Debates—Stochastic subsurface hydrology from theory to practice: A geologic perspective

A geologic perspective on stochastic subsurface hydrology offers insights on representativeness of prominent field experiments and their general relevance to other hydrogeologic settings. Although the gains in understanding afforded by some 30 years of research in stochastic hydrogeology have been important and even essential, adoption of the technologies and insights by practitioners has been limited, due in part to a lack of geologic context in both the field and theoretical studies. In general, unintentional, biased sampling of hydraulic conductivity (K) using mainly hydrologic, well-based methods has resulted in the tacit assumption by many in the community that the subsurface is much less heterogeneous than in reality. Origins of the bias range from perspectives that are limited by scale and the separation of disciplines (geology, soils, aquifer hydrology, groundwater hydraulics, etc.). Consequences include a misfit between stochastic hydrogeology research results and the needs of, for example, practitioners who are dealing with local plume site cleanup that is often severely hampered by very low velocities in the very aquitard facies that are commonly overlooked or missing from low-variance stochastic models or theories. We suggest that answers to many of the problems exposed by stochastic hydrogeology research can be found through greater geologic integration into the analyses, including the recognition of not only the nearly ubiquitously high variances of K but also the strong tendency for the good connectivity of the high-K facies when spatially persistent geologic unconformities are absent. We further suggest that although such integration may appear to make the contaminant transport problem more complex, expensive and intractable, it may in fact lead to greater simplification and more reliable, less expensive site characterizations and models