Avaliação da vulnerabilidade das águas subterrâneas por meio dos métodos AHP e TOPSIS

• Ano de defesa: 2018
• Autor(a) principal: Tedesco, Adriana Maria
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná; Pato Branco; Brasil; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção e Sistemas; UTFPR
• Palavras-chave em Português: Água potável - Contaminação; Águas subterrâneas; Abastecimento de água; Água - Qualidade; Drinking water - Contamination; Groundwater; Water-supply; Water quality; CNPQ::ENGENHARIAS::ENGENHARIA DE PRODUCAO; Engenharia de Produção
• Link de acesso: http://repositorio.utfpr.edu.br/jspui/handle/1/3799

Groundwater is an important water resource that has good quality and better protection for anthropogenic activities. However, the production of food for fertilizer eradication in agriculture and in the production of agricultural products in soybean plantations is no longer old. Mining has had a significant impact every year and a demand for quality water has also increased. Therefore, this imbalance must be taken into account and necessary to take measures of protection and recovery of resources. This unsustainable use makes them scarce and puts water safety at risk. The assessment of water and residential resources is a protective measure against degradation is a relevant and complex process. Area assessment is essential information for the planning and use of useful and detailed information for decision making. In this study, a multi-criteria methodology was used to propose a vulnerability assessment model through the wells that water for the public supply. The model proposed a classification of areas, highlighting the vulnerabilities to the anthropogenic impacts in the region. Twelve wells were evaluated under the following criteria: GOD index (Intrinsic parameter), Nitrate, pH, STD and total Coliforms (Specific parameters). An application of the multi-criteria AHP and TOPSIS was carried out to assess the vulnerability of groundwater, where the result is an ordering of wells that are most vulnerable and have the least capacity for protection and degradation. The alternative A6 was more vulnerable and A7 was less vulnerable. The wells that are most vulnerable are located in the urban environment, so it can be inferred that they are being degraded by effluents thrown into the soil without proper treatment.