Models no not provide proof: An example of model ambiguity and application of isotopic data in a mine pit lake

Abstract

Geochemical and hydrologic models of pit lakes are commonly used in environmental regulatory decisions to predict future water quality and hydrologic conditions and to understand existing pit lakes. Models may be used to quantify sulfide oxidation, predict thermal/chemical stratification and mixing, and better understand connections between pit lakes and aquifers. One concern related to the hydrologic character of pit lakes is if they are terminal (a groundwater sink with no outflow) or flowthrough (both receiving groundwater inflow and discharging to groundwater). This question was pertinent to the Liberty pit lake, a small acidic pit lake formed in a former Cu deposit in south-central Nevada where potentiometric and geochemical data potentially indicate pit-lake outflow. Potential discharge to groundwater from the pit lake was evaluated using a water-balance model, but uncertainty in hydraulic parameters led to ambiguity in the hydrologic character. Stable isotopes of water were then sampled from the pit lake and adjacent groundwater wells, which unambiguously indicated the lack of an evaporative signature in downgradient groundwater because the groundwater did not plot on a hypothetical mixing line between evaporated pit lake water and observed meteoric recharge. This methodology provided a more effective and more data-driven approach for understanding pit-lake hydrology. Although predictive models are required to quantify reasonable bounds on future conditions, many models contain substantial uncertainty and are not well suited in some environments. Datasets that provide more clear lines of evidence could be collected from existing pit lakes whenever possible to inform water-rock interaction, limnological behavior, and connectivity to adjacent groundwater.