Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hydrology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol

Research papers

Mitigating seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers: Novel approach with

treated wastewater injection and groundwater circulation
Samia Saad a, b, *, Akbar A. Javadi b, Hany F. Abd-Elhamid c, d, Raziyeh Farmani b
a
Department of Irrigation & Hydraulics, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
b
Department of Engineering, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
c
Department of Water and Water Structures Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, 44519 Zagazig, Egypt
d
Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Košice (TUKE), Košice, Slovakia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

This manuscript was handled by Corrado Cor­ Seawater intrusion (SWI) is a natural phenomenon that negatively impacts the potability of groundwater and is
radini, Editor-in-Chief, with the assistance of expected to worsen with rising sea levels due to climate change. Artificial recharge of freshwater is a commonly-
Clement Roques, Associate Editor used remediation method to mitigate SWI and improve freshwater supply security in affected coastal aquifers.
However, limited freshwater availability can limit the effectiveness of this approach. This study proposes a novel
Keywords:
mitigation measure, called Inj-GCW, which combines the injection of reclaimed water with the use of ground­
Seawater intrusion
water circulation wells (GCW) to enhance the effectiveness of artificial recharge in controlling SWI. GCW is a
Injection
Groundwater circulation well, sea level rise dual-screened well with isolated screens that extract and inject groundwater into the aquifer. The performance of
Nile Delta aquifer the proposed measure was quantitatively evaluated using an illustrative simplified unconfined coastal aquifer.
Mitigation Based on the findings, the design parameters were estimated for a field-scale case study of the Nile Delta aquifer
(NDA), a large Mediterranean coastal aquifer in Egypt. The study adopts a future scenario that considers Sea-
level rise due to climate change and projected population growth by 2100. Results demonstrate that intro­
ducing of GCWs into the saltwater wedge, along with injection, effectively retreated the saltwater wedge, due to
enhanced velocity, seaward fluxes, and dilution of contamination. Inj-GCW measure led to an 8.9% reduction in
SWI and a 5.2% decrease in aquifer salinity compared to the expected intrusion in 2100. Furthermore, the Inj-
GCW measure resulted in a 2.2% higher repulsion rate and 0.3% reduction in total salt mass compared to in­
jection alone. The Inj-GCW measure presents a promising solution to SWI challenges in the NDA and other
coastal aquifers facing similar issues. The formation of a brackish water bubble at the injection well screen of the
GCW and the generated vertical groundwater circulation cells acted as a hydraulic barrier and contributed to the
proposed method effectiveness.

1. Introduction
Seawater intrusion (SWI) occurs naturally due to salinity differences
between seawater and freshwater (Jiao and Post, 2019). However,
coastal aquifers are experiencing interruptions in this natural equilib­
rium, leading to a decline in groundwater quality and ecological impacts
(Idowu and Lasisi, 2020; Saad et al., 2023). With global climate change,
especially sea-level rise (SLR) and overexploitation of groundwater, SWI
is expected to worsen. For instance, in the Nile Delta, SLR (1.5 m) and
groundwater abstractions (4.9 billion m3/year) could lead to no fresh­
water access by 2100 (Mabrouk et al., 2018). Similarly, in the Mekong
Delta, a 0.3 m SLR in 2050 could cause salinity intrusion into the river up
to 50–60 km, affecting 30,000 ha of agricultural land (Vu et al., 2018).
Mitigating SWI requires effective measures to control or reduce it.
Various remediation/mitigation measures have been proposed, each
with their advantages and disadvantages, as summarized in Table 1.
However, finding a single solution that universally applies to all specific
site conditions remains elusive and unattainable. Among the measures
proposed, recharging the aquifer through positive hydraulic barriers is
the most commonly used method (Hussain et al., 2019; Shi et al., 2020).
This method increases hydraulic head, relieves over-exploitation by
supplying part of the demand, maintains a seaward hydraulic gradient,
and flushes out contaminated water. Different water sources can be
used, including desalinated seawater (e.g., Ganot et al., 2018), rivers

* Corresponding author at: Department of Engineering, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
E-mail addresses: samia.saad@eng.asu.edu.eg, ss936@exeter.ac.uk (S. Saad), A.A.Javadi@exeter.ac.uk (A.A. Javadi), hany.abdelhamid@tuke.sk, hany_
farhat2003@yahoo.com (H.F. Abd-Elhamid), R.Farmani@exeter.ac.uk (R. Farmani).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130139
Received 14 April 2023; Received in revised form 11 August 2023; Accepted 17 August 2023
Available online 11 September 2023
0022-1694/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
S. Saad et al. Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Table 1 Table 1 (continued )

Remediation/mitigation measures against SWI, with their advantages and Method Advantages Disadvantages Ref.
disadvantages.
by a packer and water level cannot the regional fresh
Method Advantages Disadvantages Ref. grouting. One be raised. groundwater flux.
