Search USGSSearch

USGS · ofr94276

Fate and pathways of injection-well effluent in the Florida Keys

Abstract

Twenty-four wells (21 locations) were core drilled into the limestone beneath the Keys, reef tract, and outer reefs to determine if sewage effluents injected in Class V wells onshore are reaching offshore reef areas via underground flow. These wells were fitted with PVC casings and well screens and were sampled every three months for a period of one year. Analyses showed consistent hypersalinity in most wells and a marked increase in nitrogen (as ammonia) in offshore ground water. Other forms of nitrogen (NO 2 and NO 3 ) and phosphorous were not particularly elevated in offshore ground water but were above the levels found in surface marine water. The highest levels of nitrogen (NO 2 and NO 3 ) and phosphorous were in shallow onshore ground waters. Sources for the nutrients in the shallow onshore ground water consist of septic tanks and cesspools (@ 24,000 and 5,000 in the Florida Keys, respectively), agricultural fertilizers, and natural vegetation. Ammonia concentrations were low in shallow ground waters beneath the Florida Keys, probably because of oxidizing conditions. Tidal pumping is particularly active, especially nearshore. Hydraulic heads sufficient to elevate well water as much as 7 cm above sea level during falling tides were detected in all nearshore wells. During rising tides, the situation was reversed and water flowed into the wells. Tidal pumping implies considerable water movement both in and out of the upper few meters of limestone. Tidal pumping is a likely mechanism for mixing and transferring nutrient-rich ground water into the overlying marine waters. Although tidal pumping should cause rather complete mixing and dilution of any freshwater-based effluents entering the limestone via the more than 600 disposal wells in the Florida Keys, the ground waters in the 30- to 40-ft-depth range (9-12 m) nevertheless remained slightly hypersaline relative to sea water throughout the year. Fecal coliform and fecal streptococcal bacteria were associated with three Lower Keys offshore wells and two shallow onshore wells at Key Largo. On occasions, these bacteria were detected farther offshore, once in a well 4 miles off Key Largo. The bacterial analyses for Key Largo (both onshore and offshore) are supported by two independent bacteriological researchers using more sophisticated methods than the standard 100-ml membrane-filter method used in this study. Fecal bacteria can serve as tracers; thus, we conclude their presence is possible evidence for offshore transport of ground waters originating on Key Largo. Elevated nutrients (ammonia) and slightly elevated dissolved total phosphorous in offshore ground waters, however, cannot be tied to onshore sources with existing data. Rock analyses of material from our cores do not prove or disprove the hypothesis that limestone beneath the Keys or reef tract is serving as a sink for phosphorus or other nutrients. The data, however, do not rule out phosphorus uptake by limestone adjacent to disposal sources. For the purposes of this study, monitoring wells were not positioned sufficiently close to injection wells to determine if uptake of phosphorous is taking place. Ground waters were found to contain more dissolved solids than could be accounted for if hypersalinity resulted from simple evaporation of sea water. These data indicate that ground waters in the vicinity of our wells are dissolving solids from the rock rather than precipitating material within the rock framework; however, as mentioned above, our wells were not positioned sufficiently close to disposal wells to determine if localized uptake is occurring. Examination of rock cores from these wells revealed a general distribution of reef- and grainstone-facies belts. The Upper and Middle Keys are composed of a thin coral reef facies that extends only a few hundred feet seaward of the Keys. Reef facies give way to mudstone facies within a few yards of shore on the Florida Bay side of the Keys. On the seaward side of the Keys, beneath Hawk Channel and White Bank, the Pleistocene limestone is a mixed grainstone, packstone, and wackstone facies. Corals are rare or absent. The Pleistocene limestone beneath the outer reefs 4 to 5 miles offshore, however, consists of reef facies with the same coral fauna as that found on Key Largo. This pattern of two major reef-facies belts separated by a 2- to 4-mile-wide belt of grainstone facies may have as yet undetermined effects on groundwater circulation beneath the Florida reef tract. Grainstone is approximately an order of magnitude less permeable than the coralline Key Largo Limestone facies. The Q3 surface, a major subsurface unconformity thought to form an effective confining zone elsewhere in south Florida, was not detected in wells drilled more than 1 mile from shore. This unconformity, however, was detected in all wells drilled on or near the Keys. What was found to be a more effective and widespread confining layer is the Holocene sediment deposited on the Pleistocene limestone during the past 6,000 to 7,000 years. These relatively impermeable sediments are extensive, forming a belt up to 5 miles wide beginning about 0.5 mile offshore. Holocene sediments generally consist of low-permeability lime mud just above the Pleistocene surface, overlain by more permeable carbonate sands and reefs. Leakage of ground water by tidal pumping is not likely to occur through lime-mud-dominated areas such as Hawk Channel but is likely to occur through isolated porous and permeable Holocene reefs situated on Pleistocene limestone highs, and in places where Holocene sediment does not cover the limestone bedrock. Leakage is therefore limited to 1) a shallow-water 0.5-mile-wide nearshore belt of exposed Key Largo Limestone, 2) Holocene patch reefs, which grow on mud-free topographic rock highs, and 3) along the seaward side of the outermost reef in 35 to 65 ft (10-20 m) of water, where Holocene reef and sediment accumulations are thin or absent. This study did not address direct measurements of lateral groundwater movement or a hydrologic mechanism for transporting hypersaline ground water away from the Florida Keys. More recent work, however (Halley et al., 1994), shows that sea level in Florida Bay is higher than on the Atlantic side of the Keys more than 50% of the time. Higher sea level on the bay side of the Keys provides a potential for groundwater flow toward the Atlantic most of the time. Use of tracers (dyes or harmless bacteriological tracers) injected into the center of tightly spaced clusters of monitoring wells is a simple way to ascertain the net direction and rate of groundwater movement. Knowing the direction and rate of groundwater movement is needed for prediction and modeling efforts in the future

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 24.467150664739002° to 25.527571660479637° latitude; -82.20794677734374° to -80.14801025390625° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Eugene A. Shinn, Ronald S. Reese, Christopher D. Reich. 1994. Fate and pathways of injection-well effluent in the Florida Keys. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr94276

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona