pit: 50' x 60', 3' - 5' depth, :0
...,
C
I' below surface, some drum pieces. 0-
0
>=
en
D 37 700 14 Yes Yes Yes Two waste pits: 20' x 60' and VJ
30' x 40', 3' - 5' depth, more scrap ~.
metal, eastern pit: 25 drums, scrap en
copper wire and 5-gallon cans.
E II 400 Yes Yes Yes Waste pit: numerous pits 5' - 10'
diameter, 4' depth, I' below surface,
some drums, numerous 5~gallon cans.
F 13 200 Yes Yes Yes Tin battery remains: 7' x IS', 4' depth,
2' below surface, sheets of tin, lumber,
nails, concrete~ no waste.
G 15 0 0 Yes No No Geologic feature: bedrock; slopes to

the South.
H 12 0 0 Yes No No Tree Root Zone: Aerial photo shows

wooded zone between disposal area and
farm field. 4' depth, 2' below surface.
0 900 0 No Yes No Man-made feature: building 50' east of

survey area.
0 0 4 No No Yes Concrete slab: 3' x 5' x 6",2' below

surface, contained J{2" copper pipe;
used as a ground in prior field office.
K 0 0 4 No No Yes Surface material: no subsurface feature

found.
1 Location as shown on Figures 3,37
2 Statistical Criterion: > I standard deviation response.
3 Waste pits conutined an assortment of waste, including ash, paint sludge, miscellaneous scrap metal, and occasionally panially intact 55-gallon drums.
\0
Fig. 3.38. List of anomaly sources of Fig. 3.37

92 3 Case Histories
sw MIl NE
60 MIO
50 Sondpil - -- t--- Wa 51~s _

"'1 5 2 A- C
Wot~r Tot>l~
Sand, fine to medium
o
-to
Fig. 3.39. Cross section of domestic disposal site, discharging seepage into an aquifer near
Perth, Australia. Ground water flow NE to SW
N
l'
n
- 60 - Resistivny contours (ohm-m)
0 wastes
0 Center 01 March 1967 loops
• Cenler 01 Sept. 1967 loops
0 Bores
I I
a
'""
50 100
meters
Fig. 3.40. Resisitivity contours by TEM soundings of plume in sandy aquifer, next to landfill
(Fig. 3.39). Values < 75 Om (stippled area) mark spread of the plume
Fig. 3.41. 3D plot of aquifer resistivity near waste site of Figs. 3.39 and 3.40
plumes, this detailed evaluation must be regarded as another successful applica-

tion of geophysics to a complicated environmental problem.
A more intense brine pollution was explored by TDEM electromagnetic
soundings near Pawhuska, Oklahoma USA. The brine was pressed into the
ground by injection wells. Numerous metallic pipelines in the field necessitated
the wire loops being laid out in an irregular pattern. Two injection wells were
located at the TDEM stations 3 and 1 (Fig. 3.42). The second well also lies close
to station 18.
The transient soundings were evaluated by inversion and a layered-earth model
was constructed. Figure 3.42 shows that the horizontal stratification was inter-
rupted by the steep-dipping margins of brine pollution with the very low resisti-
vities of 0.3 to 4 Om. Nevertheless, even the somewhat erroneous picture of
Fig. 3.42 conveys important information as to the spread of brine at a depth of
>100m.
Georadar
This relatively new method is impressive by virtue of its technical and electronic
perfection and of the presentation of its results in colored sections, already
available in the field. Its main difficulty is the strong influence of ground moisture
94 3 Case Histories
TDEM Station Locations
15
w w W 18 17 E
~
20 19 ... 16
n 7 - 9 m
~
6 - 110m
300
9 - 11 {2 m
~ 200
'"
Qj
.§
c:
.2
OJ
>
~ 100
1.5 - 20m
2 - 3.s0m
o 1.5-2.S0m
Sa 5b 5,
Fig.3.42. TDEM survey of brine pollution by injection wells, Oklaboma, USA. Injection wells
are between stations 3-9,1-14 and 18-16
on the results. Ground radar sections, obtained before and after heavy rainfall,
will differ considerably in depth penetration and pattern of reflections.
Another problem is created by lateral changes in the clay content of overburden
and soil. Higher clay content will abruptly minimize the depth of measurement
and may give the impression of an upturn in the reflecting horizons. Therefore,
interpretation of radar data must be made with great care because the danger of
overinterpretation is immanent with this method.
Ground radar was employed to investigate abandoned gasworks (Fig. 3.43).
The built-up area was investigated by radar profiling with a line spacing of 0.5 m.
The transmitted frequency was 300 MHz. In spite of the small free space between
the industrial buildings, this method had good results. A number of single objects
could be located that had not been found by geomagnetic measurements
(Fig. 3.3).
A special advantage was the detection of linear structures, related to ceramic
pipes and drains by radar, which could neither be found by geomagnetics nor by
low-frequencyelectromagnetics.
Since the dielectric constants of organic chemicals are very low (see Table 2.3),
ground radar is well cut out to search for organic contaminants, especially tar,
volatile hydrocarbons and used oil. Unfortunately, very similar reflections may be
obtained from sand lenses or other stuctures of high resistivity. Therefore, partly
known organic contaminations may be followed up to establish, for instance, their
spatial extension. However, assuming the presence of hydrocarbons, etc., from
radar reflections only should be avoided.
Rood
L-------t ~
!iii
Buildings
~ Localized objects
~ Strong refledions
~ 0 20m
.......... Linear structures we;7 "=====~.....
Fig. 3.43. Ground radar investigation of abandoned gasworks
The radar reflections of Fig. 3.44b are clearly effected by the immersion of
770 L of volatile hydrocarbons, shown in the lower radargrarn. But a congruous
pattern could be produced by a pocket of high-resistive material, like dry sand.
The radar record of a petroleum pipeline spill near Bemidji, Minnesota is illu-
strated by Fig 3.45. The normal texture ofthe soil is replaced by wholly different
reflections on the right, owing to a strong change in resistivity and dielectric
permittivity, caused by oil floating on the water table. However, such a featureless
texture could also have been produced by dry sand or other stratified material of
high resistivity.
The darker left side of the 80-MHz radargram exhibits larger contrasts due to
the varying water content of different horizons of a glacial outwash. The depth
scale on the left is approximate and not reliable for follow-up activities.
The detection of cavities, especially in abandoned industrial areas, is an im-
portant geophysical task that is best fulfilled by ground radar profiling. Yet this is
successful only at near-surface cavities, and even this fails if the overburden is
clayish and difficult to penetrate by radar signals.
Cavities stand out as areas of increased signal enhancement and depth pene-
tration. In Fig.3.46a, tunnel is indicated by the sudden augmentation of the
number of reflections and the prolongation of the travel time from 50 to 150 ns
(nanoseconds).
Ground radar may be used to solve many other environmental questions, pro-
vided a feasible relation of the assumed object depth to the depth penetration of
radar waves is maintained. It is sometimes possible to attribute singular reflec-
96 3 Case Histories
OJ
E
;.::
OJ 50
E
;.::
100
ns
b
Fig. 3.44 a, b. Alteration of radargrams by immersion. a undisturbed condition. b radargram

16 hours after immersion of 770 L volatile hydrocarbons into sand (frequency 200 MHz.)
tions to a certain structure, if complicated procedures of evaluation have been

applied. Such evaluation programs, like migration, may be directly taken off
seismic software.
Airborne Electromagnetics
Electromagnetic air surveys are mostly combined with magnetic and radiometric
measurements. The magnetic helicopter survey, described in Fig. 3.9, was
augmented by the DIGHEM observations of Fig. 3.47. The helicopter flew at
an average height of 50 m above the ground. The piled-up dump of domestic
waste caused a reduction in the specific resistivity from> 10 Qm to < 2Qm, as
the values decreased in concentric lines towards the minimum of the center. The
10 Qm contour tallies with the rim of the pile.
Compared with the airborne magnetic contours of Fig. 3.9, the EM picture is
easier to interpret and the extension of the waste dump is more visible. Needless
to say, not only piled-up but also buried waste deposits can be localized and deli-
neated by EM helicopter surveying.
EM helicopter surveys were also successful at mapping saline ground water.
The river Weser carries a heavy freight of brines through the city of Bremen, Ger-
many. The brines are discharged 500 km upriver by potassium mines and lower
the specific resistivity of the river water to < 6 Qm. The EM air survey has traced
20 meters
I
o
<.J
QI
III
o
C
o
III c
L..
QI
"-
QI
a; E
E 0:;:
"-
..c;; S?Qi
>
Cl.
QI
o
o L.
Normal
Fig. 3.45. Radargram of a petroleum pipeline spill
18 36 x (m) 54
T unn el
~----------------------~~-~--~-----~------~~ o
T (ns)
100
Fig. 3.46. Ground radar cross section of a shallow tunnel (frequency 80 MHz)
several salty plumes with resistivities below 6 nm (Fig. 3.48), which spread side-
ways from the river bed into the upper aquifer. This sand/gravel bed provides
fresh water for the city.
Evaluation was checked by mapping the chloride content of the upper aquifer
by flush drilling. The drilling of many holes took 2 years; the helicopter flights,
however, were accomplished within 2 days. Astonishingly, both methods had the
same results!
98 3 Case Histories
.............•....
......•.. ..... .
,
..•.
Unit: .Qm
Fig. 3.47. Contours of approx. specific resistivity by EM (DIGHEM) helicopter survey of the
domestic waste dump of Hannover, Germany (Figs. 3.9 and 3.61). Flight line spacing -50m,
frequency 385 Hz
Bremen City
Industrial park
Agriculture
IZZl < 6 Ohm m in river water

I1Za < 6 Ohm m in ground water
o
,
0.5
I
1.0
I
Fig. 3.48. EM helicopter survey of saline seepages from the river Weser, Bremen, Germany
3.1.5 Seismics
Seismic Refraction
The refraction method is able to detect flat-lying boundaries between beds show-
ing different seismic velocities. A precondition is an increase in seismic velocitiy
in the lower horizon. It functions well at shallow depths and is often employed to
Seismic refraction
St ruct ural model
sw NE
A Elevat ion
J>: 510
~':~i8_iiiiil (ml 410
390
a o
L . . '_
30
_- ' - '_
GOm
...J'
_
3D model
A-E profiles
b
Fig. 3.49a, b. Results of seismic refraction at a hazardous waste site. a Structural model with
seismic P-velocities [mls] along cross section B; b Three-dimensional picture of the refractor
surface
work out the thickness of unconsolidated layers or the relief of the basement rock.
Underground depressions, cut into the surface of impermeable hard rock, may
guide contaminated seepages or leachates and can be traced by seismic refraction.
The borders between hazardous waste dumps and unconsolidated sediments
are rarely found by seismic refraction because the seismic velocities of waste and
unconsolidated rock are too similar.
100 3 Case Histories
Elevation
(m)
290~
S --------------------------------------------~N
280;-------------------------------------------------~
~----- Dump ------~~
2~0+-------~------~------~------._------~----~
o 25 50 75 100 125 150
a
Distance (m)
Elevation
(m) S N
300 -r---------------------~
280 -!-- - - ----,..--

260
100 200 300 ~OO 500

b Distance (m)
Fig. 3.50a, b. Cross sections of seismic refraction at a hazardous waste dump with hydrocar-
bon contamination. a section geophone, spacing 2.5 m; b section geophone, spacing 10.0 m
Five sections of seismic refraction at the hazardous waste site of Fig. 3.11, con-
taining a mixture of hazardous industrial and domestic disposals, revealed de-
tailed information about the relief of the surface of the sandstone refractor.
Figure 3.49a depicts a typical section. The surface of the sandstone is presented
in the three-dimensional picture of Fig. 3.49b. It gives clear indications of the
depressions within the sandstone, which are the outlets of contaminated seepages.
In this case, the refraction method met with favorable geological conditions:
the seismic velocities of the unconsolidated and weathered upper bed vary from
510 mls to 835 mls. The velocities of the sandstone with reduced hydraulic con-
ductivity are much higher; they range from 1500 mls to 2100 mls.
However, the velocity contrast (810 mls to 835 mls) between dumped waste
and the weathered upper bed is too small to map the extension of this hazardous
waste site by seismic refraction.
The next case (Fig. 3.50) concerns an industrial hazardous waste dump whose
electromagnetic survey was described in Fig. 3.27. The seismic refraction used
Distance (m I
13 18 23 28 33 38
- 40
\/I
E
· .~'"
- 60 'ii;
•
o>
.....L.
·
- 80
Waste
Fig. 3.51. Locating the border of buried waste by air-acoustic seismics (Tekoni Innovations)
two different geophone spacings of 2.5 m and 10 m. Again, the border of the
dump and its base did not show up in the results of refraction; the contrast in the
velocity of seismic waves was too small.
Three layers were established:
Layer I: weathered topsoil 530 mls - 800 mis,
Layer 2: weathered hard rock (clay with gypsum) 900 mls-2200 mis,
Layer 3: hard rock (clay with gypsum) 1560 mls-4150 mls.
The seismic velocities are surprisingly much higher in section b with 10 m geo-
phone separation than in section a with 2.5 m (Figs. 3.50a and 3.50b). Further-
more, the lowest reflector, expected at a depth between 50 m and 70 m, seems to
be inclined in the longer geophone distance. It is interpreted as the table of
gypsum at the border between leached and compact rock.
This case shows that non-horizontal bedding, caused by leaching or subrosion
of gypsum from below, may jeopardize evaluation if the geophone separation is
too small.
Air-Acoustic Seismics
Figure 3.51 shows the result of air-acoustic mapping across the border of a waste
dump. The distance between the loudspeaker as seismic source and the geophone
Distance (m)
VI
E
OJ
E
Qj
o>
l.-
t-
Surface
.:Jr:::t Ca~al '

.: .
,
:
,,:.~
.
..
:
:
:
: .. : :;
... ::::".:
:
~,
,
:
....
, "
.: :::::,[ : :
::':
':
, ' .
" .
: :
. " ';: .:.
: : :
:
:
: :
: :
: :
: : "
Fig. 3.52. Detection of a buried sewage canal by air-acoustic seismics. Distance loudspeaker/
source to geophone 1 m, separation of stations 25 m, frequency of seismic signal 200 Hz
(Tekoni Innovations).
was 8 m. The seismic stations were separated by 25 m, and the average signal fre-
quency was 300 Hz.
While short and almost equal travel times dominate the left side of the section,
originating from clayish rocks, the travel times increase toward the right. The
margin of the waste deposit is clearly visible by this change.
Air-acoustic seismics are one more tool to locate the extension of buried waste,
to be applied especially if magnetic and geoelectrical methods fail.
Even the difficult search for underground cavities can be performed by air-
acoustic seismics. Figure 3.51 proves that the walls of an underground canal can
be located by this method. They are clearly marked by an anomalous decrease of
the travel time. Since the same effect was observed on parallel sections, the length
of the drain could be found from the surface. The method was able to find simi-
lar structures down to 13 m of overburden.
Seismic Reflection
Exploration of oil and gas is not possible without seismic reflection. Therefore,
this method is used in more than 90% of global geophysical activities. In solving
environmental problems, seismic reflection is, however, less prominent. One
reason is its penchant for great depth penetration and neglect of near-surface
effects. Another cause is the high cost of reflection surveys.
New digital instruments with high-frequency sources and extremely fast
sampling rates for geophones have been developed, and now allow evaluation of
reflections from depths < 50 m.
Nevertheless, even with this new development, seismic reflection is best suited
for structures that lie below the level of most hazardous waste sites. Such tasks as
establishing the location, thickness and extension of aquifers and tectonic faults,
which guide the underground movement of dangerous liquids, can be well tack-
led.
The seismic record of Fig. 3.53 was obtained from below the hazardous waste
dump described in Fig. 3.50. In contrast to the results of refraction, there is no
indication of the 20-m thick layer of low velocity at the surface. In spite of its
narrow geophone spacing of 10 m, the seismic evaluation in Fig. 3.53a also con-
tains no trace of the border of the buried waste site.
In the seismogram of Fig. 3.53b, a strong reflector starts in the north at a depth
of 45 m and sinks down to 70 m. From there to the south, the reflector seems to
be broken up into three short horizontal pieces. This structure is interpreted as a
series of faults having downthrusted the boundary between clay and banked lime-
stone.
A borehole was sunk into this fault zone and a pumping test found high per-
meability in fractured limestone. In spite of the fact that the seismic reflection did
not convey any features of the hazardous site, it was worthwhile employing it
because it depicted a hydraulically active fracture zone at greater depth. This zone
may allow the movement of contaminated ground water into a lower hydraulic
level, which feeds the waterworks of a neighboring town.
This case history conveys that seismic reflection, despite its limitations at
shallow depths, can be a sensible tool to solve hydraulic environmental problems.
The information from depths > 50 m regarding horizontal stratification and its
interruption by faults cannot be obtained so clearly by any other geophysical
method.
Figure 3.54 reports a combination of seismic refraction and reflection on a
700-m profile at an industrial hazardous waste site. The' seismic model distin-
guishes four beds:
1. unconsolidated soil and loam 480-750 mis,
2. unconsolidated silt and clay 1550-1800 mis,
3. banked limestone 2200-2500 mis,
4. massive limestone 3900-4200 mls.
The position and the thickness of the waste deposit in Fig. 3.54 is again not
discernible from the seismic data. The ground water table was registered in bore-
Elevat ion
(m)S N
300
280 Surface
260 ..
----
."
21,0
220
200 .-
Reflectors -
180 -
160
11,0
o
---
100
-- --- 200 300
--
1,00
a Distance (m)
T(ms )
50 I-----l 'h/J.~.
100
150
200
b
Fig. 3.53 a, b. Seismic reflection structures below a hazardous waste site. a seismogram of
hydraulically active fault zone; b interpretation.
holes; it lies approximately between beds 1 and 2. Obviously, it has not acted as a
reflector. The horizons of the refraction depict strong undulations of the bound-
aries 2/3. The corresponding reflector RI occurs only in the left part and does not
follow the ups and downs of refraction. However, the reflectors R2 (in part) and
R3 (in total) could not be found by refraction: they lie deeper.
The combination of the two seismic methods makes it clear that both lead to
different results. Whereas seismic refraction is well adapted to the structure built
on and directly below waste deposits, reflection is better suited to unearth the
structures of the deeper underground.
Elevation (m 1
W E
280 -11---
2 'c_....:::...:c==----'=~"_"_ _ _ _ __ _ Reflector
- .- - Reflectors R1, R 2, R 3
o
Distance (m)
1-1. Seismic velocities
Fig.3.54. Combination of seismic refraction and reflection at an industrial hazardous waste site
3.1.6 Gravity
Gravity surveys are rarely employed to solve environmental problems. The rea-
sons for this are not only the relatively high cost, but also the difficulty of re-
cognizing small bodies like buried waste of unknown density within the pattern
of gravity anomalies. In addition, the necessary corrections depend very much on
the relief of the vicinity and may obliterate the weak anomaly of a contaminated
object.
Figure 3.55 presents a gravity survey of the hazardous waste site of Fig. 3.50
(seismic results). The stations were spaced 10 m along a 200-m long gravity sec-
tion. The evaluation enclosed the free air and the Boguer corrections. After the
free air correction, the waste deposit is still visible as a weak negative anomaly,
but it diminishes completely after the Boguer correction has been applied.
Therefore, it is compulsary to correct raw gravity data completely by applying
free air and Boguer corrections; otherwise, false interpretations can be worked
out.
The landfill in Indiana, USA, whose geomagnetic survey is depicted in
Fig. 3.8, was also investigated by a gravity survey. Figure 3.56 shows the com-
plete Boguer gravity contours obtained from 200 gravity stations at intervals of
5 -10m at 8 lines over and adjacent to the landfill.
Figure 3.56 displays a regional variation ofthe area due to changes ofthe litho-
logical facies of glacial sediments and bedrock. This regional trend was subtract-
ed from the Boguer anomalies to yield the residual gravity contours of Fig. 3.57.
The interpretation of the gravity data to elaborate the underground shape of the
landfill was twofold:
1. Forward modelling with a constant density contrast of 0.53 g/cm 3 between the
landfill and the glacial sediments led to the gravity section of Fig. 3.58.
2. Inversion of the residual gravity data by using knowledge of the actual dimen-
sions of the landfill, based on varying density contrasts between sections
(Fig. 3.59).
5.(),-----.-----..,------,--------,
4.
3. Boguer correction
2. _ _~_'" Free air correction
1.
o
~-l.~-:~]:~~~~=~
-2.
-3.
-4.
-5.0+-------,r--...----.----r----,------4
o 50 150 200m
s N
E
oA A'
C.
OJ
o 5
10
o o 100 150 200m

Fig. 3.55. Gravity survey of a hazardous waste deposit with free air (crosses) and Boguer (black
circles) corrections
Apart from these good results, more physical properties of the dumped material
could be deducted from the gravity data. A calculated increase in density contrast
from the north to the south of the landfill is observed. It is attributed to stronger
compaction of the older northern part and to a change in the composition of the
fill material.
In the north, domestic trash of higher density predominates; in the south, con-
struction refuse and brush cuttings of lower density are in the majority. Further-
more, a water saturation of 20% and a porosity range from 43 % to 48 % is anti-
cipated from the computed density contrasts.
However, the gravity method may not be suitable for the investigation of all
waste sites. This gravity survey was possible because it depended on a profound
density contrast between homogeneous glacial sediments and fills.
3.1.7 Geothermy
Geothermal investigations depend on a strong heat flow on the surface of hazar-

dous waste deposits. Unfortunately, this specific heat flow is often smaller than
the heat produced by the rays ofthe sun. Rain and other meteoric influences com-
pete with the sun and create heat flows that are difficult to assess. Therefore, geo-
42
82
122
162
Fig. 3.56. Boguer gravity contour map
of Indiana landfill
-36 -16 4 24 44 64 104
-~
0 0
M M
0 0
LO LO
0 0
0) 0)
8 8
0 0
~ ~
0 0
~ ~
g 0
t:::
+ +
0 0
_!2l
,
!2l , I
-36 -16 4 24 44 64 84 104
0
I Fl M I
10 20 30 40 50 m CONTOUR INTERVAL ~ 0.02 mGal
N - APPROX. LANDFILL BOUNDARY
+ GRAVITY MEASUREMENT STATION
Fig.3.57. Residual gravity contour map of Indiana landfill

0.4.------------------------------------.
+ Residual gravity anomaly
:if o Calculated gravity anomaly
~ 0.2
g
~ 0
~0-0.2
-0.4..L--------------------'-
0
3
~
6
~w 9
0
12 Calculated
bottom
15
-10 10 30 50 70 90 110
A DISTANCE (m) A'
Fig.3.58. Forward-modelled gravity data of Fig. 3.56
0.4
+ Residual gravity anomaly
c;;- o Calculated gravity anomaly
co 0.2
0
g
0 dl Ell Ql c!l 6 c!l ell c!l
~
i!J i!J
Ell
~
Ell
Ql ell
ffi -0.2
0
ell c!l Ell c!l CD .. Ell +
-0.4
~ :i
6
~w 9
0
12
15
-10 10 30 50 70 90 110
A DISTANCE 1m) A'
Fig. 3.59. Inversion of gravity data of Fig. 3.56

~.
SOm
'--~~--"
~ Temperature >8 centigrade
~ Temperature < 5 centigrade
_ _ Thermal centers spacing 0.5 centigrade

Fig 3.60. Geothermal contours of a buried hazardous waste deposit. The area is used by a ten-
nis club
thermal measurements should be performed only in the middle of the night and
in dry weather.
The temperature should not be determined right at the surface, but preferably
in shallow probing holes of 0.5 -l-m depth.
Figure 3.60 presents the outcome of such a survey. The temperatures, which
were taken from probes at 0.5 m depth, appear to be nearly homogeneous over the
waste deposit. Exceptions are a temperature increase in the area of the tennis
courts, and a temperature decrease in the east near a steep slope. The positive
anomaly stems from the absorption of the sun rays by the red clay of the tennis
courts; the negative anomaly is correlated to seepage water on the surface.
Most of the geothermal indications of Fig. 3.60 are due to surface effects by
sun rays or evaporation of water. Obviously, no heat production by oxidation or
fermentation was traced on the surface. Since this overwhelming surface in-
fluence of the daily weather is seen in the thermal behavior of many waste
deposits, thermal scanning from the ground or by airborne survey may fail.
Unit: J-LR Ih
Fig.3.61. Radiometric contours of the domestic waste dump of the city of Hannover, Germany
(Figs. 2.9 and 3.47). Flight line spacing - 50 m (1 .uJ/h = 3876 .uRlh)
3.1.8 Radiometry
Hazardous or other waste dumps mostly show only weak radiation. The effects of
geological or artificial clay barriers caused by the nuclear decay of the potassium
isotope 4°K may be stronger than the radioactivity of domestic waste.
This becomes evident by a radiometric helicopter survey flown at a height of
50 m across the waste disposal dump of the city of Hannover, Germany
(Fig. 3.61). Though the radiation dose increases from lO,uRlh in the vicinity to
50,uRlh at the center of the dump, this anomaly is not significant for domestic
garbage because it could also have originated from other sources, as from the
mentioned clay beds.
Stronger radiation comes from the industrial waste of uranium mines. Sources
are the dumps oftailings and refuse from mining and ore dressing. In eastern Ger-
many, large areas of the former Soviet uranium mining industry are contaminated
by radioactive material. Remedial actions can only mitigate the impact of radia-
tion because radioactivity cannot be destroyed either by chemical treatment or
burning.
However, gamma radiation can be completely shielded by a 3-m thick
sealing of clay. Figure 3.62 shows that such an overburden absorbs a radiation of
> 75000 Bq (becquerel) completely.
On top of the dump of uranium tailings (Fig. 3.62), a clay seal of3-m thickness
conceals the gamma radioactivity completely. Over the uncovered slope, it in-
creases, however, to > 75000 Bq; a smaller increase occurs over the river bed,
where radioactive refuse has accumulated.
1000
Bq W E
75
Gamma radiation (total)

