Using geochemical and geophysical data to characterise inter-aquifer connectivity and impacts on shallow aquifers and groundwater dependent ecosystems

Understanding inter-aquifer connectivity within sedimentary basins is crucial for determining how groundwater extraction will impact groundwater resources and groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDEs). Geophysical, geochemical and radioisotope data were combined to understand whether dewatering for open-cut coal mining in Australia's Galilee Basin will be likely to impact groundwater levels in overlying aquifers sustaining the ecologically significant Doongmabulla Springs Complex and Carmichael River. Groundwater salinities (<300 mg/L), measurable H-3 (0.43 TU), and activities of radiocarbon a(14)C (14.1 - 95.3 pMC) and chlorine-36 (RCl)-Cl-36 (78.1 x 10(-15) - 161 x 10(-15)) imply that preferential pathways for groundwater flow and recharge occur through the weathered sub-crop of the Galilee Basin sediments. These high permeability zones occur consistently within 5 km of the mine (and further to the south), where strong overlap in major ion and radioisotope compositions indicates significant groundwater connectivity between aquifers. Elevated groundwater HCO3 and F concentrations and heavy fraction hydrocarbons (>100 mu g/L C-10-C-40) also imply deep groundwater in the coal measures discharges into overlying non-coal bearing aquifers, most likely via faults. Since coal mine dewatering commenced, drawdown has spread preferentially southward from the mine, driven by geological heterogeneity including into aquifers that are not targeted by mining. Drawdown is also migrating gradually into shallow aquifers west of the mine, towards GDEs along the Carmichael River valley. Numerical modelling of the mine's groundwater impacts, which was the basis of the mine's approval, did not anticipate this level of drawdown in shallow aquifers at this stage of mining. Mining impacts on shallow groundwater resources and GDEs, including the Doongmabulla springs and the Carmichael River, may have thus been underestimated and require re-evaluation. This study highlights that multiple lines of evidence must be assessed to carefully develop conceptual and numerical models, and to protect groundwater and GDEs.