New water - - An easy direct - Changes in Sherif et al. screen extracts - No net loss or
resources mitigation established (2014); Song and the other gain of
legislation measure. irrigation and et al. (2018). injects groundwater.
includes - Redesigning domestic practices groundwater
reducing, the pumping due to alterations in into the aquifer.
optimizing rates is a cost- pumping rates that Combining - Increase water - Lack of suitable Abd-Elaty and
regional free measure.- have significant positive and storage.- Raise the water for recharge. Zelenakova
abstraction, Can be com­ socioeconomic and negative piezometric head. - Clogging (2022); Saad
and/or bined with other political hydraulic - Reduce saltwater - May cause a et al. (2022).
relocating the control consequences. barriers (mixed volume. reduction in
wells to zones measures. - Wells relocation is hydraulic - More efficient freshwater
less susceptible costly. barriers) than single barrier resources.
to SWI or - Temporary systems to control - Strongly reliant on
shallowest management SWI good hydraulic
portions of the approach. characterization for
aquifer barrier locations
Using physical - Physically - High initial costs, Abdoulhalik and flow rates
subsurface prevent the SWI. particularly for deep et al. (2017); relative to other
barriers to - Don’t need aquifers. Chang et al. single barrier
reduce the maintenance and (2021) systems.
aquifer repair over their Combining - Increase water - Lack of suitable Present study
permeability lifetime. injection wells storage.- Raise the water for recharge.
such as and groundwater piezometric head. - The effectiveness
subsurface dam, circulation wells - Reduce saltwater of the measure is
cutoff wall, and (Inj-GCW volume. highly influenced by
sheet pile measure). - Enhance GCW the regional fresh
Extending the - Land - It may be infeasible Abd-Elhamid efficiency by groundwater flux.
coastline reclamation can if newly reclaimed et al. (2020); coupling with - Clogging
towards the sea significantly soil has low Shen et al. injection wells, an - Strongly reliant on
using coastal increase the land permeability and (2022) external source of good hydraulic
earth fill availability there is a large tidal freshwater influx. characterization for
amplitude. - Achieve no net barrier locations
- It can negatively loss or gain of and flow rates
impact the coastal groundwater to relative to other
groundwater address potential single barrier
hydrodynamics and issues arising from systems.
marine abstraction
environment. barriers,
- Costly to be particularly the
implemented at a decrease in
large scale. available
Using horizontal - Avoid saltwater - Decrease the Yin and Tsai freshwater
wells (scavenger upconing. chance of upconing (2019). volume.
wells), skimming at local scale.
wells or
subsurface and lakes (e.g., Dibaj et al., 2021), stormwater (e.g., Mohammad-Hos­
drains seinpour and Molina, 2022), and treated wastewater (e.g., Saad et al.,
Using positive - Increase water - Lack of suitable Dibaj et al. 2022). Using unconventional water resources to store in the aquifer has
hydraulic storage. water for recharge. (2021); Zang
barriers typically - Raise the - Clogging and Li (2021)
environmental benefits, including passive treatment of wastewater and
through artificial piezometric head. - Need space for stormwater (Page et al., 2018), reduced evaporation loss (Alam et al.,
recharge using infiltration basins 2021), and decreased carbon emissions due to the raised water table and
infiltration reduced energy requirements for pumping groundwater (Dillon et al.,
basins, canals,
2020).
recharge ponds,
or injection wells Positive hydraulic barriers have limitations in the amount of water
or through available for recharge, which may hinder their effectiveness as a miti­
gaseous barriers gation measure against SWI. To overcome this limitation, previous
by injecting studies have suggested combining them with other physical or hydraulic
compressed air
instead of
barriers. For instance, Armanuos et al. (2019) experimentally demon­
freshwater strated that freshwater injection and cutoff walls can improve the
Using negative - Reduce saltwater - May cause a Kacimov et al. repulsion ratio of positive hydraulic barriers from 22.39% by up to
hydraulic volume. reduction in (2009); Pool 45.4%. Chang et al. (2021) recommended recharge facilities with cutoff
barriers through - Suitable in the freshwater and Carrera
walls to accelerate and improve desalination of coastal aquifers. Semi-
intercepting aquifer where the resources. (2010).
inflowing water level cannot - Highly sensitive to permeable subsurface dams alone may not be also sufficient to pre­
brackish/ be raised. changes in pumping vent SWI in mild seaward hydraulic gradient situations, regardless of the
saltwater. rates. extent to which the subsurface dam covers the aquifer thickness, as
Using groundwater - Reduce saltwater - The effectiveness Vats et al. demonstrated by Abdoulhalik et al. (2017). Similarly, Abd-Elaty et al.
circulation wells, volume. of the measure is (2020)
dual-screened - Suitable in the highly influenced by
(2021); Abd-Elaty and Zelenakova (2022); and Mabrouk et al. (2019a)
wells separated aquifer where the observed increased repulsion of intrusion in the combined system
compared to injection alone. Combining positive hydraulic barriers with

2
S. Saad et al.
other measures is crucial to enhance freshwater safety and sustainabil­
ity, especially in regions with water scarcity and limited access to
treated wastewater and desalination, such as arid and semi-arid areas
and low-income countries. The Nile Delta aquifer (NDA) exemplifies
these challenges, with excessive abstraction causing a 0.1 billion m3/
year decrease in groundwater potentiality (Negm et al., 2018) and SWI
reaching up to 100 km inland (Abd-Elaty et al., 2021). The Mediterra­
nean coastal aquifer is severely threatened by SWI (Abd-Elaty et al.,
2021; Abd-Elaty and Zelenakova, 2022; Mabrouk et al., 2018; Negm
et al., 2018) and potentially exacerbated by the Grand Ethiopian Re­
naissance Dam’s impact on Nile River flow (Abd-Elhamid et al., 2019).
Furthermore, NDA is highly vulnerable to SLR (Pörtner et al., 2022),
emphasizing the urgency for combined mitigation measures.
Previous studies have examined the occurrence of fresh and saline
groundwater in the region, but fewer have focused on controlling SWI
(Abd-Elaty et al., 2021). Sherif (2003) identified the best sites for an
additional pumping of 2.3 billion m3/yr with controlling further intru­
sion of 35000 mg/l isoline, representing the seawater concentration. He
found that abstraction from the middle zone would reduce the intrusion
throughout the Delta, albeit with a slight increase in the eastern zone.