50
25
51--_ _-
Clay sealing 540 m Elevation
"''WI'' _00 9
0",QCDump' 0'00
Uranium tailings Brook
• C/\,lID""'.,
C - '" .,
:\~~\
~GneiSS' ~~
505 m Elevation
Fig. 3.62. Radiation survey of an uranium dump
w E
~oooo 8q/m
10
5
Precipitation pond
4
0 2 4 6 8 km
~~~-------=----
~-----------~
Fig. 3.63. a-Radiation in the ground air, equivalent to the content of radon gas. The section
crosses a mine dump and a large precipitation pond. The ground air samples were drawn from
soil in a depth of 0.9 m
Qj
OJ
'-
-;;;
OJ
"0
iii
o <141lRih
o 14·16 1.500
south
16·19
19·40
e 40·140
~ 140·540
_ 540·1400 Qcv
o
_ >14001lRih
+0 !
2000 3000 1.000
!
Feet
! !
Fig. 3.64. Contours of radiation (total exposure rate) over vitro tailings (heavy outline) calcu-
lated from airborne radiometric data
While the direct impact of y-radiation can easily be shielded, the gaseous nuc-
lide radon C22Rn) (Fig. 2.28) will nevertheless leak to the surface and into the air.
An example of the determination of radon by the measurement of the a-radiation
in the ground air is given in Fig. 3.63. In the area of Ronneburg/Germany, the
ground air was sampled by a steel probe at a depth of 0.9 m. Though the 100-m
spacing of the stations was coarse, it immediately gave a statement about the dis-
tribution of radon gas (Fig. 3.63).
The short half-life of 3.823 days demands quick progress of the survey and
immediate analysis of ground- or pore-air samples in the field. By observing this
rule in Ronneburg, a very high background of 45000 Bq/m3 was found. This was
eight times higher than the regional background outside the area of uranium
Fig. 3.65. Airborne gamma radiation map in mRlh after the Chernoby1 fallout over southern
Sweden, flown 1- 6 May 1986
mining. The two radon peaks of90000 and 105000 Bq/m3 in Fig. 3.63 are caused
by two mining structures: the mine dump and the precipitation pond.
Radon contaminations are not only caused by mining activities; the natural
occurrence of uranium certainly produced radon long before the first miner
appeared. But this amount remains mostly unknown, since it is rarely measured.
Another good example of a radiometric survey is provided by the vitro tailings
site in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. A helicopter flew a survey at 46-m altitude and
76-m line spacing. The scintillometer contained 20 crystals of NaI with a total
volume of 12914 cm 3.
Figure 3.64 presents the contours ofthe rate oftotal exposure over the vitro tai-
lings site. Whereas the background radiation lies between 9 and 16 .uRlh, the vitro
tailing pile reaches a peak of > 1400 ,uR!h. This immense gamma ray intensity
results in a "shine" that extends 650 m away from the source. This effect has mas-
ked both windblown tailings and tailings that were used in a small parking lot
nearby.
The lobes of higher radiation around and south of the tailings pile have dif-
ferent origins. Some are caused by windblow or by uranium ore lost from freight
trains, industrial slags or milling equipment.
On 28 April 1986, the nuclear accident at ChernobyllUkraine resulted in radio-
active fallout over parts of Sweden. A radiation air survey was flown at a height
of 150 m. Its spectrometer measurements resulted in the gamma radiation map of
Fig. 3.65 for the southern part of Sweden.
The last two case histories prove the importance of radiometric measurements
for the detection of extremely dangerous contaminations which cannot be traced
by human senses.
3.2 New Disposal Sites
3.2.1 General
Whereas the investigation of hazardous waste sites is a new task for geo-
physicists, the exploration of new disposal sites can rely on ample knowledge and
experience. This has been assembled by numerous geophysical surveys for
ground water. The problems are equivalent: localizing active hydraulic features
means also finding hydraulically paths of leachates or seepages. Such hydrauli-
cally active structures or aquifers in unconsolidated rock, such as sandor gravel
beds, and in hard rock, such as fissureor fault zones, must be avoided.
3.2.2 Horizontal Stratification
Vertical Electric Sounding (VES)

For five decades, this method has proven successful in securing the resources of
ground water. It is also well adapted to clarify the hydraulic permeabilities ot
strata in the vicinity of existing waste dumps or in areas where new waste sites are
planned.
Its main advantage is the precise distinction it makes between aquifers in
unconsolidated rocks like gravel and sand with high resistivities and clay-bearing
aquicludes with low resistivities.
Every YES results in a column enclosing the apparent specific resistivities in
Om and the depth of boundaries between layers with different resistivities. YES
can therefore be compared with a borehole. The resistivities inform about the per-
meability ofthe beds; the depth or thickness ofthe strata tell about the volume of
hydraulic or geologic features. Despite this advantage, YES costs only a few per-
cent of the cost of a borehole and is much faster in producing results.
o 100200300 500 m
• VES-points
-580 Aquiclude-contours
~ Groundwater flow
Fig. 3.66. Contours of an aquifer base in the alpine foreland by YES. A contaminated plume
follows an underground channel, carved into the top of the glacial till (arrow). YES electrodes
were separated up to 160 m; 9 profiles with a total length of 17 kIn were investigated
However, some boreholes are always necessary to verify the YES data. YES at
the location of boreholes allow a precise calibration of the sounding curves to the
hydraulic permeabilities of strata or of tectonic structures.
Figure 3.66 presents YES results in the vicinity of a waste dump in a plain in
the alpine foreland. The contours show the base of the aquifer in meters above sea
level. The resistivity of the gravel aquifer varies between 700 and 2500 Qm. The
aquiclude below consists of glacial till and drift with lower resistivities from 20
to 150 Qm. The boundary or the base of the aquifer is thus marked by a distinct
change of resistivity and can easily be followed up by YES.
This survey resulted in a detailed relief map of the aquiclude, with its surface
structures guiding the flow of ground water and of a contaminated plume. In this
case (Fig. 3.66), the plume was traced, though it was only weakly saline and of
similar resistivity as the uncontaminated aquifer. It was located indirectly by map-
ping the underground structures guiding its flow.
The hydraulic impermeability of the geological barrier is the most important
precondition for the construction of new waste disposal sites. The next case
(Fig. 3.67) describes the search for such an impermeable area in a plain of glacial
drift. A grid of 1600 x 600 m 2 with a rectangular mesh of 100 x 100 m 2 was sur-
veyed by 96 YES.
Depth Penetration 2.0 m

o 100 200 300 ~00 500 600 700 000 '100 1000 1100 1200 1300 1 ~00 1500 1600
600 600
N
W+E
500 I S 500
~~C>«
400 400
.~
E 300 300
200 I 200
100 100
~UL-L~~L-~-L__~~~~~~~~~~L-~0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 '100 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
a m
Depth Penetration 7.0 m
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 '100 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
'---~7rr--n--T7--~~r-~--~---r--n-~~~rr~r--.---.--~600
N
500
W+E 500
S
400
E 300 300
100 100
~-U~-L __~~~__L-~LL~__- L_ _- L_ _~~L-__LL~~~~LL__J 0

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 '100 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
b m
Fig. 3.67a, b. Contours ofthe apparent specific resistivity at different depths, derived from 96
YES. A possible new dump area is framed by dashed lines. It consists of impermeable rocks
with resistivities < 40 Om, indicating a good geological barrier
The target was to eliminate all areas with permeable soil and rock. From the
YES curves, two resisitivity contour maps for the depths of 2 m and 7 m were
derived. In Fig. 3.67, resistivity contours were drawn only from 40 Om upward,
showing that most of the area contains rocks with higher resistivities and thus too-
high permeabilities. Only the rectangular area in the center, framed by dashed
lines, displays resisitivities <40 Om. Since a countercheck by drilling found
impermeable clay in the underground, this area was finally chosen as a new waste
disposal site.
This geophysical result reduced the area to be investigated by drilling or pro-
bing from 960000 m 2 to 123000 m 2 ! That means the development costs were
reduced by approximately 87 %. Thus, considerable savings were achieved by
spending only US $ 12000 for the geoelectric survey.
Om
Clayish weathering
100m
200m
Multifrequency electromagnetic
o 100m
v Sounding (FEM) ""'"'''''''''''''''''......''''''''''''''"'''''''''......'
,,"'
/j Fault
Fig,3.68. Cross section of 10 FEM soundings. Thick layers oflimestone and quartzite are over-
burdened by weathered clay and loam. A fault thrusts the left block> 50 m down. This inter-
pretation was confirmed by follow-up drilling
Electromagnetic Sounding
This method is also known as multifrequency sounding, or FEM. It was develo-
ped in Canada and in the Geophysical Institut ELGI, Budapest, Hungary (see also
Sect. 2.2.2). Figure 3.68 presents an FEM section of stratified limestone overlain
by weathered clay. A quartzite was found deep under the limestone. The sudden
change of the limestone thickness is believed to be caused by a fault down-
thrusting the northwestern block.
Seismic Refraction
In the vicinity of a hazardous waste dump, a line of 410 m length was surveyed
by seismic refraction. The geophone separation was 5 m. Figure 3.69 shows the
w E
A 585 62 A'
65 570
390-625
1665---,-h
1820
1940
2040 1785
c h--'- 2300 <

.2 ~ < < < <
-0 < < < < < < < < < < < < < <
> 360 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <
.!!:! < < < < < < < < <
- < < < < < < < < < <
w < < <
< < < 3255 < <
< < 4640 < < < < 3765 < < < <
~
< < 3640 < < <

< 3425 ,< < < < < < < < < < < <
<
340 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <
< < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <
< < < < 0 15 30 m < < < < < < < < < < < <
320~-<---<~-<--<--~-------<---<---<--<---<---<--~<--<---<---<--<---<---<___
<-L
Fig. 3.69. Geological model by seismic refraction. Thickness and dip of the sandstone (1665-
2300 m/s) were confirmed by drilling
achieved structural model. Under a low-velocity overburden lies a sandstone bed

of ~ 40 m thickness with seismic velocities varying from 1665 to 2300 mls. This
was interpreted as the indication of an inhomogenously fissured sandstone. By
extending the spread of geophones to 240 m, another, deeper bed of selenitic
Keuper with> 3000 mls was detected.
Follow-up drilling confirmed this seismic prediction. The depth difference bet-
ween seismic and borehole data was less than 2 m. By refraction, not only the
thickness of the sandstone but also its dip to the west was determined. Important
is the fact that this seismic profile coincides with a metal gas pipe that would have
obliterated all geoelectric signals from the ground.
Seismic Reflection
Its advantage lies in the possibility of recording many reflecting horizons at once
and of clarifying even complicated features of the underground. Its disadvantage
is its inability to record subsurface structures.
Figure 3.70 describes a digitally evaluated seismic section and its geologic
interpretation of tertiary lignite seams, compressed by glacial pressure. The inter-
ruption lines of the reflecting horizons dip steeply down to 170 m. At greater
depths, their dip flattens until an undisturbed series is reached in ~ 200 m.
Progressing glaciers have broken up the tertiary lignite series into separate
blocks, piled them up and created a complicated geohydraulic system with steep
sutures. Such an area is definitely not suitable for the construction of new waste
disposal sites, even if the subsurface beds consist of impermeable clay, because
the weight of the deposited material could release landslides and slumps.
In the following example of seismic reflection (Fig. 3.71), subsurface features
were detected by determining the "optimum reflection offset window." This is the
window that allows shallow reflectors to be observed with a minimum of seismic
Fig. 3.70. Cross section of seismic reflection in tertiary strata. Glacier-pressure has piled up lig-
nite beds
noise. It has to be found by trial and error, e.g. by shooting several expanding
spreads around the area.
Figure 3.70 presents a seismic section with derived geology. Flat and dipping
reflectors of sediments disclose the piling-up of lignite beds. This renders this
area unsuitable for the construction of a new disposal site.
Figure 3.71 introduces a sophisticated interpretation of a seismic reflection
survey. Three continuous reflectors between 20- and 50-m depth indicate flat-
lying glacial lake sediments. Such stable and unfaulted subsurface conditions
stand for low ground water risks and mark the site as a potential hazardous waste
treatment facility.
3.2.3 Steep Dipping Structures
Geomagnetics
Geomagnetic measurements can sensibly be used not only to trace buried magne-
tic waste but also to find natural magnetic structures that influence the path of
contamination. In Fig. 3.72, a dyke of basalt acts as a hydraulic swallow path for
contaminated surface water.
From the foot of a waste dump, the leachate flows over the surface until it seeps
into a cleaved and fissured basalt dyke. This guides the contamination through an
impermeable clay barrier deep into the ground. The dyke was detected by a geo-
magnetic survey under thin loamy overburden. The inclination of the magnetic
earth field of 55° causes only the southern maximum to coincide with the top of
the dyke. The related minimum lies north of this magmatic and magnetic struc-
ture.
Electromagnetic Mapping
This method is apt to locate steep dipping and long-extending hydraulic structures
in karst and hard-rock areas rapidly and at low cost. Due to its inductive coupling,
zero for
depth sco N
o
o Legend:
4' Reftective horizon

5 Iii \!J number 1
10 E '2" Reflective horizon
- 15 \bI number 2
QI
.5 20 E Reftective hor izon
:; 25
@ number 3
c. OJ
~ 30 o> 85 '14 Borehole location
L.
35 ,., I
o
1.0 ~
N
70 70
NORTH
App roximate 84 ·2 SOUTH
zero for 185'3 85 ' 6 85 ·9
85 ' 12
depth scale_ I I I I
'0', ---~-----------' '0'
UPPER GLACIOLACUSTRINE
5 AND HALTON UNITS
5
10 10
- 15 15 -
.5 20 20.5
:; 25 25 :; w
a. LOWER GLACIOLACUSTRI NE UN I T c.
~ 30 30 ~
n
~
35 35 ''""
::c
1.0 <n'
1.0 o::l .
Fig. 3.71. Offset seismic reOection and geologic cross section at a proposed hazardous waste facility in South Ontario, USA
'"'"
.lI.T
S N
Surface
water Intake area
=-=
--=---
---
-:Clay-=
--- -=-
-----------
--- - - - -
=-=- t
--
- --
" '-
"-- --
-- -
-----------
Basalt dyke
Fig. 3.72. Cross section of magnetic total intensity d T. The seepage path of a basalt dyke pene-
trates a clay barrier
no electrodes have to be driven into the ground. Further advantages are the high
resolution of steep sheet structures like fault planes, fissured zones or crevices.
The linear extension of such structures is won by correlating the related EM indi-
cations of several profiles to "linears".
Linears are marked by pronounced minima of the in- and outphases of the elec-
tromagnetic field. Needless to say, the EM-profiles should cross long tectonic
structures perpendicular to their strike to achieve undistorted values and to avoid
errors of interpretation.
Each EM survey point must be entered precisely into the location map.
Numbered pegging is not necessary if the EM profile is a straight line, terminat-
ed at both sides by vanishing poles. The point separation can be drawn from fixed
marks at the connecting cable between transmitter and receiver.
EM results always pertain to the midpoint of the EM spread. Since this is
sometimes overlooked, a countercheck and perhaps an appropriate correction is
advisable.
Figure 3.73 portrays an electromagnetic section across a planned new waste
disposal site. Minima that are typical for well-conducting linears occur with chan-
ging intensities and shapes over faults and fracture zones. While vertical fault pla-
nes cause symmetric minima right above the structure (A and E), inclination
accounts for a shift of the minimum towards the side of the dip (B). Structures
where in- and outphase curves run in opposite directions are attributed to sub-
surface effects.
SW HE
80
60
>R
0 40
w
en 20
c:(
:I:
Do
t-
::J 0
--enw
0
c:( -20
:I:
Do
il:
-40
.--+..,t
-60
-80
•
? A
• •
E
I
O?
• ?•
B
Legend
INPHASE ~ 1760 Hz 0 125m
! I I I I
OUTPHASE '!> 3520 Hz

Point distance: 25 m
X 880 Hz :5<: 7040 Hz Coil distance : 100 m
Fig. 3.73. EM cross section of a planned waste site. Minima carry capital letters and connect
up to long linears (Fig. 3.74)
If minima move too close together, their interpretation may be impounded.

Uncertain minima are question marked in Fig. 3.73. The construction of linears
between the minima of different cross sections always requires close cooperation
between geophysicists and geologists, geohydrologists or environmental experts.
A geophysicist alone, without relevant knowledge, would perhaps draw pointless
structural patterns.
The EM contour map of Fig. 3.74 provides a good example for such a coope-
ration. The linears are derived from the minima A to F of the cross section
Fig. 3.73. It is worth noting that linears cannot be constructed from contour lines.
The geophysicist must consider the shape of the minima in every case and has to
consider appropriate model structures to achieve a proper interpretation.
The linears of this area were identified by a drilling programme as an echelon
of faults with vertical and horizontal thrusting. They do not render the area
o 500m
~!--------------------~!
Fig. 3.74. EM-contours and linears (black beams), constructed from EM cross sections (Fig.
3.73). Inphase data, frequency 3520 Hz, spread 100 m, + = measuring point, separation 25 m
permeable and unsuited for waste dumping, however, since the weathered fault
planes are sealed by clay and loam. These faults do not guide but retain the gro-
und water as steep dipping aquicludes.
The most appropriate frequencies for electromagnetic mapping of such steep
dipping zones lie between 200 and 14 000 Hz. They guarantee good depth pene-
tration by portable energy sources. Permanent distant transmitters with higher
frequencies from 12000 to 24000 Hz, known as VLF, can also be used if the
.. .. . HLEM
5 A I
\ B ,' .
I \ I \ ..
I .'
~
~ f = 3555 Hz 50m
0
..
a.
I
'- ,
:f ' ........... Inphase
-5
+ -+ -+ Quadrature
A B
2.5
~ .... f = 1777Hz
a.
I
'-
0
,
\
II. ~ '" 4-
.
I '" -2.5
VLF Inphase
20
FUO Quadrature
10
*"a.
I
'-
0
I'"
-10
Resistivity
1000
800
E
C:: 600
500
..
ro
V> L
400 I • Will (Q = lm J/ h)
W E
0
weathered layer
,
.s 10
0 100m
I
f- 20 ...... . .. granite
a..
w
0
30
Fig. 3.75. Comparison ofVLF and other electromagnetic and electric data over granite and vol-
cano sedimentary rocks in Burkina Faso, Africa
objects are not too deep (Fig. 2.12). The results of VLF surveys are otherwise
similar to those of EM mapping, as shown by Fig. 3.75.
The steep-dipping fracture zones of Fig. 3.75 are detected by all employed