However, pumping from the eastern and western zones would only repel
the intrusion at the middle zone. Mabrouk et al. (2019a) proposed three
adaptation measures for Sharkeya governorate (third in the adminis­
trative districts in terms of crop production) considering the impacts of
SLR and the potential groundwater abstraction in 2100. The measures
included changing crop patterns and improving irrigation practices,
injecting the available amount of treated wastewater, and abstracting
brackish groundwater. The measure of changing crop patterns and
improving irrigation practices, which resulted in a decrease in total
abstractions, showed the most promise compared to the other measures.
Abd-Elaty et al. (2021) examined decreasing the abstractions, increasing
the recharge, abstracting brackish water, and a combination of these
measures on the Middle Nile Delta under an SLR of 0.5 m and a potential
increase of 50% in the regional abstractions. They reported 6.2%,
19.5%, 5.9%, and 21.3% retardation in the SWI for the above 4 measures
respectively. Abd-Elaty and Zelenakova (2022) argued that subsurface
barriers and coastal earth fill measures are not effective for controlling
SWI in deep aquifers such as NDA, and mixed hydraulic barriers of
injecting treated wastewater and abstracting brackish water would have
a great positive effect on the Nile Delta aquifer. The mixed hydraulic
barriers further repelled intrusion by approximately 1.75 km seaward.
From previous studies, artificial recharge and abstraction of brackish
water are vital for the success of the mitigation measures. However, it
was found that the abstraction barriers can extract freshwater more than
brackish or saline water, eventually leading to a decrease in the avail­
able freshwater volume (Hussain et al., 2019; Pool and Carrera, 2010).
To alleviate this problem a new mitigation measure (Inj-GCW) is pro­
posed based on injection wells and groundwater circulating wells (GCW)
to control the SWI in the NDA. This approach addresses the limitations of
the traditional method of combining negative and positive hydraulic
barriers by overcoming potential losses in freshwater volume.
GCW is an effective in-situ technique for remediating contaminated
groundwater. It is a dual-screened well that circulates groundwater by
extracting from a screen, treating the water within the well, and
injecting the treated water through the second screen (Elmore and
Hellman, 2001). The induced circulation flow eventually flushes the
contaminant within the well proximity (Vats et al., 2020). Unlike
traditional pump-and-treat systems, GCWs have no adverse effects on
aquifer drawdown, surface discharge of treated groundwater or property
acquisition. (Elmore and Hellman, 2001). Furthermore, GCW system can
be considered a green technique due to its inherent resource-
conservation nature of no net loss or gain of the groundwater through
the circulation (Elmore and Hellman, 2001). Although primarily used
for removing organic compounds, (Ainscough et al., 2021), Vats et al.
(2020) took advantage of circulating the water, without any treatment,
to create a barrier and push back the saline wedge toward the sea. Rather
3
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
than conventional negative barriers, groundwater was abstracted to
create a hydraulic gradient that acted as the barrier. This technique is
also recommended by Sharan et al. (2021) in their review study, to
prevent SWI in countries that suffer from over-abstraction.
To the best of our knowledge, Vats et al. (2020) is the only study that
used GCW in controlling the SWI, they assessed its effectiveness after
ceasing the groundwater abstraction on a laboratory-scale flow tank
model. However, the performance of GCWs with continuous regional
groundwater abstractions, and their dynamics when combined with
injection wells remain unclear. Additionally, the effects of GCW design
parameters, including screen placement, location, and circulation flow,
on controlling SWI have not been studied. Furthermore, the applicability
of this new methodology to reduce SWI on a large field scale, such as the
NDA (≈25,000 km2), has not been investigated. In this study, these
research gaps are addressed and insights in sustainable groundwater
management are provided.
Therefore, this study aims to 1) construct and calibrate a 3D density-
dependent flow and mass transport finite element model simulating the
SWI in the NDA, and predict its future status considering future climate
change scenarios. 2) introduce the new mitigation measure of Inj-GCW
and perform a sensitivity analysis describing its behavior in reducing the
SWI and the aquifer salinization using an illustrative case study
mimicking the NDA, then propose some design guidelines. 3) test the
effectiveness of the measure on the NDA and evaluate its performance
against other mitigation measures adopted in previous studies.
The proposed approach can be a promising solution to the challenges
of SWI in the NDA adding to the existing literature on mitigation mea­
sures for the protection of freshwater resources in coastal aquifers. Here,
we explore the Inj-GCW approach, which not only presents a novel
avenue for further research in this domain but also has the potential to
be applied to other coastal aquifers facing similar SWI challenges.
2. Methodology
2.1. Nile Delta aquifer study area
The Nile Delta is a large Mediterranean coastal aquifer, situated on
the northern plateau of Egypt. The Delta has 11 administrative districts
(Fig. 1) with the highest population density in the country at 1724
people per km2. The region heavily extracts water for irrigation and
domestic purposes (Mabrouk et al., 2019b). Table 2 displays an over­
view of the study area’s physical, geological, and hydrogeological
attributes.
2.2. Numerical modeling of variable-density groundwater flow and solute
transport in NDA
FEFLOW, a finite element groundwater flow software (Diersch,
2013), was used to simulate the advective–dispersive SWI process in the
coastal aquifer. The governing flow and mass transport equations in a
fully saturated heterogeneous porous medium were solved considering
variable fluid density. In the present study, the viscosity was considered
to be independent of the concentration, and thermal effects were
neglected. The convective form of the transport equation was considered
because it is a practical choice regarding the required computational
time (Diersch, 2013). For detailed information on the governing equa­
tions of coupled groundwater flow and salt mass transport can be found
in Diersch (2013).