methods. Especially the VLF cross section responds well to the steep conductor,
because it occurs inside the VLF depth limit.
Ground Radar
This method should be applied to the investigation of new disposal sites only if
high resistivities or low dielectric constants allow the necessary depth penetration
of > 10 m. It can be used better to trace old underground mine workings or non-
metallic pipes in prospective areas (Fig. 3.46).
Seismics
Up to now, refraction and reflection have been directed mostly at more or less
horizontal structures. Steep dipping structures like faults had to be deducted
indirectly from interruptions and dislocations of reflecting horizons (Fig. 3.53).
The new 3D seismic method overcomes this handicap but it is perhaps still too
expensive to follow up vertical textures, which might discharge contamination
through hard rock areas.
Well Logging
Geophysical surveys at proposed new waste deposits should always be amended
by geophysical logging, because the suitability of an area for the construction of
a waste site depends not only on the porosity and permeability of the underlying
hard rock, but also on the intensity and distribution of fracturing, which con-
siderably effects its hydraulic properties. Geophysical logs reveal important ad-
ditional information, even in cored boreholes.
In Fig. 3.76, seven salinometer logs explicitly exhibit the saline-water distribu-
tion, mixing zones and freshwater occurrences in seven pumped wells. Water
inflows were located by differential temperature logs. Such results are of great
importance for the control of freshwater resources in areas where fresh and saline
ground water occur together. The freshwater resources that are found in lenses
under many islands need to be checked by such logs regularly.
Since most fractured zones are difficult to drill and produce poor core recovery,
geophysical well logging is essential in such boreholes. In Fig. 3.77, not only the
caliper log shows fracture zones as backbreaks of the borehole wall; they are even
better recorded in the sonic and electric logs.
Figure 3.77 displays geophysical logs in gneisses combined from 13 different
runs and methods. The uniform logs of the electric resistivity, the gamma radia-
tion, the sound (seismic) velocity, and the caliper (borehole diameter) indicate a
fairly homogenous petrography with constant ground water permeability. Solely
the zones with sudden high chargeabilies of induced polarization mark fractured
hydraulic paths for the movement of ground water and soluble pollutants.
Another advantage of logging is the verification of geophysical statements
about the depth of structures. This corroboration is necessary for depth data of
A B C
MODERN
OLD SALINE WATERS. OLD SALINE WATER. PUMPED WELLS SALINE INTRUSION.
MINOR PUMPING AREA IN MAJOR PUMPING AREA MAJOR PUMPING AREA
t • t
LONGLANDS elBA GEIGY NO.1 FISONS
CHURCH LANE 51TE 43
I
, SlTj ~:o, 8 ' ~ ~ '2
THEDDlETHORPE
aSlTf 55 10
I
51TE 9
64
ClEETHORPES
2 c,"Tj 12
SITj 23 IMMINGHAM
,~ ~~SI--1Tr_3-,-7~~
~:~~O~10~8~6~4~____~lO~8~i6~'24_'~2_'~__~4~3~2__~~______~__~__~~~__ G~~~d
10
ZONE OF <
MIXING
20 ! DIFFUSION
< <
...
<
30 < <
40 -r~ ZONE OF MIXING

/DIFFUSION
"'
~
...
50
60
ZONE OF MIXING
I DIFFUSION
70
80
LEGEND
90
100
... r-r-l
.... !:~~:~a~~~~C~~:~ by dHferential
Fluid conductivity scales (non.linear)
T
4 2 0 Units: mScm"'
Well water level

110
< Bottom 01 casing

120
Fig. 3.76. Geophysical salinometer logs, Lakeview, Ontario, Canada. Arrows indicate inflows
found by temperature logs
geoelectric soundings (VES) and seismic refraction. Geophysical logging can

furthermore be employed to revise the depth figures given by the drilling crew.
The petrographic description of the drill cores of Fig. 3.77 contains no clues as
to the nature of those zones. Neither rock boundaries nor other textures were
described. Only the microscopic investigation revealed disseminated graphite and
sulfides grown inside zones of tectonic shear and thrust.
This example proves the high value of well logging, since zones of tectonic
weakness in hard rock, which may guide the spreading of contaminants, can be
located with more precision than by the petrographic analysis of drill cores.
Radiometry
An increase in the radioactive gas radon in the ground air may point to steep dip-
ping and deep-reaching structures. The contours of a-counts in Fig. 3.78 display
variations in the radon content above the normal background. The background
was established at 150 a-counts (cpm) in a nearby well.
The investigated area houses a hazardous waste deposit of chemical refuse.
West of the dump, a-counts as high as 450 cpm, accompanied by high helium
contents of the ground air, were measured. This double anomaly was interpreted
200 150 100 50 0 Depth (m)

~?,!r!{r.~: ~. 33 .:::~r~:f~;i ~~~k-'!:::~ .~r--;.F.s:~::.~~::"'~ ~: Petrography
. / '-'1/ ....... I-~ - '\../ ~'"

-r-t-t--j--t--t-=-r~-T...Lf=rV=-+=----4'-.J....-1~~4=~=fi.l:l..,\,..l.--l---l Self· potential
.......
--
-. ...-
.-...............Ar.- ~ "~ ....... . . . . . _ _.
-t-ff-t-t-=t...L....:I---<+-T-+~~-4F+-+-+==l-q~~4-----l EI. resis tiv ity 40 + 160 cm
.....
,.
;:;. .0,
r- _.
y \ 1\
-t--j--t-'-t--t--t-f-+-++--t-t-f--\;r+-+-+---+-1r\+-+~ Induced polarizot ion
. .,~. - "h ~J!

0~,tr--:::tV~~\r+;:.;.::-,tP'(7.,-b/v4~rf:,'V"~¥'~r-~~S"P~,,""~~b,..,J..V-""'~IV
¥J~H Gradient of selfpotentiol
\,"",J~ Sonic
-t-t---t--t---t-t---lf--t-f-+-+-+--lf--t-+-++-t--1-l--I Temperature
~:-- Caliber
Fig.3.77. 13 Geophysical logs from a borehole in gneisses in Bavaria, Germany
as an indication of a deep-reaching fracture zone allowing the radon gases to

ascend to the surface. An origin of radon from the waste deposit could be ex-
cluded.
3.2.4 Nuclear Repositories
It is imperative that, in the future, nuclear waste is kept out of the biosphere or the
ground water system. Appropriate rocks are dry granite or gneiss and, most
important of all, salt domes. Salt is absolutely dry and encases hot, highly radio-
active waste completely because of its enhanced plasticity under high temperature
and rock pressure.
No alien rocks or even lye are allowed in a nuclear deposit, because such
pockets might expand when heated and open up cracks or fissures for the intru-
sion of ground water. They can certainly be detected by drilling. However, finding
all inclusions would necessitate many boreholes and convert the salt dome not
into a nuclear deposit, but into a Swiss cheese.
To overcome this and to investigate salt diapirs spatially, the method of elec-
tromagnetic reflection (EMR) or georadar has been developed. EMR is able to
..
o'-_.....20m
'
Survey point ~ 200cpm-300cpm
I11III t.OOcpm-SOOcpm ~ 100 cpm - 200 cpm
~ 300 cpm - 400 cpm ~ 0 cpm-100 cpm
Fig. 3.78. Radon contours in the ground air, measured as a-counts per minute near a hazardous
deposit of chemical waste
S Transmitting antenna
E Receiving antenna
R Receiver
Fig. 3.79, Locating a thin reflecting clay horizon by EMR in a salt dome from two horizontal
boreholes and from an adit
3.2 New Disposal Sites
129
4
.~ .... .i.
6
B
10
12
14
16
IB .-
20
22
24
26
-.
2B '0
0
30 g' :
32 "C . III
01
0
34 .0
..c. \
.!:
.:r.
36 01 . L.
3B
'Qj 0- 0
•
.
z ~
40 '0
42 VI
44 .-
46
4B
<II
-0
.-
50 .c.
<II
.
L.
52 o
al
54
56
58 '-
OJ
., , ~
'b
.-
60 ~
62
.!2 0>
--
-===
~
.!!! .~ -
64 ·c 7'"
66 q~ ~ -
iz;:f- .2 :6. -=:::
68
70 ~~
~ ~ .S
g --==
.-
72
74 ~.--~ - - -: -===
76
78
-
.--.
- ...
80 '·r
BGR. Henno ve
Frequency 220 MHz
Duration 1.0 J-Ls
Fig. 3.80. Underground radargram measured in a salt dome to be developed as a nuclear waste
repository
locate any alien inclusion precisely without endangering the safety or the sealing
of the future disposal mine.
EMR works with the same high frequencies (> 100 MHz) as the ground radar.
However, transmitting and receiving antennas are separated. This optimizes the
signal reflection and allows determination of the direction of the EMR reflector.
The extremely high resistivity of the salt allows the high-frequency EMR oscil-
lations to penetrate and be reflected from distances between 5 and 1000 m. EMR
is used to find the boundaries of different salt beds, anhydrite seals, clay lenses,
lye-filled fissures, and intruded dykes of magmatic rock.
From underground adits or boreholes, the spatial position of all electric reflec-
ting bodies with deviating dielectric constants can be established. Figure 3.79
shows how the bearings of an underground reflector are won by EMR.
According to the derived distance, very short pulses of groups of electro-
magnetic waves of only 0.1 J,ls duration are transmitted. This signal reaches the
receiver after having travelled through the salt. It is also used to synchronize the
receiver with the transmitter. The calculation of the travelled distance is made,
according to seismics, by the determination of the travel time differences. But
with EMR, the travel times are extremely short and their measurement requires
great technological efforts.
The electromagnetic radar waves are received not only from one direction
but from all spatial directions. Reflections from above the adit cannot be distin-
guished from those that stem from below. The spatial assignment of the re-
flections can be made either according to their shape or by using directional
antennae.
In the radargram of Fig. 3.80 the two parallel reflections, running across the
whole area, are caused by a parallel adit. Important information is revealed by the
reflection curving slightly to the right from the lower margin (track No. 80 to
track No. 40). A follow-up borehole identified it as a thin bed of anhydrite. The
slightly bent reflections on the right beyond the adit reflection are the reverbera-
tions of old mine works.
4 Cost of Geophysical Surveys
4.1 Cost Structures

The expenses for geophysical investigations comprise the following:
1. Transport to and from the area of investigation,
2. Measurements in the field,
3. Evaluation and interpretation,
4. Reporting,
5. Overheads.
Tables 4.1 and 4.2 give a rough estimate of 1993 expenses for geophysical sur-
veys. The prices include measurements, evaluation, reporting and overheads.
Transport costs are not included. The given prices are non-binding, without obli-
gations and guarantees as to correctness. They are meant to allow a quick estimate
of geophysical costs. Special and local conditions may lead to higher or lower
expenses.
In addition prices may be influenced by the following:
1. Volume of order; measurements become cheaper with growing volume.
2. Rough terrain increases, flat ground decreases the costs.
3. Imprecise or disturbed raw field data must be corrected by special digital
evaluation programs at extra cost.
4. Many bidders may lead to reduction in costs.
Table 4.1. Estimated costs for one geophysical field day (1993)
Method Cost per day (USS)
Geomagnetics 500 to 700

Geoelectric mapping 530 to 1000
Geoelectric sounding (according to spread) 560 to 1100
Induced polarization 950 to 1300
Self-potential (>200 electrodes ~ 1000S) 350 to 1400
Electromagnetic mapping + VLF, TDEM 510 to 850
Georadar 900 to 1500
Seismic refraction 1000 to 2200
Seismic reflection 2000 to 10000
132 4 Costs of Geophysical Surveys
Table 4.2. Estimated costs of line meter and station (US$)
Method Costlm Costlstation
Geomagnetic 1.50 1.50-3.50

Geoelectric mapping 1.45 1.45-3.00
Geoelectric sounding 1.65 42.00-120.00
Induced polarization 2.10 40.00-150.00
Self-potential 0.80 2.00-6.00
Electrom. mapping +VLF 1.45 1.45-3.00
Georadar 3.42 continuous
Seismic refraction 5.00 50.00 - 200.00
Seismic reflection 12.00 200.00 - 500.00
4.2 Comparison of Geophysical Expenditures

If a site has to be drilled or geophysically surveyed in a dense meshed grid, the
following topics have to be addressed:
1. Extension of dumped waste or contamination,
2. Thickness of waste deposit,
3. Location of small (toxic) bodies.
Table 4.3 describes the actual cost of the investigation of a hazardous waste depo-
sit. Under A) the expenditures without geophysics and under B) the costs with the
application of geophysics are listed. The prices for geophysical measurements
agree roughly with the figures given in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. Drilling was offered at
US $ 150.00/m, shallow probing at US $ 30.00/m.
The cost-benefit analysis of Table 4.3 shows that the application of geophysics,
plus a reduced drilling/probing program, has reduced the total cost of inves-
tigation by 73 %. The expenditures under A) were only planned; those under B)
have been incurred.
A side effect of geophysics was the continuous spatial coverage of the waste
site. Mere drilling and probing would have left gaps 5 -10m wide between the
points. One can certainly imagine how many contaminated bodies, like poisonous
sludges or bundles of drums with toxic filling, could have hidden between the
drill sites.
The costs in Fig. 4.1 were taken from actual projects. They are, however, not
representative for all investigations of landfills or waste deposits. Local condi-
tions may vary considerably and influence the cost frame. However, it is a rule
that the application of geophysical methods leads to considerable cost reductions.
In the case of Table 4.3, the cost decrease is 73 %. Any cost-benefit analysis of
a landfill investigation must therefore include the reduction of the high costs of
systematic drilling and probing by geophysics.
Table 4.3. Comparison of environmental investigation costs without and with geophysics.
(Buried hazardous waste deposit covering - 30000 m 2)
A) Investigation costs without geophysics

330 Percussion probes, depth 6 m, grid 6 x 6 m2
cost per meter US $ 20.00 US $ 39600.00
18 cored boreholes, depth 25 m, grid 25 x 25 m 2
cost per meter US $ 150.00 US $ 67500.00
Total expenditure: US $ 107100.00
B) Investigation costs with geophysics

Magnetics, 1200 points 5 x 5 m2 grid,
cost per point US $ 3.00 US$ 3600.00
Geoelectric mapping, 300 points, lOx 10m2 grid,
cost per point US $ 3.00 US$ 900.00
Geoelectric sounding, 48 stations, L = 100 m,
cost per sounding US $120.00 US$ 5760.00
Seismic refraction, 500 line meter,
cost per meter US $ 8.00 US$ 4000.00
30 Percussion probing, depth 6 m,
3 Boreholes, cored, depth 25 m,
Total expenditure: US$ 29110.00
Table 4.4. Volume of geophysical measurements for the costs of one borehole meter
Method No. of points Line meters Area (m2) a
Magnetic 40-250 100-300 200-450

Geoelectric mapping 50-100 100-250 200-400
Geoelectric sounding 2-4 10-30 20-100
Induced polarization 1-4 20-30 50-100
Self-potential 25-75 100-300 200-500
EM mapping VLF, TEM 50-100 100-250 200-600
Ground radar continuous 100-150 50-70
Seismic refraction 1-3 30-50 50-80
Seismic reflection 1-0.3 12-15 30-50
a Calculated by different point separations

134 4 Costs of Geophysical Surveys
us$
250
125 c:=J
100
I ~ CO;';COfH'
Cost /point
60
Fluctuation
50
It'
It'
40 It'
It'
It'
30
It'
~
20 It'
I It'
It'
I It'
10 I
i~It'
41:JJtl]
It'
~ j<
~It' pl·· .· c
It'
It'
It'
VI 0> L 0> V1 C L
"0
0 ,!:! c c c W Cl. 0 ,~ 2OJ
:;; ~
OJ
'0.
a.
"0
c a.
a. > V1 :;:
u "ti
OJ c c L
c c ~ E
::E 0>
E
L
c E
, "0
c , Qj Qj ';:
E ::E
::J
u L L
0
E
0
0
OJ
(!)
W L
(!)
0
E
VI VI
'iii 'iii
V1 V1
Fig. 4.1. Comparison of costs per borehole meter to expenditures for the application of geo-
physical methods
The expenditures of Table 4.3 were calculated for a waste site containing
domestic and industrial refuse. It allowed the complete exploration of the conta-
minated area of 30000 m2 down to a depth of 20 m. Furthermore, a distinction
between industrial and domestic waste could be made and isolated concentrations
of scrap metal, building material and industrial sludges were located.
The figures in Tables 4.1 to 4.5 concern routine arrays and spreads. For special
problems, quite different arrangements can be made. These tables must be regard-
ed only as a rough guide to estimate the costs of an environmental investigation
before consulting a geophysical expert.
Table 4.5. Suitable point separations
Method Point separation Remarks
Magnetic 1-5 m rectangular grid

Geoelectric mapping 2-15m rectangular grid
Geoelectric sounding lO-l00m along paths and roads
Induced polarization 10-50 m
Self-potential 5-20m rectangular grid
EM mapping + VLF 2-25m rectangular grid
Ground radar continuous rectangular grid
Seismic refraction I-30m geophone separation
Seismic reflection 5-40m geophone separation
5 Briefing for Geophysical Surveys
5.1 Areas of Application
Geophysical measurements or surveys can help to investigate the following:

1. Geological and hydraulically active structures of the ground under and around
existing landfills or hazardous waste sites. Geological barriers for the selection
of new sites.
2. Extension and contents of waste dumps. Single bodies.
3. Flow of contaminated plumes, seepages and leachates
Geophysical surveys can, in many cases, identify the stratification and the
tectonic and other hydraulically active structures and textures. They are able to
monitor the underground to act as a geological barrier protecting rock and ground
water from putrification and contamination.
To know the exact extension of hazardous landfills and waste sites is essential
for any risk assessment. In most cases, geophysics can find the borders of conta-
minated areas, even under thick coverage. The unexpected physical uniformity of
domestic and some industrial waste furthermore allows the exploration of the
underground of landfills in detail.
Geophysics can further elaborate the physical properties of buried waste,
allowing the non-invasive identification of contaminated materials from above.
The pursuit of the underground paths of contaminated ground water is another
valuable field of geophysical exploration. This depends, however, on significant
alterations of the physical properties of the ground.
Since most leachates and seepages from landfills and dumps are salty, many
plumes carrying freights of soluble contaminants can be detected by geophysics.
But identification of concentrations of organic fluids, e.g. fluorhydrocarbons,
may fail.
Another positive effect of geophysical measurements on hazardous sites is the
industrial safety of working personnel. Since geophysics is non-invasive and non-
destructive, natural and artificial sealings remain intact. Toxic gases or liquids
cannot escape and the health hazard is low.
Table 5.1 shows a brief overview of the most important areas of application for
approved geophysical methods. Methods not mentioned, like gravity or geo-
thermy, are rarely employed. The well-logging methods described intensively in
this book should always be applied to any sunken borehole.
138 5 Briefing for Geophysical Surveys
Table 5.1. Applications of Environmental Geophysics
Methods Area of application
Geology Landfill Plumes Remarks
Magnetic (+) + ltd. depth penetration

Geoelectric mapping (+) + (+) disturbed by pipes etc.
Geoelectric sounding + + + disturbed by pipes etc.
Induced polarization (+) (+) (+) research necessary
Self-potential (+) (+) (+) research necessary
Electromagnetic methods + + + EM, VLF, TDEM
Ground radar (+) + (+) dry ground necessary
Seismic refraction + (+)
Seismic reflection + expensive
+ applicable, (+) limited applicable, - not applicable
The successful and cost-saving application of geophysics depends very much

on the physical properties ofthe site and on the skill of the geophysicist in char-
ge to combine the right methods to extract an optimum of information. It is futi-
le to apply geophysics if the differences among physical properties are too small.
Good examples are the specific electric resistivity and the seismic velocity. The
resistivities of two materials to be distinguished should differ at least by 30 Om;
seismic velocities should vary by 200 mls.
The disturbing influence of human installations like metal pipes or cables,
roads, buildings, etc. must be considered before any measuring begins. Their pre-
sence may limit any geophysical activities or demand the application of methods
which remain undisturbed by installations. It is therefore recommended to first go
over the area with a cable- or pipe-detector. Sometimes man-made effects are in-
visible: the induction of high-voltage power lines will effect electromagnetic
measurements up to several hundred meters away.
5.2 Objectives and Limitations

Table 5.2 lists targets of environmental geophysics and the proper methods to be
used. Only surface measurements are included.
Below, the suitability of geophysical methods to solve environmental problems
is discussed in detail:
Magnetics
Magnetic methods are best adapted to the boundary mapping of domestic waste
sites by the general content of iron objects. On landfills without magnetic mate-
rial, magnetics will naturally fail. Single iron objects like metal barrels or car
scrap can be located only near the surface. If buried deeper into the waste, they
cannot be found.
Table 5.2. Objectives of Environmental Geophysics VI
N
0
Methods Objectives s:
(1)
Domestic Industrial Abandoned Plumes in Plumes in Geological ~.

(1)
waste waste site pore aquif. joint aquif. barrier
§'"
0-
Magnetic + + + t"'
Geoelectric mapping + + + + + + 3·
Geoelectric sounding + + + + +
Induced polarization + + + +
*
~:::s
*
Self-potential * + * '"
Electromagnetic: EM, VLF, TDEM + + + + + *
Ground radar * * + *
Seismic refraction * * + +
Seismic reflection + *
Suitability: + = good, *= limited, - = not possible
....
w
100
Even in landfills of soil and excavated earth, magnetics may succeed if the
magnetic properties of the deposited material differ sufficiently from the country
rock.
Magnetic measurements are prone to the magnetic influence of iron installa-
tions like cast pipes, fences or casings of boreholes, and most of all, of iron
buttons or buckles of the operator; care has to be taken to avoid them.
In most cases, only statements about the location and the depth of objects can
be made. Identification of type, like drum, fridge or car part, is not possible.
Geoelectrics
Geoelectric measurements are restricted if buildings, metallic pipes and cables
are present in the ground, or if railway lines or guard rails cross the area of inve-
stigation.
The grounding of electrodes becomes difficult on tar and concrete road surfa-
ces. Plastic liners may be perforated.
Good conducting beds like clay and marl decrease the depth penetration.
DC measurements are time consuming, since current and potential electrodes
have to be grounded.
The precondition of +/- horizontal stratification must be fulfilled for geoelec-
tric soundings.
Geoelectric soundings may omit thin layers. Several equivalent solutions as to
the depth or the thickness of beds are possible.
Such limitations are also valid for the Induced Polarization. In addition, elec-
trical noise near industrial areas will disturb and distort the measurements.
The results of self-potential surveys are difficult to interprete since redox and
flow potentials overlap and the spatial position ofthe plus and minus poles, or the
exact location of the SP sources, are rarely determinable.
Electromagnetic measurements are disturbed by all metallic installations, and
especially by powerlines running near the survey area. The depth penetration of
VLF observations is limited mostly to < 20 m. VLF profiles should run perpendi-
cular to a straight line between the object of investigation and the very distant
transmitting station.
Ground radar penetrates from decimeters to a few meters into the ground. The
obtained data change rapidly after rain or other alterations of soil moisture. Dense
vegetation or rough ground prevents radar work. The evaluation has to compile
tremendous amounts of digital data. Radar data must be cautiously interpreted.
This is not possible without practical experience. If this is lacking, overinter-
pretations may occur.
Seismics
Seismic surveys are the most voluminous and expensive geophysical methods.
They are confined to horizontal stratification. Steep structures can only be indi-
rectly inferred from interruptions of horizontal bedding. Areas of high ground
disturbance, caused by railways and road traffic, may be unsuitable for seismic
surveys.
5.3 Planning and Execution of Investigations 141
Seismic refraction is well adapted to map the surface of a consolidated bed,

even below landfills or hazardous waste sites to trace the flow ofleachates or con-
taminated ground water. The number oflayers to be investigated is limited. A pre-
condition is the increase in seismic velocity with growing depth.
The determination of the borders of waste dumps depends on the differences
in the seismic velocities between refuse and country rock. If the rock is uncon-
solidated, the velocities may be equal and the borders not discernible.
Seismic reflection has only recently been developed to reveal structures above
the depth of 50 m. Most units work only at greater depths. It can precisely disclose
many horizontal boundaries, but very thin layers may be overlooked. Before
seismic reflection is employed, its high costs must be considered.
Gravity
The gravity anomalies of landfills are generally very small. They can fall well
below the level of necessary corrections. It is nevertheless a good method to find
cavities or abandoned adits. Any environmental application demands very narrow
grids, which are expensive to survey. The costs of gravity evaluations may be
higher than those of fieldwork. Very small anomalies may lead to false inter-
pretations.
Geothermy
Geothermal measurements depend on strong heat production rates inside a land-
fill and dense heat flows on the surface. Observations should be made only in
short probing holes between 2 and 5 o'clock a. m. and in dry weather. They might
be influenced by alterations of the local microclimate.
5.3 Planning and Execution of Investigations
5.3.1 Choice of Methods
Table 5.3 lists the most common problems and the routine geophysical methods
of solving them. The suitability is graded from good to limited to impossible.
Table 5.3 is strongly simplified for the use of geophysical laymen.
Table 5.3 should always be used in connection with Tables 5.1 and 5.2 to select
the best methods or combination of methods to solve environmental problems. It
must be emphasized that the use of these tables can certainly not replace consul-
tation with a geophysicist; they are merely to be used as general briefings.
The following examples are to aid in the choice of methods: Simple problems,
like finding the location and extension of a landfill or waste dump, should be
tackled by the cheap and fast methods of magnetics and geoelectrics. Magnetic
measurements can trace the extension of most buried domestic waste bodies; in
earth dumps, magnetics can locate single iron objects.
Table 5.3. Choice of Methods for Hazardous Waste Sites
IV
"'"
Methods Objects to be checked
Locating Extension Top Bottom Thickness Single Seepage Saline

sealing sealing of deposit objects paths plumes
Magnetic + + +
Geoelectric mapping + + + + + +
Geoelectric sounding * * + + + * +
Induced polarization * * * * * *
Self-potential * * * * *
Electromagnetic: EM, VLF, TDEM + + * * + + * +
Ground radar * + + +
Seismic refraction * * + + + +
Seismic reflection * * * +
Suitability: + = good, *= limited, - = not possible
V\
ttl
::I.
~
::1
::I
0Cl
8'
'"1
a
~
.g
~
~
;:;.
eo.
[/l
j
~
5.3 Planning and Execution of Investigations 143
Electromagnetic or geoelectric (DC) mapping can complement the magnetic

data where no iron is present or where the depth of deposited material has to be
determined. Geoelectric sounding can help to find the thickness of a dump and
the channels that guide the flow of leachates.
Furthermore, geoelectric sounding and/or seismic refraction are capable of
answering geohydrological questions about the thickness and extensions of
aquifers, aquicludes and their overburden. In hard rock areas, fissured seepage
paths and permeable faults may be traced by electromagnetic methods. The
thickness of unconsolidated sediments on top of hard rock or the morphology of
the interlayer surface can be found by seismic refraction.
It has to be considered whether combinations of methods should be applied
simultaneously or in succession. It is advantageous to divide the survey into two
phases:
Phase 1: Presurvey and overview. Only the cheap and fast magnetic, geoelectric
and electromagnetic methods should be used.
Phase 2: Main survey. Areas selected by results of the presurvey are to be inves-
tigated in detail. This comprises the tightening and extension of the pre survey
grid and the employment of methods like seismic refraction, seismic reflection or
induced polarization.
Interdisciplinary cooperation with geohydrologists, environmental experts or the
owners of waste sites is often successful. In any case, a cost-benefit analysis, based
on Tables 4.1 to 4.2, is necessary to establish the best combination of geophysics,
drilling and probing.
5.3.2 Necessary Experience
The performance of geophysical surveys cannot follow direct schemes and stan-
dards. The investigations have to be adapted to the special conditions of every
locality. The sequence of geophysical measurements has to be arranged accord-
ing to the specific results of each method, the geological background, presurvey
analyses and drilling data. Therefore, the interpretation of geophysical field ob-
servations has to be based on long-term experience and should be counterchecked
with environmental engineers, geologists or geohydrologists.
The choice of arrays to be combined also requires considerable expertise and
knowledge. Certain aspects of environmental hazards must be followed up by dif-
ferent arrays. If, for example, the precise location of the margin of a hazardous
waste deposit has to be known, geoelectric and/or magnetic measurements have
to be made in a narrow rectangular grid of I x 1 m 2 • However, the general position
of buried waste deposits can be explored by wider grids of lOx 10m2 •
One should keep in mind that little and imprecise preinformation raises the
cost of geophysical investigations considerably and hampers the interpretation.
The geophysical mono survey or the application of only one method should be
the exception. Combinations are obligatory to arrive at a correct solution.
Equivalent results can thus be sorted out. Naturally, not only geophysical but also
geological, drilling, or technical data will assist in achieving a correct and safer
result. Further information about the combination of methods is found in
Sect. 5.5.
5.3.3 Preparations
The first step in planning a geophysical survey is to collect all available physical
and historical data about the target. The problems and demands ofthe client must
be defined in detail before a first blueprint can be drawn.
Knowledge of the target should include information about accessibility,
distance to buildings, railway lines, roads or electrical installations, topography
and, most important, the location of pipes and cables.
Most urgent is the availability of maps, sections or other graphic documents
describing the status of the area. They must be scaled to enable the accurate
entering of measured stations. Only precise and correct maps can serve as a topo-
graphical base for the evaluation and interpretation of geophysical data.
In some areas, digital data banks inform about agricultural use, technical
installations, drilling activities, etc. They should be consulted in connection with
the following Table 5.4.
5.3.4 Evaluation and Interpretation
Evaluation and interpretation have to be done with the same caution and care as
the geophysical fieldwork.
Nowadays, evaluation is much easier and faster than in the past, since special
geophysical software is available. Putting the computer to work saves time but
does not obviate thinking. The formal and generalized computer results have to
be corrected according to the specifications of the order and to the known pro-
perties of the object.
The final report has to be comprehensible to non-geophysicists, as well, but
data must be so thoroughly documented that reevaluations and reinterpretations
are possible. All maps, sections and other graphics should be presented in the
same scale to enable direct comparison (see Sect. 1.4).
Geophysical statements as to the extension of contaminations, the hydraulic
paths of seepages and the geology of an area should be discussed in detail in a
final report. A mere formal presentation of geophysical data without discussing
the special relevance of results is not sufficient!
5.3.5 Follow-up Activities
A scheduled geophysical survey may have to be amended during and after field-
work. If anomalies are recognized at the ends of lines, they should immediately
be prolonged. Such extensions should not be postponed until after the final eva-
luation, to avoid the necessary return of the field crew to the area of investigation.
5.3 Planning and Execution ofInvestigations 145
Table 5.4. Checklist Preparation of Geophysical Surveys
1. Definition of the object ofinvestigation and the problems to be solved.

2. Assessment of the topography. Possibility to drive or to walk into the area, installations such
as power lines, buried metallic pipes or cables, distances to buildings, roads and railway lines.
3. Collection of information from government offices such as topographical or geological
surveys, mining or environmental bodies. Records and reports about time and nature of
dumped material and fitting of sealings have to be studied.
4. Assessment of geophysical methods to answer the special questions of the client, considering
the information under 1. to 3.
5. Setting up a survey programme, including the positioning of the survey lines and points in a
correct map. The distances between points and lines have to be chosen according to the
demands for vertical and lateral penetration.
Table 5.5. Checklist for Evaluation and Interpretation
1. Application of approved software.

2. Entering the results of different methods into maps, sections and graphics on equal scale.
3. Clear presentation of results in words and graphics which is understandable also for geo-
physical laymen. Use of colour to enhance this.
4. Critical revision of geophysical results by comparison of the data of all geophysical methods
used.
5. Comparison of geophysical data to geology, geohydrology, tectonical structures and pro-
perties of the waste e.g. to chemical analysis.
Table 5.6. Checklist Follow-up Work
1. Execution of complementary field measurements to consolidate the results.

2. Extension of the survey into adjacent prospective areas, e.g. to trace contaminated plumes.
3. Verification of geophysical results by drilling, probing or trenching progranunes.
Modern digital field instruments can store the measured data of one day or
more. Transferred to laptops directly in the field, evaluation software can be
applied to check the daily output for faulty measurements. Questionable data
must be repeated or counterchecked in the field the following day.
In many cases, a wide-meshed grid is laid first to recognize areas with
characteristic indications. If, however, such anomalies are found by a preliminary
evaluation, those areas have to be surveyed in a second field campaign within
narrow-meshed grids (Table 5.6). This confinement of detailed surveying to pro-
spective areas will always result in considerable cost reduction.
Follow-up work should lead ultimately to the positioning and realization of

drilling, probing and trenching programs. Since these are very expensive, great
care has to be taken by the geophysicist in charge to recommend such develop-
ments only after a careful scrutiny of the geophysical results.
5.4 Combination of Geophysical Methods

Every geophysical method is directed at certain physical properties of material or
rock. It is advisable not to investigate single properties by geophysical methods,
but as many properties as possible by various methods, to countercheck and con-
solidate the results.
Methods to be combined are described in Table 5.7, which may be considered
an extension of Table 5.2. Nevertheless, these tables contain only general advice.
The combination of geophysical methods for individual objects can be quite dif-
ferent, depending on the aim of the survey and on special local conditions.
Experience has shown that at most waste sites or landfills, the cheap and fast
methods of magnetics and geoelectric or electromagnetic mapping suffice to
determine the spatial extension. If, however, single waste components have to be
pinpointed, more efforts and more methods are required. Ground radar, induced
polarization, self-potential or seismic refraction may have to be used.
The costly seismic reflection is to be recommended when information from a
greater depth is desired. This might be necessary if contaminated plumes plunge
into deep strata.
Ground radar is the only method that is influenced by the dielectric constant.
Since this is very different for water and organic fluids, it is a good method to
trace strong organic contaminations of ground water. Furthermore, it is capable of
detecting non-metallic pipes, which cannot be found by other methods. Because
of its very limited depth penetration, it must often be supplemented by deeper-
reaching methods, such as electromagnetic mapping.
It is very important to run geophysical logs in every borehole. The logs record
very precisely the alterations of physical properties in vertical extension. Good
geophysical borehole data will upgrade the information from surface geophysics
many times!
5.5 Research and Development

Environmental geophysics is a very young applied science, and employs mostly
the procedures of mining geophysics adapted to shallow targets by smaller arrays
and spreads. This was adequate at the beginning, but to develop this new branch
of geosciences, further research work is necessary.
One drawback to environmental geophysics is the lack of knowledge of the
physical properties of waste. Sometimes they are quite different from what might
Table 5.7. Combinations of Geophysical Methods v.
U,
Target Methods ~
r!l
Landfills, magnetics geoelectrical mapping! EM mapping ground radar induced self- seismic ~
hazardous waste dumps sounding TDEM, VLF polarization potential refraction
2-t:)
Abandoned industrial magnetics geoelectrical mapping! EM mapping ground radar self-
sites or areas sounding potential ~
Contamined plumes, geoelectrical mapping! EM mapping induced seismic
seepage paths sounding TDEM polarization refraction
Geological
barrier