The spatial and temporal discretizations utilized in the numerical
model, as well as the considered hydraulic and transport parameters, are
presented in Table 3.
2.2.1. Initial and boundary conditions
The hydraulic head values were initialized as zero, while the initial
concentrations were determined based on previous study contour maps,
which accounted for the salinity of the hypersaline groundwater flowing
S. Saad et al.
Fig. 1. Map of Nile Delta aquifer, showing the locations of different administrative districts, and the observation points.
from the bottom (Nofal et al., 2015). The simulation period lasted for
365000 days considering the boundary conditions static. A dynamic
equilibrium was achieved asymptotically after 325000 days. The simu­
lation results were considered as the steady-state condition in 2013, and
the initial conditions for subsequent analyses. Fig. 2a and Fig. 3a,b, and c
illustrate the horizontal and vertical salinity distributions in 2013,
respectively, with the vertical cross sections taken from the middle
(section 1), east (section 2), and west (section 3) of the study area.
The study area is located in a semi-arid region, which is character­
ized by limited rainfall. The aquifer is mainly replenished with the re­
turn flow of irrigation water and the leakage from the surface water
networks (Abd-Elaty and Zelenakova, 2022). The irrigation return flow
was assigned as a specified flux (Neumann BC), and its value varied
spatially from 0.25 to 1.1 mm/day (Negm et al., 2018). Its salinity
ranges from 100 mg/l south to 700 mg/l north (Mabrouk et al., 2019b),
and was assigned as a Neumann-type mass flux boundary condition (BC)
on the aquifer’s top slice. The surface water networks (two main
branches, main irrigation canals, and open drains) were represented by
Cauchy BC, representing the exchange between those water bodies and
the aquifer system. Cauchy BC was assigned in the first layer requiring a
specified head, specified salinity, and the transfer rates of flux and mass.
The specified head for the Ismailia canal, which runs from the south to
the east, varied from 16.17 to 7.01 m (Abd-Elaty and Zelenakova, 2022).
For the western boundary, El-Rayah El-Behery and Nubaria canals, the
water head ranged from 16.96 m in the south to 0.5 m in the north (Abd-
4
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
Elaty and Zelenakova, 2022). The two main branches started at 15.14 m
in the north and ended at approximately 0.5 m near the sea. The water
heads of the surface water networks varied spatially, but they were
considered temporally constant. This is due to the irrigation structures,
which were constructed along the Nile river controlling the water levels
in the canals throughout the year (Sherif et al., 2012). The salinity
concentration in the main branches showed an increase from 250 mg/l
(freshwater density is considered 1 mg/l) in Cairo to 650 mg/l towards
the sea in the north, while most of the canals showed an average salinity
of 300 mg/l (Mabrouk et al., 2019b). A constant Dirichlet BC of zero (the
mean sea level) was imposed on the north boundary along the Medi­
terranean sea with a salinity of 35000 mg/l for a saltwater density of
1.025 g/cm3. On the bottom boundary, the seepage flux of the hyper­
saline groundwater, expulsed from the Pliocene formation due to its
compaction, was assigned by a Neumann-type BC with a constant value
of 3 × 10− 6 m/day (Van Engelen et al., 2019), and its salinity concen­
tration varied from around 40000 mg/l to 110000 mg/l (maximum
density of 1.071 g/cm3) (Nofal et al., 2015). Hence, different boundary
conditions were imposed internally and on all the outer boundaries
except the eastern boundary, which corresponds to the Suez Canal and
was considered impervious to both the flow and solute transport
(Mabrouk et al., 2019b).
The overall groundwater extraction from the NDA was estimated to
be about 3.56 billion cubic meters per year in 2013 (Nofal et al., 2015).
This amount was distributed among 3228 extraction wells. A single well
S. Saad et al. Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Table 2 Table 3
Characteristics of the study area. Model Discretization and Hydraulic/Transport Parameters for the NDA.
Characteristic Description Model discretization of NDA
Feature Description
Physical description
Location Nile Delta, Egypt, latitudes 30˚00‘ and 31˚45‘N, and Horizontal discretization Using 68,266 linear triangular prism elements per
longitudes 29˚30‘and 32˚30‘E layer, with refinements near the coast, model
Surface area ≈ 25,000 Km2 boundaries, and high-velocity areas (e.g., pumping
Thickness The NDA is remarkably thick, reaching up to 1000 m depth wells, Nile branches, canals, and drains). Mesh
at the coast. Across the globe, only 0.3% of the coastal resolution ranged from 0.3 to 2.3 km.
aquifers are deeper (Van Engelen et al., 2019). Vertical discretization Using 17 layers, from top: 1 layer (7.5 m)
Domain boundary NDA has a triangular shape with a 300 km coastal base on considering surface water depths, 8 layers (max 50
the Mediterranean sea and an apex near Cairo, 200 km m) considering extraction well screens, 7 layers
away from the sea. The Delta is centered by the Nile River, (max 100 m), and 1 layer (5 m) accounting for the
which divides into two branches at the apex - Damietta and flux from Pliocene deposits.
Rosetta. The delta is bordered by the Suez Canal to the east, Temporal discretization Using the Automatic time-stepping method with a
Ismailia Canal to the southeast, El-Rayah El-Behery to the predictor–corrector scheme, adjusting time step
southwest, and Nubaria Canal to the west (Fig. 1). based on convergence behavior with an error
Geological tolerance of 1 × 10-3. Initial time step: 0.001 day.
information The maximum growth rate between subsequent
Geological formation Quaternary deposits consist of the Holocene and Pleistocene time steps was 2.
layers (Sestini, 1989). Below these two layers, is an Hydraulic and transport parameters of NDA
impervious Pliocene formation. Feature Description
Holocene layer Consists of medium to fine-grained silt with clay and peat in Horizontal hydraulic 50–500 mm/day (Nofal et al., 2015).
some locations (Pennington et al., 2017). Its thickness conductivity of Holocene
decreases towards the delta fringes in the south and reaches layer
up to 50 m near the sea. Vertical hydraulic 25 mm/day (Nofal et al., 2015).