geoeIectrical mapping!
sounding
EM mapping
VLF
induced
polarization
seismic refraction
seismic reflection
f
:;
-..j
be expected. Who would have thought that the very inhomogeneous domestic
waste behaves geoelectrically like a homogeneous body of very low resistivity?
It is necessary that the tables in this book, which list some physical properties
known from individual determinations, shall be amended by laboratory and field
experiments. Even this enhanced knowledge of physical properties is not enough;
the specific responses of waste materials and fluids to geophysics have still to be
studied.
One of many research targets is the differentiation among substances by com-
plex resistivity or induced polarization measurements, using the mathematical
tool of the fractal dimension. This new geophysical approach should be used to
distinguish between clays and unconsolidated rock filled with saline ground
water.
Self-potentials may originate from oxidation and reduction, or from the move-
ment of fluids through permeable substances. Research work should be directed
toward finding a means of telling the difference between the two effects.
High-frequency seismics are now able to work in subsurface areas. But inter-
pretation is still difficult, since very few seismic velocities of human refuse are
really known.
A new field of research concerns the long-term monitoring of leaks in bottom
seals. If a leak occurs, it can be detected only much later, after its seepage has
reached one of the monitoring wells outside the landfill. This may take weeks or
months and may result in high remedial expenses.
Tests arranged by perforating the plastic liner (Fig. 5.1) have indicated sprea-
ding of the artificial plume by 3.6 m after 24 hand 45 mm of rainfall, and by 5.3 m
after 96 hand 62 mm of rainfall. The water seeped away below the plastic liner
and collected on top of the clay barrier. It would have taken about 40 days until
m
10 - 25.
9-
8-
30
7-
6-
5-
4-
3-
2
1- 30 0 30
25= Qs (!1.ml- =Perforat"lon
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 m 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 m
a b
Fig. 5.1 a, b. Alteration of the electric resistivity of a bottom clay barrier after perforation of the
plastic liner. a) after 24 hours and 45 mm rain; b) after 96 hours and 62 mrn rain
5.5 Research and Development 149
Continuous registration
Voltmeter Current source
'. .
... :- ....
,',
Current~::~::::~==:=~~~~=:~~====~~~~~
coble
Cloy barrier
[ 0.2~L.
Geological barrier o 5 10 m 20
! I ' !
o
Fig. 5.2. Principle of long-term leak monitoring by permanent electrodes
this artificial plume had reached monitoring wells at the margin of this landfill of
150 x 350 m 2 •
To avoid this crucial delay, it is proposed to implant stainless steel electrodes
into the clay barrier, directly below the plastic liner. By connecting them up by
rustproof cables, it is possible to monitor their electric potential in a common
array in short time intervals (Fig. 5.2). If leachates, especially saline leachates,
seep between two electrodes, their potential will abruptly diminish and the DC
current will change. This monitoring system will report the time and the location
of leaks immediately. Remedial measures could thereby commence at once.
In a pilot project, the stainless steel electrodes should be separated by 10-m
intervals. They should be round with a diameter of 2.5 cm and arrayed in a
rectangular grid. Their connectors have to be riveted to non-corrodable cables that
lead to a constant power source and a digital voltmeter with automatic memory
functions. The shunting of different arrays, preferably the Wenner array, must be
possible.
Other research work should answer the question of whether long-term applica-
tion of electric potentials or DC currents to aquifers might help in the precipita-
tion oftoxic ions. The experiences already accumulated in preventing pipe corro-
sion by weak electric potentials could be used.
These are only a few selected examples of urgent research activities in the field
of environmental geophysics. With the growing application of geophysics to shal-
low environmental targets, new problems will have to be solved, necessitating
more research and development. Geophysics should also be employed to aid and
to check remedial or mitigation programs.
6 Geophysical Tenders
6.1 Procedures
After the combination of methods has been chosen, the call for tenders can be
made. Table 6.1 lists important information for bidders.
Tenders should be kept flexible. Mainly, the total volume of geophysical work
has to be described, e.g. the number of points or stations, size of the area to be
surveyed, etc. The bidder should be able to include his own ideas concerning the
array, the point and line separations.
Details must be fixed only if necessary to fulfill the purpose of survey. How-
ever, requirements about the requested precision and depth penetration are in-
dispensable. For some methods, certain geophysical instruments have to be con-
tracted (e.g. the proton magnetometer).
It has to be stipulated how the final data are to be presented. This might be in
cross sections, profiles, or three-dimensional pictures, colored or black and white.
Any reports must be accurate, understandable, and meet the current standards of
science and technology. Further demands concerning the presentation should not
be made in tenders, since many details of the presentation can only be decided
upon after the field data have been collected.
Table 6.1. Information Recommended for Bidders
Position, size and topography Topo maps with proposals for Number of survey points,
of survey area survey areas, arrays length of profiles, grids
Details of object and problems Details of geology, hydrology, Time table: Beginning
tectonics and dumped and end of field work
materials and evaluation
Table 6.2. Compilation of Tenders and Placement
1. Compilation of an appropriate flexible tender, with precise description of the object, work
program, fieldwork, evaluation, interpretation and reporting.
2. The prices for preparation of equipment, transport, field measurements, stand-by times,
digital evaluation, interpretation and presentation/reporting have to be declared separately.
3. Placing the order to the consultant who made the best bid at acceptable total costs, and with
good references as to his reliability and dependability.
152 6 Geophysical Tenders
The evaluation and interpretation of geophysical data can be quite extensive

and time consuming, since indirect conclusions must be worked out. These
expenses might eventually surpass the costs of the field operations. Therefore, the
field and evaluation costs in bids have to be separated.
Very important is the compatibility of the results of different geophysical
methods. To achieve this, measuring points of all methods have to be entered into
maps on equal scales.
It might not be wise to contract the cheapest bidder. The one with the most
relevant experience (Table 6.2) and who can submit references as to his dependa-
bility and proper fulfillment of previous contracts should be chosen.
6.2 Call for Tenders
6.2.1 Preparation
Information for the bidder:

Method or combination of methods.
Size (arrays) of survey grid, point separation.
Instruments to be employed.
Requested special prices:
- Topographical surveying and pegging.
6.2.2 Fieldwork
Requested Prices:
per measured point.
per line meter (kilometer etc.).
for additional measures (e.g. monitoring diurnal field variations, error
margins).
6.2.3 Evaluation
Requested Prices
per corrections (topographical, diurnal).
per application of sophisticated software (e.g seismic migration, geoelectric
inversion).
per 2D and 3D derivations.
per digital model calculations.
per technical or geological interpretations.
per reporting, including three-dimensional and/or colored pictures, if
necessary.
7 List and origin of Figures and Tables
7.1 List of Figures ([] = No. of references)
Figure 2.1. Magnetic anomalies at different heights above ground [53] 6

Figure 2.2. Magnetic section of the total intensity DT over a globe-
shaped concentration of scrap iron at 65° latitude [53] . . . 7
Figure 2.3. Current flow through a limited conductor [53] 9
Figure 2.4. Principle of measurement and potential field for
geoelectric DC surveys [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Figure 2.5. Arrays for geoelectric mapping and sounding [53] 11
Figure 2.6. Geoelectric sounding curve (VES) of a Schlumberger
array with digital interpretation and computed model curve
of the minimum type "H" [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . ; .. 15
Figure 2.7. Equivalent digital interpretations of a Schlumberger
sounding curve [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Figure 2.8. Three-layer master curves in a log-log graph of the
INGESO atlas [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 2.9. Principle of induced polarization (IP) [53] . . . . . 18
Figure 2.10. Pattern of different Sp anomalies over a hazardous
waste site [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 2.11. Principle of electromagnetic mapping [53] . . . . . 21
Figure 2.12. Nomogram relations of specific resistivity to depth
of penetration and frequency [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Figure 2.13. Typical EM curves over steep dipping, conducting
sheets like faults or fracture zones with different dip [53] 23
Figure 2.14a. Influence of topography on VLF surveys.
Changing of apparent resistivity rs and phase difference E/H [53] 26
Figure 2.14b. Changing ofVLF stations alters topographical
effects [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
154 7 List and origin of Figures and Tables
Figure 2.15. System wave forms employed by the TDEM method [27] 27
Figure 2.16. Diagram of an EM helicopter survey (Dighem system)
with maximum coupling and a coil separation of 8 m [53] . 28
Figure 2.17. Principle of ground radar measurements [53] 30
Figure 2.18. Principle of seismic refraction [53] 33
Figure 2.19. Pattern of seismic refraction [23] . 34
Figure 2.20. Principle of air-acoustic seismics. (Tekoni Innovations) [53] 36
Figure 2.21. Principle of seismic reflection [53] 37
Figure 2.22. Pattern of seismic reflection [23] . 38
Figure 2.23. Principle of gravity measurements [53] . 40
Figure 2.24. Comparison of different logs with the lithology
of cores [36] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Figure 2.25. Probes for geophysical well logging [36] . . . . 45
Figure 2.26. Distribution of resistivities around a borehole [36] . 46
Figure 2.27. ES (resistivity) logs run in a borehole and in a probe
hole [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Figure 2.28. 238U decay series [15] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Figure 2.29. Tritium CH) and radiocarbon C4 C) in C0 2 of European
precipitation from 1950 to 1985 [20] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Figure 2.30. (J_180 content and mean yearly temperature
in GroningeniHolland [20] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Figure 3.1. 3D picture of the magnetic total intensity of a hazardous waste

deposit containing domestic and industrial waste [47] . . . . . . . . . 58
Figure 3.2. 3D picture of vertical gradient of magnetic total intensity
(hazardous waste deposit Fig. 3.1) [47] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Figure 3.3. Magnetic map of old gasworks within built-up area [53]. 59
Figure 3.4. Anomalies of magnetic total intensity over former landfill,
now used as tennis club [21] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Figure 3.5. Magnetic total intensity over four steel barrels, buried upright
at different depths [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Figure 3.6. Contours of total magnetic intensity of buried air-raid shelter
with reinforced concrete roof and walls [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Figure 3.7. 3D picture of magnetic total intensity, air-raid shelter
Fig. 3.6 [21] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7.1 List of Figures 155
Figure 3.8. a) Contours of magnetic total intensity at 1 m height,

b) Contours continued at 6 m upward, landfill Indiana, USA [39] 63
Figure 3.9. Contours of magnetic total intensity by helicopter survey,
piled-up domestic waste dump, Hannover, Germany [08] . . . . . . . . 64
Figure 3.10. Contours of apparent specific resisitivity p., domestic waste
dump in the alpine foreland [07] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 66
Figure 3.11. Contours of apparent specific resistivity p.,
industrial/domestic waste dump [47] . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Figure 3.12. Contours of resistivity (Schlumberger soundings)
20-m depth, Panoche Fan, California [03] . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Figure 3.13. Geoelectric soundings (Schlumberger array) of hazardous
waste site on Rhine island [47] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Figure 3.14. Combined investigation of contaminated ground water
by geomagnetic measurements and YES [54] . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Figure 3.15. Geology and geolectrical profile of the Rhine valley from
the extinct volcano Kaiserstuhl to Strassbourg [53] . . . . . . . . . . .. 72
Figure 3.16. YES curves 09 and 08 in North of Fig. 3.15, near
Strassbourg [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Figure 3.17. YES curve 04 in South of Fig. 3.15, near Kaiserstuhl [53] . 73
Figure 3.18. Geoelectric profile north of Cross-Florida Barge Canal.
Well data are included, arrows mark YES [24] . . . . . . . . . 74
Figure 3.19. Geoelectric profile of Cross-Florida Barge Canal,
perpendicular to Fig. 3.18 [24]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Figure 3.20. Resistivity profile of chemical disposal ditches, northern
Utah, dipole-dipole array [40] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Figure 3.21. IP pseudosection of hazardous waste site [53] . . . . . . 77
Figure 3.22. Chargeability contours in m VN of a domestic waste site
in the alpine foreland [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Figure 3.23. IP pseudosection of domestic waste site Fig. 3.22 [53] . 79
Figure 3.24. Sp contours oflandfill, next to built-up area [53] 80
Figure 3.25. Sp cross section of ground water down-wash,
domestic dump, Bavaria [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Figure 3.26. Self-potential profiles across domestic waste dump,
feeding ground water to area of Fig. 3.25 [53] . . . . . . . . . . 81
Figure 3.27. EM cross section: In- and outphases of industrial waste
site, contaminated by organics and heavy metal [53] . . . . . . . . . 82
Figure 3.28. Contours of conductivity (mS/m) from electromagnetic

mapping of hazardous mixed waste dump [47] . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Figure 3.29. EM contours (inphase, 7040 Hz) of abandoned industrial
site. Foundations are exactly presented [47] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Figure 3.30. EM contours (outphase, 7040 Hz) of abandoned industrial
site, Fig. 3.29. Foundations are less prominent [47] . . . . . . . . . . .. 84
Figure 3.31. EM contours (inphase, 3500 Hz) of buried air-raid shelter
with reinforced concrete roof and walls (Fig. 3.6) [53] . . . . . . . . . 86
Figure 3.32. 3D presentation of Fig. 3.3l. Three peaks disclose three
metal containers, filled with toxic liquids [53]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Figure 3.33. Contours of EM conductivity data at a hazardous waste site
with two plumes and monitor wells (triangles) [16] . . . . . . . . . . . .. 87
Figure 3.34. 3D picture of EM data, Fig. 3.33. Low-conductivity plumes
differ clearly from geological noise [16] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Figure 3.35. Contours of equal conductivity of plume adjacent to the
Kesterson Reservoir, Merced County, California [22]. . . . . . . . . . 88
Figure 3.36. Evaluation of EM measurements at Kesterson Reservoir
(Fig. 3.35) [22] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Figure 3.37a, b. Magnetic and EM contours of scattered hazardous
waste [45] .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Figure 3.38. List of anomaly sources of Fig. 3.37 [45] . . . . . . . . 91
Figure 3.39. Cross section of domestic disposal site, discharging seepage
into an aquifer near Perth, Australia [10] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 92
Figure 3.40. Resisitivity contours by TEM soundings of plume in sandy
aquifer, next to landfill (Fig. 3.39) [10] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Figure 3.41. 3D plot aquifer resistivity near waste site of Figs. 3.39
and 3.40 [10] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Figure 3.42. TDEM survey of brine pollution by injection wells, Oklahoma
USA [19] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Figure 3.43. Ground radar investigation of abandoned gasworks [53] . .. 95
Figure 3.44 a, b. Alteration of radargrams by immersion of 770 L volatile
hydrocarbons into sand (frequency 200 MHz) [53] . . . . . 96
Figure 3.45. Radargram of a petroleum pipeline spill [35]. . 97
Figure 3.46. Ground radar cross section of a shallow tunnel.
(frequency 80 MHz) [47] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
7.1 List of Figures 157
Figure 3.47. Contours of approx. specific resistivity by EM (DIGHEM)

helicopter survey of the domestic waste dump of Hannover,
Germany [08] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Figure 3.48. EM helicopter survey of saline seepages from the river
Weser, Bremen, Germany [53]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Figure 3.49 a, b. Results of seismic refraction at a hazardous waste site [47]. 99
Figure 3.50 a, b. Cross sections of seismic refraction at a hazardous waste
dump with hydrocarbon contamination [53]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Figure 3.51. Locating the border of buried waste by air-acoustic
seismics [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Figure 3.52. Detection of a buried sewage canal by air-acoustic
seismics [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Figure 3.53 a, b. Seismic reflection structures below a hazardous waste
site [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Figure 3.54. Combination of seismic refraction and reflection at an
industrial hazardous waste site [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Figure 3.55. Gravity survey of a hazardous waste deposit [53] . 106
Figure 3.56. Boguer gravity contour map ofIndiana landfill [38] 107
Figure 3.57. Residual gravity contour map of Indiana landfill [38] 107
Figure 3.58. Forward-modelled gravity data of Fig. 3.56 [38] 108
Figure 3.59. Inversion of gravity data of Fig. 3.56 [38] . . . 108
Figure 3.60. Geothermal contours of a buried hazardous waste deposit
used by a tennis club [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Figure 3.61. Radiometric contours of the domestic waste dump of
Hannover, Germany [08]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Figure 3.62. Radiation survey of an uranium dump [53] . . . . . . 111
Figure 3.63. a-radiation in the ground air, equivalent to the content
of radon gas [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. 111
Figure 3.64. Contours of radiation over vitro tailings calculated from
airborne radiometric data [34] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . 112
Figure 3.65. Airborne gamma radiation map after the Chernobyl fallout
over southern Sweden [34] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Figure 3.66. Contours of an aquifer base in the alpine foreland by YES.
A contaminated plume follows an underground channel [7] . . . . . . . 115
Figure 3.67 a, b. Contours of the apparent specific resistivity at different

depths, derived from 96 YES [07] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 116
Figure 3.68. Cross section of 10 FEM soundings at proposed new waste
site [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Figure 3.69. Geological model by seismic refraction [53] . 118
Figure 3.70. Cross section of seismic reflection in tertiary
strata [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Figure 3.71. Offset seismic reflection and geologic cross section
at a proposed hazardous waste facility in South Ontario [43] . . . 120
Figure 3.72. Cross section of magnetic total intensity ~T. The seepage
path of a basalt dyke penetrates a clay barrier [53] . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Figure 3.73. EM cross section ofa planned waste site. Minima carry
capital letters and connect up to long linears (Fig. 3.74) [53] . . . 122
Figure 3.74. EM-contours and linears (black beams), constructed
from EM cross sections (Fig. 3.73) [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Figure 3.75. Comparison ofVLF and other electromagnetic and electric
data over granite and volcano sedimentary rocks in Burkina Faso,
Africa [31] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 124
Figure 3.76. Geophysical salinometer logs, Lakeview, Ontario, Canada [29]. 126
Figure 3.77. 13 Geopbysicallogs from a borehole in gneisses in Bavaria,
Germany [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Figure 3.78. Radon contours in the ground air, measured as a-counts
per minute near a hazardous deposit of chemical waste [53] . . . . . . 128
Figure 3.79. Locating a thin reflecting clay horizon by EMR in a salt
dome from two horizontal boreholes and from an adit [53] . . . . . . 128
Figure 3.80. Underground radargram measured in a salt dome to be
developed as nuclear waste repository [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Figure 4.1. Comparison of costs per meter of borehole to expenditures

for the application of geophysical methods [53]. . . . . . . . . . .. . 134
Figure 5.1a, b. Alteration oftbe electric resistivity ofa bottom clay

barrier after perforation of the plastic liner [53] . . . . . . . . . . . 148
Figure 5.2. Principle of long-term leak monitoring by permanent
electrodes [53] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
7.2 List of Tables 159
7.2 List of Tables

Table 1.1. Assessment of Geophysical Results 3
Table 1.2. Presentation of Geophysical Results 4
Table 2.1. Specific Resistivities. 12

Table 2.2. VLF Stations. . . . . 24
Table 2.3. Dielectric Constants, Electric Conductivity, Electric Velocity
and Attenuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Table 2.4. Logging Methods and Parameters . 44
Table 2.5. Units of Radiometric Doses . . . . 53
Table 2.6. Threshold Values of Radiation Doses for Human Organs. 53
Table 4.1. Estimated Costs for One Geophysical Field Day (1993) 131
Table 4.2. Estimated Costs of Line Meter and Station . . . . . . . 132
Table 4.3. Comparison of Environmental Investigation Costs With and
Without Geophysics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Table 4.4. Geophysical Measurements for the Cost of One Borehole
Meter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Table 4.5. Suitable Point Separations . . . . . . . . . . 135
Table 5.1. Applications of Environmental Geophysics. 138

Table 5.2. Objectives of Environmental Geophysics 139
Table 5.3. Choice of Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Table 5.4. Checklist Preparation of Geophysical Surveys 145
Table 5.5. Checklist for Evaluation and Interpretation . 145
Table 5.6. Checklist Follow-up Work . . . . . . . 145
Table 5.7. Combinations of Geophysical Methods 147
Table 6.1. Information Recommended for Bidders . 151

Table 6.2. Compilation of Tenders and Placement . 151
8 References
1. Barker, R. D., 1990: Investigation of ground water salinity by geophysical methods. - In

Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 II,
201-213; Tulsa.
2. Berktold, A.; Schleicher, F.; Strobel, P.; Mathes, P.; Durlesser, H. P., 1992: Moglichkeiten
und Grenzen des VLF-R Verfahrens im IngenieurlUmweltbereich. - Geophys. Mitt. 1,
65-86, ISSN 0931-2145; Munich.
3. Bisdorf, R. 1., 1990: Geoelectrical studies of the Panoche fan area of the San Joaquin Val-
ley, California. - USGS Circ. 1033-133-139; Denver.
4. Boom-Van Den, G. & Ort, Matthias, 1991: Anwendung eines gasgeochemischen Recon-
naissance Verfahrens zur Bestimmung von Helium und Radon in der Bodenluft. - Report
BGR-Archiv Nr. 108203, 1-23; Hannover.
5. Bredewout,1.w., 1990: Detection of iron objects with magnetic and EM methods. - 52
EAEG Meeting; Copenhagen.
6. Brost, E., Ellwanger, D., 1991: Ergebnisse neuerer geoelektrischer und stratigraphischer
Untersuchungen im Gebiet zwischen Kaiserstuhl und Keh!. - Geo!. Jb. E 48, 71 - 81, ISSN
0341-6410; Hannover.
7. Buchholz, R.: Unpublished reports, figures and drawings; Heiligenberg.
8. Bundesanstalt fUr Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe (Hrsg.), 1987: Die Erde. - Erfor-
schung zum Nutzen der Menschen. Hannover.
9. Bundesminister fUr Forschung und Technologie (Hrsg)., 1992: Verbundvorhaben "Metho-
den zur Erkundung und Beschreibung des Untergrundes von Deponien und Altlasten". -
BGR-ArchivNr.: 109-492; Hannover.
10. Buseli, C., Barber, C., Davies G. B. & Salama R. B.,1990: Detection of ground water con-
tamination near waste disposal sites with transient electromagnetic and electrical methods.
- In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 II,
27-41; Tulsa.
I 1. Butler, D. K. & Llopis, 1. L., 1990: Assessment of anomalous seepage conditions. - In Ward,
Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 II, 153-175.
12. Daniels, 1. L. & Keys, W. S., 1990: Geophysical well logging for evaluating hazardous
waste sites. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN
1-56080-003 1,263-287; Tulsa.
13. Darilek, G. T. & Laine, D., 1989: Understanding electrical leak loacation surveys of geo-
membrane liners and avoiding specification pitfalls. - Proc. 10th Nat. Conf. Superfund,
56-67; Silver Spring.
14. Duerbaum, H.-J.; Reichert, C.; Bram, K., 1990: Integrated Seismics Oberpfalz 1989. -
KTB-Report, 90-96b; Hannover.
15. Duval, 1. S. & Tanner, A. B., 1990: Some basic facts about radioactive radon. - USGS Cire.
1033,163-165; Denver.
16. Environmental Protection Agency: Geophysical techniques for sensing buried wastes and
waste migration. - EPAlEMSL, EPAX 8706-0050; Las Vegas.
17. Foerstner, u., 1990: Umweltschutztechnik. - 1-462, Springer, ISBN 3-540-52154-2;
Berlin.
162 8 References
18. Fraser, D., 1978: Resistivity mapping with an airborne multi-coil electromagnetic system.
- Geophysics 43 144 - 172.
19. Frischknecht, EC., 1990: Application of geophysical methods to the study of pollution
associated with abandones and injection wells. - USGS Proc. Circ. 1033 73 - 79; Denver.
20. Geyh, M. A., 1988: Methoden der Umweltisotope - In Schneider, H. (Hrsg.) Die Wasser-
erschlieBung, 339-354; Essen.
21. Geophysik Consulting GmbH: - Unpublished reports, figures and drawings; Kie!.
22. Goldsten, N. E. & Benson, S. M., 1990: Saline ground water plume mapping with electro-
magnetics. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-
56080-001-1 II, 17-27; Tulsa.
23. Griineberg, S., 1991: Unpublished drawings; Hannover.
24. Hagemeyer, R. T. & Steward, M., 1990: Resistivity investigations of salt-water intrusions
near a major sealevel canal. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics
(Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 11,67 -77; Tulsa.
25. Hasbrouck, W P., 1990: Initial shallow seismic tests in the Panoche fan area, Fresno Coun-
ty, California. - USGS Cire. 1033 139-143; Denver.
26. Hering, E., Schulz, W, 1987: Kemkraftwerke, Radioaktivitiit und Strahlenwirkung. - VOl-
Verlag 1987, ISBN 3-18-400793-6; Dusseldorf.
27. Hoekstra, P. & Blohm, M. W, 1990: Case histories of timedomain electromagnetic sound-
ings in environmental geophysics. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics
(Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 II, 1-17; Tulsa.
28. Homilius, J.; Flathe, H., 1988: Geoelektrik in der WassererschlieBung. In: SCHNEIDER,
H. (Hrsg.): Die WassererschlieBung, 3. Aufl. Vulkan; Essen.
29. Howard, K. W E,1990: The role of well logging in contaminated transport studies. - In
Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 II,
289-301; Tulsa.
30. Lankston, R. W, 1990: High-resolution refraction seismic data acquisition and interpreta-
tion. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-003
1,45-75; Tulsa.
31. McNeill, J. D., 1990: Use of electromagentic methods for ground water studies. - In Ward,
Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Pub!.), ISBN 1-56080-003 I, 191-219;
Tulsa.
32. Militzer, H.; Weber, E (Hrsg.), 1985: Angewandte Geophysik. - Springer; Wien, New York.
33. Mundry, E. & Homilius, J., 1979: Three-layer model curves for geoelectrical resistivity
measurements - Scblumberger array. - Schweizerbart; Stuttgart.
34. Nielson, D. L., Linpei, C. & Ward, S. H., 1990: Gamma-ray spectrometry and radon eman-
ometry in environmental geophysics - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophy-
sics (Pub!.), ISBN 1-56080-003 1,219-250; Tulsa.
35. Olhoeft, G. R., 1986: Direct detection of hydrocarbon and organic chemicals with ground-
penetrating radar and complex resistivity. - Proc. NWWAIAPI Conf. & Nat!. Water Well
Ass. 284-305; Houston.
36. Repsold, H., 1989: Well Logging in Ground water Development. - Int. Ass. Hydrogeo!. 9,
1-136: ISSN 0936-3912; Hannover.
37. Richardson, WK., Kirkpatrick, G.L. & Cline, S.P., 1989: Integration of borehole geo-
physics and aquifer testing to define a fractured bedrock hydrogeological system. - Proc.
10th Nat. Conf. Superfund, 277 - 282; Silver Spring.
38. Roberts, R. L., Hinze, W J. & Lep, D. I., 1990 (I): Application of the gravity method to the
investigation of a landfill in glaciated midcontinent USA. - In Ward, Geotechnical and
Environmental Geophysics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 11,253-261; Tulsa.
39. Roberts, R. L., Hinze, W J. & Lep, D. I., 1990 (2): Data enhancement procedures on magne-
tic data from landfill investigations. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophy-
sics (Pub!'), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 11,261-267; Tulsa.
8 References 163
40. Ross, H. P., Mackelprang, C. E. & Wright T, P. M., 1990: Dipole-dipole electrical resistivi-
ty surveys at waste disposal study sites. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geo-
physics (Publ.), ISBN 1-56080-001-1 II, 145 -153; Tulsa.
41. Rueter, H.; Elsen, R., 1989: Geophysikalische Methoden bei der Altlastenerkundung.-
Thome'-Kozmiensky, K. J. (Hrsg.) 3, 89-115; Berlin.
42. Sengpiel, K. P., 1983: Resistivity/depth mapping with airborne electromagnetic survey
data. Geophysics 48 181 -196.
43. Slaine, D.D., Pehme, P.E., Hunter, J.A., Pullan, S.E. & Greenhouse, J.P., 1990: Mapping
overburden stratigraphy at a proposed hazardous waste facility using shallow seismic
reflection methods. - In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Publ.), ISBN
1-56080-001-1 11,273-280; Tulsa.
44. Steeples, D. W & Miller, R. D., 1990: Seismic reflection methods applied to engineering,
environmental and ground water problems.- In Ward, Geotechnical and Environmental
Geophysics (Publ.), ISBN 1-56080-003 I, 1- 31; Tulsa.
45. Struttmann, T. P. E. & Anderson, T., 1989: A comparison of shallow electromagnetic
(EM31) and proton magnetometer surface geophysical techniques to effectively delineate
pre-RCRA buried wastes.- Proc. 10th Nat. Conf. Superfund, 27 - 35; Silver Spring.
46. Thierbach, R. & Mayerhofer, H., 1978: Elektromagnetische Reflexionsmessungen in Salz-
lagerstiitten.- Fifth international symposium on salt, 393 -403; Hamburg.
47. Thor Geophysikalische Prospektion GmbH: Unpublished reports, drawings and figures;
Kiel.
48. Van Zijl, J. S. v.; K6stlin, E.O., 1985: The electromagnetic method.- Field man. f. techni-
cians. S. A Geophys. Ass; Joahnnisburg.
49. Vogelsang, D., 1988: Bohrlochmessungen in Bohrungen zur Vorerkundung der KTB-Loka-
tionen Oberpfalz und Schwarzwald,Geol. Jb. E 41 : 5 - 19; Hannover.
50. Vogelsang, D. & Stettner, G., 1988: Bohrungen zur Vorerkundung der KTB-Tiefbohrloka-
tion Oberpfalz - Petrographie und Bohrlochgeophysik.- Geol. Jb. E 41: 27 -42; Hannover.
51. Vogelsang, D.; Schimer, W; Strassburger, A., 1990: Materialien zur Altlastenbearbeitung.-
Leitl.Geophysik an Altlasten LFU, 2, 1-137; Karlsruhe.
52. Vogelsang, D., 1991: Geophysik an Altlasten, Leitfaden flir Ingenieure, Naturwissen-
schaftler und Juristen. - Springer 1-133; ISBN 3-540-53948-4; Berlin, Heidelberg.
53. Vogelsang, D., 1993: Geophysik an Altlasten, Leitfaden flir Ingenieure, Naturwissen-
schaftler und Juristen. - Springer, 2nd enlarged Edition, 1-179, ISBN 3-540-56659-7;
Berlin, Heidelberg.
54. Wallach, G., 1991: Erkundungsmethodische Grundlagen der Risikobewertung von Altlast-
verdachtsfliichen. - Radex-Rdsch 3/4, 583 - 597; Leoben.
55. Ward S. H., 1990: Resistivity and induced polarization methods.- In Ward, Geotechnical
and Environmental Geophysics (Publ.), ISBN 1-56080-003 1,147 -191; Tulsa.
9 Index
Legend:
120 = page number
f = > 1 word per page
( ) = adjective or synonym
--+ = found under
abandoned hazardous sites 57 - rustproof- 149

aeroplane 8f, 27, 53 - - speed 43, 49
air - towing- 8
- acoustic seismics 35f, 36 Fig. 2.20, 101f, caliper 49f
102 - log 49
- impedance 101 Fig. 3.51, 102 Fig. 3.52 - tool 49
air-raid shelter 61 f, 62 Figs. 3.6/3.7, 77, 86 car
Fig. 3.31, 87f - part 140
americium-beryllium (radionuclide) 43 - scrap 138
ammonia case histories 57
- content 80 ceramic 94
- gas 16 chargeability 17f, 18, 19f, 77f, 78f,
AMT(audiomagnetotellurics) 25 78 Fig. 3.21, 79f, 80 Fig. 3.22, 323,
aquiclude 35, 114, 115, 120, 143 125
aquifer 13,27,30 Table 2.3, 31, 68, 70, 74f, choice of methods 141
92 Fig. 3.39, 3.40, 93 Fig. 3.41, 97f, 103, clay 19,24,29,30 Table 2.3, 43, 49, 50,
114f, 115fFig. 3.66, 143, 149 51f, 66, 68, 77f, 10If, 103f, 109, 110,
auxiliary point method 14 114,123,140,148
- barrier 82, 110, 119 Fig. 3.72, 148, 149
barrel 11 Table 2.1, 60f, 61 Fig. 3.5, 138 Fig. 5.1
- steel- 60f, 61 Fig. 3.5 - bed 110
- metal- 61, 138 - content 29,43 Table 2.4, 46, 48, 95f
barrier - horizon 130
- geological- 66.115,116 Fig. 3.67, 137f - impermeable- 116, 118
- clay- 82, 110, 119f, 148, 148 Fig. 5.1, 149 - - lens 130
basalt 119f - - overburden 95
- dyke 119 Fig. 3.72 - - percentage 48
briefing f. geoph. surveys 137 - - rock 102
biosphere 57 - - seal 110
boguer correction 105 f + Fig. 3.55/3.56 - - sediment 43, 82
- anomalies 105 - - shield 51
- contours 105 - - silt 68
bone marrow 52 Table 2.7 - weathered- 117, 118 Fig. 3.68
bone surface 52 Table 2.7 conductivity (electric) 16, 17,24,28, 29f,
brine 93f 30 Table 2.3, 42 Fig. 2.24, 47f, 82,
- plume 27 83 Fig. 3.28, 85f, 87 Fig. 3.33, 3.34, 88f,
- pollution 93f, 94 Fig. 3.42 88 Fig. 3.35,90 Fig. 3.37
- apparent- 43 f
cable 3,13,22,29,31,138,140,144 - - contours 89
Table 5.4 - hydraulic- 100
- connecting- 21, 121 - rock- 47f
- - detector 4,13,22,27,31,138 conductor 9f, 9 Fig. 2.3, 28f, 125
- -loop31 cooperation 2 f, 122 f
166 9 Index
cost (of geophysics) I, 17,28,39,40,65, - seismic- 35, 103

85,89,103,105,114,116,119, 131f, l31 --step 3
Table 4.1, l32 Table 4.2, l32f, l33, - TEM 90
Table 4.3, l34, 141 f, 143, 151 Table 6.2, - YES- 115
152 DC sounding--tgeoelectric sounding
- benefit analysis l32f, 143 decay
- bore- l31 Table 4.1, l33 Table 4.4 - gas 16
- - comparison l34 Fig. 4.1, l33 Table 4.4 - coefficient (transient) 17, 19
- - decrease l32 - current (transient) 27
- - evaluation 152 - curve (IP) 17,18
- - geophysical surveys l31 - microorganic- 41
- investigation- l33 Table 4.3 - - series of nuclides 43
- - reduction 145 - - - (thorium) 51,52
- - saving l38 - - - (uranium) 52 Fig. 2.28, 56
- - structure l31 - - - (radon) 110
- transport- l31 - - time 17f
crack 127 - - voltage 17
crevice 121 decay-cefficient 14
CSAMT 25 density 31,34, 39f, 103,
current 9f, 10, l3f, 14, 17f, 25f, 47 - anomaly 39
- altemating--tAC- 9 - contrast 39, 105f, 106f
- dangerous- 18 - heat flow- 41
- - decay27 - log 43,44
- direct--tDC- 9f, l3, 17,74, 149f depth penetration 24, 65, 95, 103, 122, 125
- - direction 17 140, 146, 151
- eddy- 20, 47 depth sounding 25, 30
- - electrode 9,11, l3f, 14, 17, 18f,46, development 146
47, 140 dielectric
--flow 9 - constant 29f, 30 Table 2.3, 94, 125, l30,
- primary- 17f,27 146
cycle skip 48 - - permittivity 95
dipole
data I, 2f, 3f, 8f, 9,10,11,12,14,39,49, - dipole (array) 11, l3f, 17f, 18f,
50,57,67,74 Fig. 3.18, 75, 88, 144f, 145 78 Fig. 3.20, 78 Fig. 3.21,78 Fig. 3.22
Table 5.5, 151, 152 - length (width) 78 Fig. 3.22
- borehole 3,43,49,118,125,143,156 - receiver 90
- - carrier 3 discontinuity 29
- - bank 144 diviner 31 f
- digital- 140, 144 divining rod 31 f
- EM- 82f, 83, 85, 87 Fig. 3.33, Fig. 3.34,
123 Fig. 3.74,124 Fig. 3.75 electrode 9, l3f, 46, 47f, 81, 121, 140
- evaluated(ion) 19,39 - array 11,47,48
- field- 10,18,19,22,25,31,39,41, l31, - borehole- 11,47,48
151 - - configuration l3
- gravity- 105f, 108 Fig. 3.58, 3.59 - current- 9,11, l3f, 14, 17, 18,20,47,48
- historical- 144 - distance 46f, 65, 67f, 71
- magnetic.- 61,88,143 - length 47
- near surface- 50 - mono- 46
- questionable- 145 - non polarizable 13
- radar- 30,94, 140f - permanent- 149 Fig. 5.2
- radiometric- 112 Fig. 3.64 - potential- 10, 11, 12, l3, 17, 18, 19f, 81,
- refractor- 34 l31 Table 4.1,140
- registered- 32 - secondary- 19
- resistivity- 35 - selfpotential- 121, l31
9 Index 167
- - separation 57,70,71 - groundwater- 19,90 Fig. 3.39, 106f, 115,

- single point- 46 141
- - spacing 47, 71, 75 - heat- 41,90 Fig. 3.39
- steel- 149f - in- 48,125,126 Fig. 3.76
- VES- 115 Fig. 3.66 - leachate- 139, 141
electromagnetic - - meter49f
- cable detector 4 - out- 79
- data 124 Fig. 3.75 - - potential 102, 140
- field 7f, 51,121 fluid 148f
- instruments 85 - borehole- 44 Table 2.4, 48 f, 49
- low frequency- 94 - - flow 49
- - mapping 20,81,83 Fig. 3.28,119,123, - organic- 137, 146
143, 146f - pore- 48f
- measurements 3,88, 138, 140 - rock- 19
- methods 20-31,81-98 - salinity 47,77
- - reflection (EMR) 127 focussed electric log 47
- - section 121 foerster sonde
- - sounding 90, 93, 117 follow-up activities 149
- - survey 88, 100 fractal dimension 149
- - wave 47 fracture(d) 48,50
engineer 1, 2f, 3, 143 - hardrock- 49
error 119,121 - - limestone 10,321
- margin 2, 152 - - path 43, 125
- rate 31 - - zone 23 Fig. 2.13, 24f,
evaluation 144, 152 54,103,121, 125f, 126
evaporation 41,55 f, 109 fundamentals 1