Pleistocene layer Consists of coarse sands with a few clay intercalations. It is conductivity of Holocene
capped by the Holocene layer (RIGW, 1992). Its thickness layer
ranges from 200 m in the south up to 1000 m near the sea in Hydraulic conductivity of 23–177 m/day, average of 75 m/day (Elshinnawy
the north. It is the main highly productive aquifer. Pleistocene layer et al., 2015).
Pliocene layer Consists of marine clays. It is generally considered the Specific yield of top Holocene Gradual decrease from 12% to 0% towards the
aquifer hydrogeological base (Abd-Elaty and Zelenakova, layer north (Eltarabily and Negm, 2017; Eltarabily and
2022; Mabrouk et al., 2019b). Negm, 2018).
Hydrogeological Specific yield of Pleistocene Constant average value of 35%.
System layer
Aquifer classification The aquifer is unconfined in the east and west with a thin Specific storage Average value of 10–5 (1/m) (Van Engelen et al.,
top Holocene layer and confined in the northern middle 2018).
Delta with a thick top Holocene layer. It is also leaky in the Effective porosity of Varies spatially from 0.12 near the coast to 0.2 in
southern and middle parts. (Sherif et al., 2012). Pleistocene layer the south (Sherif et al., 2012).
Depth to water table Groundwater exists at shallow depths ranging from 1.0 near Effective porosity of clay cap Constant average value of 0.5 (effective porosity =
(m) the coast to 5 m in Cairo below the ground surface. 0.067) (Mabrouk et al., 2019b).
Transfer coefficient of surface 0.01 (1/day) (Van Engelen et al., 2019). It is used
water beds to simulate the rate of flux exchange between
can represent several nearby wells due to the relatively coarse grid of the surface water and groundwater.
model. The extraction wells were assigned vertically in different layers Longitudinal dispersivity 10 m (Nofal et al., 2018).
Transverse dispersivity 1 m (Nofal et al., 2018).
based on the location and length of the well screen. Their depth varied Molecular diffusion 8.64 × 10–5 m2/sec (Van Engelen et al., 2018).
between 45 and 180 m below the ground surface. Transfer rate of mass transport 1.5 m/day, adapted from a similar system for the
coefficient watershed of the Colombia River, USA (Fang et al.,
2.2.2. Model calibration 2020).
The calibration process was undertaken using manual trial-and-error
due to the long computation time. The calibrated parameters included 2.2.3. Future scenario
the irrigation return flow, seepage flux of the hypersaline groundwater, The current conditions for the flow and salinity in 2020 were ob­
horizontal hydraulic conductivity for the Pleistocene layer, vertical tained by running the simulation model using the calibrated parameters,
hydraulic conductivity for the Holocene layer, and longitudinal and the above-mentioned BCs but with the consideration of the
dispersivity. groundwater extraction increase and the sea level rise (SLR). The SLR
A total of 984 observation points (246 points at depths of 60 m, 200 boundary condition was updated to comply with the high-level climate
m, 400 m, and 600 m) were located on a pseudo-regular grid covering change scenario RCP 8.5 (Representative Concentration Pathways 8.5),
the entire model domain (Fig. 1). They were separated by approximately which corresponds to the highest CO2 emission. According to the esti­
10 km. The observed data of salinity concentration at depths 200, 400, mate provided by the IPCC, a gradual SLR was considered 4–5 mm/year
and 600 m and the shallow piezometric head at depth 60 m were (Torresan et al., 2020). Assessing the impacts of gradual SLR is more
extracted from the contour maps found in the literature, which were realistic than that of instantaneous SLR (Ketabchi et al., 2016), however,
developed based on collected field measurements in the same year 2013 the impacts of the landward migration of the coastline in response to SLR
(Nofal et al., 2015; Nofal, 2016). were not considered. The increase in groundwater extraction was
The model calibration performance was assessed based on the assumed to correlate with the increase in the population. The total
following statistical indices: 1) Root mean square error (RMSE), which population was expected to reach 200 million in 2100 with an average
measures the difference between the observed and simulated datasets, growth rate of 8.11% per year (Mabrouk et al., 2018). The future sce­
2) Nash-Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE), which estimates the ratio of nario until 2100 was applied to assess the vulnerability of the NDA to the
the model error to the variability of the data, 3) Coefficient of deter­ combined effect of gradual SLR and increase in groundwater extraction
mination (R2) (the squared value of Pearson correlation coefficient) to to reach 45 cm and 10.95 BCM/year, respectively.
quantify the similarity between the two datasets.

5
S. Saad et al.
Fig. 2. Plan view of the salinity distributions at the average depth of − 100 m, where most extraction wells are located, (a) in 2013 (initial salinity), (b) in 2020 (just
before implementing a mitigation measure), (c) & (d) in 2100 at the end of the management period, with no management strategy adopted and after implementing
the mitigation measure, respectively.
2.3. SWI management strategy
The goal of the management was to mitigate the SWI. The 1000,
2000, 10000, 17500, and 35000 mg/l isolines (salinity concentrations
contour lines) were used to fully represent the intrusive saltwater
wedge. The average intrusion length of each isoline (Lx ) was calculated
as in Eq.1.