execution of investigations 141
exotherm 48 gamma 6
experience 143 - detector 43
- radiation 42,43,51,110,113 Fig. 3.65,
fault 23 Fig. 2.13, 24f, 77, 103 f, 104 Fig. 3, 114, 125
53,117 Fig. 3.68,119, 12lf, 122, 123, - radioactivity 110
125 - ray 42 Fig. 2.24, 51,114
- extension 71 - ray log 43, 50
- permeable- 143 - ray source 43
- - plane 14, 121 f, 123 Geiger-Muller counter 52
- tectonic- 103 geoelectric(s) 24,39,71, 140, 141, 148
- - zone 103,114 - array 11
FEM ~multifrequency electromagnetic - DC-methods 9-20,65-81
sounding - field 10, 19,65,77
fence 140 - inversion 152
- wire- 82 - mapping 11,12, 13f, 65f, 66, 67,131
- wire-net 60 Table 4.1 132 Table 4.2, 133 Table 4.3, 4.4,
fermentation 109 135 Table 4.5 143, 146
ferrimagmnetic 5,57 - measurement 4,140,143
ferromagnetic 7 - method 9.36,65,85 f, 102, 140, 143
field work 52 - profile 75 Fig. 3.19
fissure(d) 47,50, 118, 127, 143 - section 14,67,68,71
- filled- 130 - signal 118
- - basalt-dike 119 - sounding(VES) 11 Fig. 2.5, 13, 14, 16,
- - sandstone 118 67,69 Fig. 3.13, 73 Fig. 3.17126,131
- - zone 54,114,121 Table 4.1,132 Table 4.2,133 Table 4.3,
flow 39,44 Table 2.4, 70, 115, 137 4.4,135 Table 4.5, 140f, 143f
- current- 9 Fig. 2.3 - structure 9
168 9 Index
- survey 9,10 Fig. 2.4, 11, 116 - station 40, 89

- tracer 75 - survey 39, 105, 106 Fig. 3.55
geohydrology ~ hydrogeology grid 2.4, 8f, 19,28,40,41,53,57,60,61,
geology(ical) 2f, 14, 15 Fig. 2.7, 71 f, 72 79, 80, 88, 115, 133 Table 4.3, 143 f, 145 f,
Fig. 3.15, 85,119,144, 145 Table 5.5,151 149,151 Table 6.2.
Table 6.1 - fine meshed (dense)- 2,19,40,55,61,85,
- background 143 132, 141, 143, 144, 149
- barrier 66, 110, 115, 116 Fig. 3.67, - flying- 8,
137f ground radar ~ radar
- bed 35,36 groundwater 1,12 Table 2.1,19,41,49,51,
- complex 53 55, 56f, 57, 66, 85, 125
- condition 100 - circulation 56
- data 144 - contamination 70, 85f
- feature 77, 114 - downwash 80,81 Fig .. 3.25
- interpretation 75,118, 152 - flow (movement) 19,48, 115
- model 118 Fig. 3.69 - native- 88
- noise 87 Fig. 3.34 - - permeability 125
- section 29,120 Fig. 3.71 - saline- 17,77, 85f, 96, 125
- structure 10,14,31,32,36,37,82 - - system 127
- survey 144
geomagnetic(s) ~ magnetics hard rock 48, 49f, 61, 101 f, 114, 119, 125 f,
geophone 31-34,35,36,102 Fig. 3.52, 126, 143f
103,116,117,118 heat production 109
- separation ~-interval ~ helicopter 8,27,
- spacing 33,101,102,103,118,135 - electromagnetics 28 Fig. 2.16, 96f, 98
Table 4.5 Fig. 3.47, Fig. 3.48
georadar ~ radar - magnetics 64 Fig. 3.9,
geothermy(mal) 40,41,137,141 - radiometrics 53, 110, 113
- anomaly 41 holocene 55
- contours 109 Fig. 3.60 horizontal stratification 114 -119
- field 44 Table 2.4 hydrogeology ~ geohydrology 2
- gradient 48
- indicator 109 inclination (magnetic field) 6f,
- investigation 106 44 Table 2.4
- survey 51 induced polarization (IP) 16, 17, 18 Fig. 2.9,
- work 51 77 f, 125, 131 Table 4.1, 132 Table 4.2,
glacial till 133 133 Table 4.3,135 Table 4.5, 143, 146,
glacial drift 13 3 148
gonad 53 Table 2.6 - boundary layer- 16
gravel 12 Table 2.1,13, 13,33,51,68,79, - metallic- 16
115 industrial
- aquifer 115 - area 80, 95, 161
- bed 71,96, 115f - building 60, 94
gravity 39f, 40, Fig. 2.23, 105 f, 138, - equipment 114
141 f - mud (sludge) 6 Table 2.1, 57
- anomaly 40, 105 - noise 17,19,134
- contours 105 f - refuse 134
- correction ~ free air ~ - safety 57, 137
- Boguer- 105, 107 Fig. 3.56 - site 30,58,82 Fig. 3.27, 84 Fig. 3.29,
- - forward modelling 108 Fig. 3.58 3.30, 85f,
- - data 105 - waste (dump) 58,61,65,67 Fig. 3.11, 82
- - inversion 108 Fig. 3.59 Fig. 3.27, 83
- - investigations 40f injection well 93
- residual- 105, 107 Fig. 3.57 interdisciplinary 143
9 Index 169
Interpretation 1, 2f, 3, 8,15 Fig. 2.6,16 - micro(ML)- 46

Fig. 2.7, 19f, 29, 31,41,48,49,60,79,81, - monoelectrode(PR)- 46
117 Fig. 3.68,119, 122f, 131, 143f, 144f, - salinometer(SAL)- 47
145 Table 5.5, 148, 152, 151 Table 6.2 - selfpotential(SP)- 47
- digital- 39 - sonic velocity(SV)- 48
- electromagnetic- 81 - temperature(T)- 48
- - error (false-) 39, 105, 121, 141 log(ging) 41-49, 42 Fig. 2.24, 2.27, 125f,
- geologic- 75, 118 126,137
- gravity- 105 - methods 41-50
- over- 94, 140
- radar- 94 magnetics 8,90 Fig. 3.37, 96, 132
- threedimensional- 14 Table 4.3, 4.4,138,140,141,146
- seismic- 104 Fig. 3.53 - airborne- 63, 65
joints 47 - - anomaly 5,6 Fig. 2.1, 7, 8, 58f, 61, 62
ionization 52, 53 Fig. 3.6, 3, 7, 63 Fig. 3.8, 64 Fig. 3.9
isotope 54 f, 55 14C_ 56 - - background 63
- fractioning 55 - - body 8
- hydrogen- 54 - - contours 96,98 Fig. 3.47
- - hydrology 54, 56 - - data 61,88
- oxigen- 54, 55 - - deposit 8
- potassium- 43, 110 - - disk 36
- radon- 53 - - disturbance 60
- stable- 55 - - diurnal variation 8
- - 238U 51 - - dump 5
- - earth field 5, 6
karst(ic) 88, 121 - - field 5-7, 26 Fig. 214a, 27, 60, 61, 64,
kinetic ~ flow potential 47 119
landfill 5, 57f, 60 Fig. 34, 61 f, 63 Fig. 3.8, - - field balance 6
64f, 79f, 80 Fig. 3.24, 92 Fig. 3.40, 105 f, - - helicopter survey 96
107 Fig. 3.57, 84, 132f, 137f, 138, 140, - - indication 60
141 f, 146, 148, 149 - - installation 8
laterolog 47 - - interpretation 60
leachate 24,35,41,46,47,65,79,82,90, - - investigation 60
99, 114, 119, 137f, 141, 143, 149f - - landfill 5
- plume 13, 56 - - mapping 59 Fig. 3.3
limestone 12 Table 2.1,13,29 Table 2.3,56, - - material 61
103f, 104f, 117fFig. 3.68 - - measurement 7, 8
- stratified- 117 - - methods 5-9,57-65
linear(s) 24,49,121 f, 122f, Fig. 3.73,123 - - minimum 61
Fig. 3.74 - - noise 58
lithology 35, 42 Fig. 2.24, 44 Table 2.4, 48 - non- 8
- facies 105 - - object 8
loam 103, 117 Fig. 3.68 119, 123 - - property
log - - section 7 Fig. 2.2
- caliper(CAL)- 49 - - source 7
- density(D)- 43 - - structure
- deviation(DV)- 49 - - survey 144
- electric(EL)- 46 - - susceptibility 5
- focussed electric(FEL)- 47 - - tape 36
- flowmeter(FLOW)- 49 - - target 60
- gamma ray(GR)- 43 - - torsion balance
- induction(IEL)- 47 - - total intensity 5,6, 57f, 58 Fig. 3.1, 60
- latero(LL)- 47 - - variations 61
- microlatero(MLL)- 46 - - waste 119
170 9 Index
magnetization 4f, 5, 6, 7, 64 - metallic- 3,4,31 f, 138, 140, 144, 145

- inductive 5 Table 5.4
- remanent- 4, 5 - non-metallic- 125, 146
magnetometer - - spill 97 Fig. 3.45
- absorption cell- 8 - steel- 66
- - field balance 6 planning of investigations 141
- proton- 7,8,25,57,58,60,85 plastic liner 82, 140, 148 Fig. 5.1
- torsion- 7 f plasticity 127
magnetotellurics 25 pliocene 55,71
marl 6 Table 2.1,7,8,140 plume 12 Table 2.1,13,19,27,35,39,56,
mesozoic(um) 70,71 65f, 70f, 74, 80f, 85f, 87 Fig. 3.33,
- rock 71 88 Fig. 3.35, 89f, 90f, 92 Fig. 3.40, 93 f,
- series 71 97,115 Fig. 3.66, 137f, 145 Table 5.6146,
- strata 71 f 148, 149
meteoric influence 109 pollution( ed) 93
microlaterolog 47,48 - area 39
microlog 47 - - brine- 93,94 Fig. 3.42
military site 30 - soluble- 125
multifrequency electromagnetic porosity 44 Table 2.4, 48f, 106, 125
sounding ~ FEM 30, 117 Fig. 3.68 - rock- 36
potential
new disposal sites 114 - difference 12, 13
nuclear - electric- 13, 14, 15, 19,44 Table 2.4,
- accident 11 0 148f,149f
- danger 51 - - electrode 10, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19f, 46, 47,
- decay 110 81, 140
- deposit 127 - - field 9f, 10 Fig. 2.4,19,80
- disintegration 51 - - function 19
- helium 51 pottery 19
- repositories 127 -131 powerline 140, 145 Table 5.4
- test ban treaty 56 preconditions 1
- testing 56 probe 7,41, 43f, 44 Table 2.4 45 Fig. 2.25,
- test programme 56 47f, 48f, 49f, 50 Fig. 2.27,109,112,133
- waste 127, 129 Fig. 3.80 Table 4.3
nuclei 43, 51, 52 - density- 43
- dipmeter- 49
- density- 43
Ohm's law 9f - foerster- 7 f
organ 53 Table 2.6 - gamma ray- 43 f
overburden 28,31,51,60,94,95,102,110, - neutron- 43
117 Fig. 3.68,119,143 - percussion- 41,50 Fig. 2.27
overinterpretation 94, 140 111, 161 - salinometer- 48f
oxidation 19,47, 109, 148 - selfpotential- 44 Table 2.4
- sonic- 48f
percussion probing 41,50,51,53,132 protonenmagnetometer 57
permeability 46,47,103,114, 125f pseudosection 70f, 77 Fig. 3.21,
- hydraulic- 115 79 Fig. 3.23
pipe 4, 13,22,29
- cast- 140 quaternary 70
- ceramic- 94
- - corrosion 149 radar (EMR) ~georadar 28,30,93-97,
- - detector 23, 138 127,128 Fig. 3.79,131 Table 4.1,132
- gas- 83,118 Table 4.2, 133 Table 4.4, 135 Table 4.5,
- - line 58, 93, 95 140, 146f
9 Index 171
radar (EMR) safety (industrial) 14, 18, 129, 137

- altimeter 8 saline(ity) 44 Table 2.4, 46, 48 f, 66, 71, 85 f,
- gram 95 Fig. 3.44a, b, 97 Fig. 3.45, 129 89, 115
Fig. 3.80 - drainwater 88, 89
- - ground- 28, 29 f, 30 Fig. 2.17, 94 - fluid 47,77
Fig. 3.43, 96, 97 Fig. Fig. 3.46, 125, 129 - groundwater 17,56,70,71 f, 77, 88, 96,
Fig. 3.80, 132 Table 4.2 140, 146 97,125,149
- measurement 3,29f - leachate 149
- profiling 95 - plume 88, 89, 90
- record 94, 95 - porewater 71
- reflection 94, 95 - seepage 98 Fig. 3.48
- response 29 - water 17f, 74f, 88, 89, 125
- section 29 salinization 85, 88
- signal 95 salinometer 48f, 125, 126
- wave 130 - - log 126 Fig. 3.76
radiometry(tric) 52,53,54, 110 Fig. 3.61, salt(y) 12 Table 2.1,13,29,70,127,129,
126, 127 130,137
- aero- 28, 96 - content 44 Table 2.1, 48, 65
- - dose 53 Table 2.5, 2.6 - deposit 71,74
- - section 52 - diapir 127
- - survey 52, 113, 112 Fig. 3.64, 113 Fig. - dome 12 Table 2.1, 28, 127f, 130
3.65 Fig. 3.79, 131 Fig. 3.80
Raleigh wave 37 - leachate 82
red bone marrow 53 Table 2.6 - mine 56,71
redox potential 19 f, 140 - plume 19,96
research 78, 146f, 148f, 149f - rock- 29 Table 2.3
activity 149f - seepage 70
target 148 - water 27,74,77
resistivity 9 f, 14, 20, 24, 27, 29 f, 31, 36, 42 salting 18
Fig. 2.24, 47, 50f, 65f, 66, 68 Fig. 3.12, sampling rate 3948
69 Fig. 3.13, 70f, 71, 74f, 75, 76 Fig. 3.20, sand(y) 12 Table 2.1, 13f, 29 Table 2.3, 31,
77f, 78f, 79f, 82f, 90, 93, 94, 95f, 96, 35,43, 50, 68, 78, 92 Fig. 3.40, 95f, 96
115f, 125, 129, 138, 148 Fig. 5.1 Fig. 3.44, 119
- apparent specific- 9f, 11 f, 12 Table 2.1, - aquifer 92 Fig. 3.40
14,17,18,23,25,26 Fig. 2.14a, b, 43, 44 - bed 97
Table 2.4, 46f, 47f, 48, 67 Fig. 3.11, 75, - casting- 12 Table 2.1,13,19,70
78, 96, 98 Fig. 3.47 - - clay interbedding 48
- aquifer- 93 Fig. 3.41 - - lens 9412
- - background 90 - saturated- 139
- complex- 148 - - stone 12 Table 2.1,13, 100f, 118
- - contours 78,90, 116 Fig. 3.67 Fig. 3.69
- DC- 27 scale 5,55,56,144,145 Table 5.5,151
- inversed- 85 - depth- 95
- - log 50 Fig. 2.27 - logarithmic- 13
- overburden- 319 - metric- 3
- rock- 46,47 - spring- 40
- - section 12 schlumberger sounding
- true- 44 Table 2.4, 46 15 Fig. 2.6, 2.7, 68 Fig. 3.12
- - value 13, 16, 93 scrap
- VLF- 25 - anomaly 58
resistivity sounding - - car- 57, 138
~ geoelectric sounding - - iron- 6,7 Fig. 2.2, 8, 19,58,
risk assessment 57,137 63
~groundwater- 119 - metal- 12 Table 2.1, 65, 134
172 9 Index
seepage 28,41,65,74,92 Fig. 3.39,98 Table 4.2, 133 Table 4.4, 135 Table 4.5,
Fig. 3.48, 99, 100, 114, 137f, 148 140, 146, 148
- channel 65 - profile 81 Fig. 3.26
- path 39,43,67 Fig. 3.11,121 Fig. 3.72, silt 12 Table 2.1,103
143, 144 skin 53 Table 2.6
- waste-dump- 19, 29 sludge
- - water 70, 109 galvanic- 77 Fig. 3.21, 78
seismic(s) 29,48,98, 118,125, 130, 138 industrial- 57, 134
- break 32, 35 poisonous- 132
- energy 32 toxic- 65
- evaluation 29, 103 soil 1,12 Table 2.1, 19f, 29f, 30, 35, 51, 60,
- exploration 35 68,94,95, 111 Fig. 3.63, 140
- - high frequency- 148 - moisture 85, 140
- impedance 35,36 - - permeable- 116
- investigation 31 f - salinization 80
- methods 31-40,98-105 - - top- 101
- migration 152 - unconsolidated- 103
- model 103 spinell
- noise 118 - structure 5
- profile(section) 118 f steep dipping structure 119 -127
- property 35 sulfatic water 74
- ray 32,33 sunray 109
- receiver(geophone) 31,39,101
- record 35, 103 tar 12 Table 2.1
- reflection 29,32, 35f, 36, 37 target area 8
Fig. 2.21, 38 Fig. 2.22, 37f, 39f, TDEM 35 Fig. 2.15, 90f, 93f, 94 Fig. 3.42,
103f, 104 Fig. 3.53,118,119,120 131 Table 4.1
3.71,131 Table 4.1, 132 Table 4.2, tectonic(s) 39,50, 103
Fig. 133 Table 4.4, 135 Table 4.8, 141 f, - block- 71
143, 146 - - pattern 24
- reflector 31,35, 36f - - shear 126
- refraction 32f, 33 Fig. 2.18, 34 Fig. 2.19, - - structure 4,115, 121, 122, 137, 145
35f, 48, 98f, 99 Fig. 3.49,100 Fig. 3.50, Table 5.5, 151
102, 103, 104 Fig. 3.54, 117f, 118 - - thrust 126
Fig. 3.69,119 Fig. 3.70,125,131 - - zone 24
Table 1, 132 Table 4.2, 133 Table 4.3, telluric noise 18, 19
133 Table 4.4, 135 Table 4.5,141, 143 f, TEM 27 Fig. 2.15, 90f, 92 Fig. 3.40, 93
146 Fig. 3.41, 94 Fig. 3. 42, 131 Table 4.1
- result 105 temperature 40f, 41, 44 Table 2.4, 55f, 55
- signal 31 f, 32f, 35, 36, 37,103 Fig. 2.30, 106, 109f, 127
Fig. 3.52 - anomaly 41
- software 96 - base 41
- source 31,32, 33f, 35f, 36, 37,101 - dependence 55
- station 102 - determination 41
- string 33 - log 125, 126 Fig. 3.76
- survey 140 f - measurement 41
- technology 37 - tool 48f
- velocity 31,33, 34f, 35f, 36f, 98, 99 tender (call for)
Fig. 3.49, 100, 101, 118, 128, 138f, 141, 1,151 Table 6.1,152 Table 6.2
148 tertiary 71 f
- wave 31f, 32f, 35f, 101 - lignite 118f, 119 Fig. 3.70
- wavefront 32 - salt deposit 71
selfPotential 17, 19f, 42 Fig. 2.24, 43, 44 - series 71
Table 2.4, 47, 79f, 80, 131 Table 4.1,132 test-pit 52
9 Index 173
three dimensional (3D) 58 Fig. 3.1, 59 waste 65, 68f, 69 Fig. 3.13, 79, 89, 93, 99,
Fig. 3.2, 62 Fig. 3.7, 85, 86 Fig. 3.32, 87 105, 123, 132, 137, 144 Table 5.5, 146,
Fig. 3:34, 93 Fig. 3.41, 99 Fig. 3.49, 100, 148
152 - - body 65,83,141
- projection 3 - chemical- 127
- seismics 142 - - component 70,78,79,146146
time domain electromagnetic - - deposit 1, 5, 9, 12, 13, 32, 35, 58, 70,
sounding(TDEM) ~transient electro- 80f,96, 102, 104, 105,109, 110
magnetic sounding Fig. 3.61,125,127,132, 143f
tissue 53 Table 2.6 - domestic- 14, 16,53,57,58,60, 65f,
torsion magnetometer 7 67 Fig. 3.11, 78 Fig. 3.22, 79 Fig. 3.22,
transient electromagnetic 79 Fig. 3.23, 80, 81 Fig. 3.26,90, 96,
sounding ~ TEM, TDEM 27, 90f, 91 f, 92 110, 134, 138, 148
Fig. 3.40 - - dump (site, deposit 1,4, 5f.7, 8f, 12,
traveltime 29,31, 36f, 44 Table 2.4, 48f, 50, 13, 24, 28, 3035, 53, 54, 57, 64 Fig. 3.9,
95, 102f, 130f 65,66,67, 68f, 80, 82, 83f, 93
- curve 35 Fig. 3.41, 98 Fig. 3.47, 99 Fig. 3.49,
treatment 100, Fig. 3.50, 101, 102, 103, 106, 109,
- chemical- 110 110, 114f, 115 f, 116, 118, 119, 121,
- - facility 119 122 Fig. 3.73, 125, 132, 134, 141 f, 143,
146
- hazardous- 19f, 20 Fig. 210, 25, 35f,
unconsolidated
37,39,40,41 f, 48,56,57,58 Fig. 3.1,
- bed 50, 100
59 Fig. 3.2,67,69 Fig. 3.13, 70, 77
- - layer 99
Fig. 3, 21, 82f, 85, 87 Fig. 3.33, 89
- rock 13, 34f, 99, 114f, 141, 148
Fig. 3.37, 99, 100f, 103f, 104 Fig. 3.53,
- sediment 99, 143
105 Fig. 3.54, 106 Fig. 3.55, 109
- silt 103
Fig. 3.60,110, 114, 117, 119, 120
- soil 103
Fig. 3.71, 126, 132, 133 Table 4.3, 137,
Uterus 53 Table 2.6
141, 142 Table 5.3
- industrial- 58,61,65,82 Fig. 3.27, 83,
vertical electric 110,137
sounding, VES ~geoelectric - iron bearing- 5
sounding - magnetic- 119
voltage 9-11, 13, 17f, 19 - - migration 65
- decay- 17 - nuclear- 127,131
- high- 140 - paint- 88
- primary- 17,18 - - paper 12 Table 2.1
- static- 52 - - resistivity 12
- transient- 17, 18, 27 - radioactive- 51,53, 127
VSMOW (Vienna-standard - solid- 90
Mean Ocean Water) 55 well logging ~ logging methods
Spri nger-Verlag
and the Environment
We at Springer-Verlag firmly believe that an

international science publisher has a special
obligation to the environment, and our corpo-
rate policies consistently reflect this conviction.
We also expect our busi-

ness partners - paper mills, printers, packag-
ing manufacturers, etc. - to commit themselves
to using environmentally friendly materials and
production processes.
The paper in this book is made from

iow- or no-chlorine pulp and is acid free, in
conformance with international standards for
paper permanency.

Geophysical Hazards. Minimizing Risk, Maximizing Awareness (Tom Beer)

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Geophysical Hazards. Minimizing Risk, Maximizing Awareness (Tom Beer)

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Environmental Engineering

Series Editors: U Forstner, R. J Murphy, W H Rulkens

With 113 Figures

Prof. Robert 1. Murphy Dept. of Civil Engineering and Mechanics

Prof. Dr. ir. W. H. Rulkens Wageningen Agricultural University

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Typesetting: Data-conversion by Fototsatz-Service Kohler OHG, Wiirzburg

Hannover, March 1994 Dieter Vogelsang

3.1.7 Geothermy. 106

4 Costs of Geophysical Surveys 131

5 Briefing for Geophysical Surveys . 137

6 Geophysical Tenders . 151

7 List and Origin of Figures and Tables. 153

To cope with increasing rates of consumption of raw materials, the geophysical

Table 1.1. Assessment of geophysical results

Absolutely unerring Ambiguous, several equivalent solutions possible

All properties are exactly Properties can be determined only approximately

No interpretation is neccessary Interpretation is essential

Clear and correct description of problems

.. Straightforward description of restrictions

Table 1.2. Presentation of geophysical results

Medium Completeness Readability Follow-up Recollection

tape, disc good difficult good bad

checked painstakingly by an electromagnetic cable/metal detector before

2.1 Geomagnetic Methods

2.1.1 Geomagnetic Ground Surveys

Fig. 2.1. Magnetic anomalies at different heights above ground

torsion magnetometer. They register the vertical and horizontal components of

should be continuously monitored at a non-moving base station for which a

2.1.2 Aeromagnetic Surveys

Magnetic measurements can also be performed from helicopters or airplanes.

It is necessary to monitor the daily variations of the magnetic field at a base

2.2 Geoelectric Methods

2.2.1 Direct-Current Methods

The DC methods utilize the different electrical resistivities of minerals, rocks

Survey car and

Measurements of differences of the potential field (voltage U [V]) are carried

t""'" ~~"1~"" "':j' "

""""" ""\1".." , "a":::' i" '::" ~ "",

Table 2.1. Specific resistivities

Rock typelMaterial Specific resistivity [!lm]

Geolectric Sounding (VES)

Sounding curves of> 2 layers are subdivided into four types:

0.1 L _ _ _-----=::::::=~~~~::...;;;;;~~~~~~_ _.J

For environmental application, it is important that saline waters prevent induced

Induced polarization (time domain)

Fig. 2.9. Principle of induced polarization (IP)

Customary dipole lengths are n = 1 to n = 6. Further enlargements may lead to an

Fig. 2.10. Pattern of different Sp anomalies over a hazardous waste site

2.2.2 Electromagnetic Methods

Electromagnetic Mapping (EM)

Spread 50,100,150,200 or 250 m

Oscillator Compensator - Amplifier

Fig. 2.11. Principle of electromagnetic mapping

component. Hence, all measurements in mountainous terrain must be slope-

Buried metallic cables or pipes create electromagnetic anomalies that disturb

Electromagnetics by Distant Transmitters (VLF)

Table 2.2. VLF Stations

Station Location Frequency Output

FUO Bordeaux, France 15, I 500

approximately 15 m can be reached. Apart from that, the nearly homogeneous

Magnetotelluric and Transient Electromagnetic Methods (MT + TDEM, TEM)

laO Frequency: 19.0 kHz 5S

0.1 L _ _ _-----=::::::=::...;;;;;~~_ _.J