∑
nc
Lx = avg lx
i=1
where, lx is the isoline intrusion length, measured per each node that
lies on the coastline (m), nc is the number of nodes that lie on the
coastline, and × corresponds to the isoline of interest. The objectives of
the management were to minimize L17500 (50% isochlor) by the end of
2100 and the total salt mass within the aquifer. These objectives were
chosen as evaluation criteria in previous studies (Abd-Elaty and Zele­
nakova, 2022; Saad et al., 2022). The mitigation management started in
2020 and continued until 2100 considering the future scenario settings.
The management utilized the proposed approach of Inj-GCW, which
combines injection wells for recharging the aquifer with available
treated wastewater and groundwater circulation wells to reduce further
toe advance. The treated wastewater used was tertiary treated with a
salinity of 500 mg/l.
The national development plan (Tawfik et al., 2021) expected a total
treatment capacity of 0.019 BCM/day for the Nile Delta by 2030, which
was distributed among the 11 administrative districts based on extracted
groundwater. 386 injection wells were assigned with an average
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
injection rate per well of 40000 m3/day at depths ranging from 50 to
275 m. Due to the grid size used, a single well could represent multiple
nearby wells. The next section will discuss the GCW technique.
2.3.1. Groundwater circulation well technology
Groundwater circulation wells (GCW) allow quasi-in-situ ground­
water remediation, where the aquifer is not subjected to a net loss or
gain of the groundwater. They include the following components:
(1)
- A well with two screened intervals separated by vertical distance and
isolated from each other by an impermeable plate,
- A pumping system that induces vertical groundwater circulation by
extracting groundwater from the extraction well interval and dis­
charging it to the recharge well interval.
The GCW could operate in two flow modes; standard mode and
reverse circulation mode. In standard mode, water is extracted from the
lower screen and injected through the upper screen, while in the reverse
mode, the process is reversed. Vats et al. (2020) tested the effect of both
modes on SWI and found that the standard GCW was ineffective.
Therefore, the reverse circulation mode was adopted in the present
study (Fig. 4).
GCWs are commonly used alongside other remediation techniques
(such as air stripping, ozone addition, and surfactant usage) to remove
volatile and nonvolatile organic compounds. However, these techniques
cannot treat salinity contamination. In this study, GCWs were used
without passing through an external treatment. They were used as
6
S. Saad et al.
Fig. 3. Vertical salinity distributions at three cross sections, their locations are shown in Fig. 2. (a,b,c) in 2013 (initial salinity), (d,e,f) in 2020 (just before
implementing a mitigation measure), (g,h,i) & (j,k,l) in 2100 at the end of the management period, with no management strategy adopted and after implementing the
mitigation measure, respectively.
Fig. 4. Groundwater circulation well (reverse circulation mode) sche­
matic diagram.
hydraulic barriers to mitigate SWI, benefiting from the developed ve­
locity, which can potentially reduce the inland lateral flow from the sea.
The velocity is enhanced due to the combination of the induced negative
pressure at the extraction well interval with the overpressure at the in­
jection well interval that generates a vertical hydraulic gradient. GCWs
can also dilute the initial salt concentration, as the salinity of extracted
water from the upper layer is less than that in the lower layer where it is
7
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
injected.
To simulate the GCW in the numerical model, its upper and lower
parts were designated as the extraction and injection sections, respec­
tively, with each section treated as a single well. Injection and extraction
rates were kept equal. The wellbore was represented as a one-
dimensional discrete feature with infinite hydraulic conductivity. To
formulate the mass flux boundary condition, Neumann-type BC should
be used. This requires applying the divergence form of the mass trans­
port equation to achieve mass conservation on the boundary (Diersch,
2013). However, the divergence form poses difficulties at the outflow
boundary, while the convective form is more stable (Panday et al.,
2018). To address this issue, the terms in Eq. (2) of the Neumann-type
BC for the divergence form were modified to become approximately
equivalent to Cauchy–type BC for the convective form (Eq. (3)).
− (D.∇C).n + C qn = qk (2)
where, D: hydrodynamic dispersion tensor, C is the unknown mass
concentration on the outflow boundary, n corresponds to the normal
unit vector, qn the normal fluxes across the boundary, qk are prescribed
Neumann mass fluxes on the boundary.
− (D.∇C).n − qn (Ck − C) = 0 (3)
where Cis the unknown mass concentration on the outflow bound­
ary, Ck is the prescribed value of mass concentration on Cauchy BC,
which equals the mass concentration of the water extracted by the GCW,
and qn represents the prescribed Neumann fluxes (≈ Cqkk ). A custom script
was developed in Python to simulate the GCW in FEFLOW.
GCW design parameters of spacing, screen placement, and injection/
extraction flow rate (circulation flow rate) vary according to the aquifer
conditions such as permeability, anisotropy, saturated thickness, etc.
(Tatti et al., 2019). However, to implement the new measure of Inj-
GWC, it was first examined in an illustrative case study. The hydro­
geological settings were set to mimic the NDA.
S. Saad et al.
2.3.2. Illustrative coastal aquifer case study
The aquifer is an unconfined, anisotropic, homogenous, deep coastal
aquifer. The model boundary was considered a rectangular shape. The
horizontal dimensions were × = 7000 m, y = 3000 m, and the vertical
dimension was z = -1000 m below the sea level, where the aquifer base
was located. The regional abstractions were supplied by 8 partially
penetrating pumping wells placed between 1000 and 3000 m from the
shoreline at depth of − 200 m below the ground surface with a constant
pumping rate of 6250 m3/day per well. The abstractions were estimated
based on the average ratio of abstractions to volume in the NDA of 2.14
× 10-6 1/day. More detailed description of the simulation model, and the
considered hydraulic parameters are found in the supplementary data.
Constant head Dirichlet boundary condition was imposed on the
right boundary with 0 m above the mean sea level and 35000 mg/l
constant salinity concentration, while for the left side, a constant inflow
of 0.015 m/day with a 250 mg/l salinity concentration was considered,
estimated using the average inflow to outflow ratio in the NDA of
approximately 0.85. The initial toe position (Xtoe), just before imple­
menting the measure, was located at 6081 m from the coast. The man­
agement period was 100 years.
A single injection well was located at the interface toe, penetrating
the entire aquifer and positioned at the midpoint of the model domain
along the y-axis (Fig. 5). The impact of the recharge rate was examined
using two rates: 75000 m3/day, equivalent to 1.5 times the total ab­
stractions, and 32000 m3/day, which maintained a similar ratio to the
injection and regional abstractions reported in the NDA (approximately
63%). For GCWs, two wells were centered on the y-axis, separated by 2
km (Fig. 5).
In previous studies, the spacing between adjacent GCWs was deter­
mined to guarantee that no fluid particles can escape from the interval
between them (e.g., Elmore and Hellman, 2001). Cleaning up all the salt
particles is technically and economically infeasible. Hence the selected
spacing was adopted from Abd-Elaty and Zelenakova (2022) study. They
used mixed hydraulic barriers of abstraction and injection wells to
control SWI in NDA which included abstracting brackish water and
recharging the aquifer using reclaimed water. The abstraction wells
Fig. 5. 3D illustrative coastal aquifer model with applied flow boundary conditions (a) hydraulic head distribution, (b) salinity distribution before the application of
management strategy (e.g., run2).
8
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
were set apart by 2 km. However, the abstraction wells in this study were
replaced by GCWs.
Table 4 lists the conducted simulation runs, to explore various con­
figurations of GCW, including the horizontal location (in the x-axis di­
rection), penetrating depth, injection and extraction screen locations of
wells, and the circulation rate. Fig. 5a and Fig. 5b provide a 3D view of
the coastal aquifer model for example run 2, showing the imposed flow
and transport boundary conditions, initial hydraulic head, and salinity
distributions just before the implementation of the management plan.
In light of the performed sensitivity analysis which described the
dynamics of Inj-GCW mitigation measure under different settings (dis­
cussed later in Section 3.3.1), the design parameters were determined.
They were then applied to the NDA. The GCWs were placed spatially to
align with the location of 17500 mg/l isoline at the bottom of the
Pleistocene layer, just before implementing the management strategy.
93 GCWs with a spacing of 2 km were used. Vertically, the extraction
well screens were located near the top of the Pleistocene layer at depths
varying from − 13 m to − 60 m, while the injection well screens were
placed at an average depth of − 350 m (ranging from − 118 m to − 517
m) (near the bottom of the Pleistocene layer). The total circulating flow
was considered as 5% of the injected water (950000 m3/day) after
testing different flows (Section 3.3.3).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Calibration results of NDA model
The initial and calibrated parameters are shown in Table 5. The
initial values and their ranges were based on the existing literature. In
general, the hydraulic conductivities in the Quaternary and Holocene
layers underestimated the salinities considering the initial values. The
seepage flux increased to mimic the hypersaline groundwater salinity
distribution within the aquifer. A remarkable change was made to the
longitudinal dispersivity to enhance the representation of the extent and
thickness of the freshwater-seawater transition zone, and to avoid the
non-convergence of the solute transport equation. It can also be
S. Saad et al.
Fig. 6. Spatial distribution of the calibrated parameters (a) Holocene layer horizontal hydraulic conductivity, (b) Pleistocene layer horizontal hydraulic conductivity,
and (c) Irrigation return flow rate.
attributed to that longitudinal dispersivity in laboratory experiments are
usually much smaller than those in the field (Gelhar et al., 1992). As the
irrigation return flows were the main source of recharge, their values
significantly influenced the groundwater levels.
The statistical errors between the simulated and published observed
hydraulic heads and salinities were computed. The RMSE, scaled-RMSE,
NSE, and R2 of the hydraulic heads were 1.2 m, 9.8%, 0.76, and 0.87,
and of the salinities at different depths were 4668 mg/l, 6.23%, 0.92,
and 0.9 respectively. The scaled-RMSE (RMSE scaled by the range of
measurements) values indicated an acceptable level of model-
measurement mismatch (Barnett et al., 2012). The R2 results showed a
high correlation between the simulated and observed measurements,
where values were > 0.7, indicating a significant relationship. NSE co­
efficients were close to 1, hence the groundwater levels and salinities
were closely matched by the calibrated model. The statistical errors of
the model calibration showed overall satisfactory results, and are shown
in Fig. 7.
3.2. Impacts of SLR and groundwater extractions on NDA
The extent of SWI in NDA was found to be highly affected by the
combined impacts of SLR induced by climate change and over­
exploitation of groundwater, as highlighted in previous studies (Abd-
Elaty et al., 2021; Mabrouk et al., 2018; Sefelnasr and Sherif, 2014).
Therefore, quantifying their impacts was crucial for sustainable
groundwater management in the region. The effects of the SLR (0.45 m)
and population growth (leading to a 2.45 times increase in abstractions
9
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
from 2020 to 2100) were investigated. The initial intrusions in 2020 of
1000, 2000, 10000, 17500, and 35000 mg/l isolines were 110 km, 86
km, 44.7 km, 36.4 km, and 18.1 km. The results showed further in­
trusions of 1.9 km, 5.8 km, 15.8 km, 12.4 km, and 6.6 km of the isolines
respectively, due to the combined effects of the SLR and over-
abstraction. Salinity distributions in 2020 and 2100 at three vertical
cross-sections are presented in Fig. 3d, e, f, g, h, and i. The total salt mass
within the aquifer increased from 6.04 × 1010 tons to 7.39 × 1010 tons.
3.3. Implementation of the SWI management strategy
3.3.1. Performance of Inj-GCW measure in controlling SWI under different
settings (based on the illustrative case study)
To gain a clear understanding of the mechanism of GCW and its ef­
ficacy when combined with the injection to control SWI, an illustrative
case study was conducted to allow fast evaluations of different config­
urations. The performance of the Inj-GCW measure, injection-only
measure, and no-management scenario were compared according to
the comparison points: repulsion of the intrusions of 1000, 2000, 10000,
17500, and 35000 mg/l isolines and the reduction in the total salt mass
within the aquifer.
The results showed that the injection-only scheme reduced the
aquifer’s salinity by 37.5% and repulsed the intrusions of 1000, 2000,
10000, 17500, and 35000 mg/l isolines by 37%, 38%, 47.8%, 49.7%,
and 12.8%, respectively, compared to the no-management scenario
(Fig. 8). The velocity vectors indicated that the injection scheme was
able to shift back the hydraulic gradient toward the sea (Fig. 9).
S. Saad et al. Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Table 4
Different physical and hydraulic settings of Inj-GCW simulation runs
No. of runs GCW Injection
Distance from the coast (m) Extraction depth (m) Injection depth (m) Total flow (m3/day) Total flow (m3/day)
1 0.25Xtoe ≈ 1500 − 200 − 1000 100,000 75,000

2 0.50Xtoe ≈ 3000 − 200 − 1000 100,000

3 0.75Xtoe ≈ 4500 − 200 − 1000 100,000
4 Xtoe ≈ 6000 − 200 − 1000 100,000
5 0.25Xtoe ≈ 1500 − 500 − 1000 100,000
6 0.50Xtoe ≈ 3000 − 500 − 1000 100,000
7 0.75Xtoe ≈ 4500 − 500 − 1000 100,000
8 Xtoe ≈ 6000 − 500 − 1000 100,000
9 0.25Xtoe ≈ 1500 − 900 − 1000 100,000
10 0.50Xtoe ≈ 3000 − 900 − 1000 100,000
11 0.75Xtoe ≈ 4500 − 900 − 1000 100,000
12 Xtoe ≈ 6000 − 900 − 1000 100,000
13 0.25Xtoe ≈ 1500 − 200 − 900 100,000
14 0.50Xtoe ≈ 3000 − 200 − 900 100,000
15 0.75Xtoe ≈ 4500 − 200 − 900 100,000
16 Xtoe ≈ 6000 − 200 − 900 100,000
17 0.25Xtoe ≈ 1500 − 500 − 900 100,000
18 0.50Xtoe ≈ 3000 − 500 − 900 100,000
19 0.75Xtoe ≈ 4500 − 500 − 900 100,000
20 Xtoe ≈ 6000 − 500 − 900 100,000
21 0.25Xtoe ≈ 1500 − 200 − 500 100,000
22 0.50Xtoe ≈ 3000 − 200 − 500 100,000
23 0.75Xtoe ≈ 4500 − 200 − 500 100,000
24 Xtoe ≈ 6000 − 200 − 500 100,000
From 25 to 48 Similar settings to their corresponding runs from 1 to 24 75,000
From 49 to 72 Similar settings to their corresponding runs from 1 to 24 50,000
From 73 to 96 Similar settings to their corresponding runs from 1 to 24 25,000
97 Similar settings to its corresponding run 2 100,000 32,000

Table 5
Values of initial and calibrated model parameters.
Parameter Initial values Units Lower Upper limit Calibrated Sources for the limits
limit parameters

Longitudinal dispersivity 10 m 0.1 500 100 (Abd-Elaty et al., 2021; Mabrouk et al., 2019b;
Negm et al., 2018; Nofal et al., 2015; Sherif et al.,
2012)
Holocene vertical hydraulic Varied spatially
conductivity
0.005–0.025 m/day 0.0025 16 0.007–0.016
(Fig. 6a)
Pleistocene layer horizontal Varied m/day 5 240 44––150
hydraulic conductivity spatially23.22–––177.49
(Fig. 6b)
Irrigation return flow Northern part 2.5 10-4 m/ 2.5 11 2––11
day
(Fig. 6c)
Middle part 10 2.5 10
Southern part 11 8 11
Eastern part 2.9 2 50
Western part 5 1 15
Hypersaline groundwater 3 × 10-6 3 × 10-6 6 × 10-6 3.75 × 10-6 Crude estimate
seepage flux

Fig. 8 shows the performance of the Inj-GCW measure under
different simulation runs (1 to 24), showing that all the runs, relative to
using injection only, showed further improvement at least in some
comparison points. The overall decrease in the total salt mass ranged
from 0% to 6%, while the repulsion of the isolines ranged from − 4.1% to
16.6%. Fig. 9 displays the vertical salinity distributions along the aquifer
length and the velocity vectors for the initial status, at the end of the
management period for the no-management scenario; after imple­
menting the injection scheme; and the Inj-GCW measure. The results
indicated that both the injection and Inj-GCW measures were able to
shift back the hydraulic gradient toward the sea, while combining in­
jection with GCW was a more effective measure for controlling SWI.
However, it was found that the horizontal and vertical position of the
GCW significantly affected the amount of improvement achieved, which
could impact the workability of Inj-GCW as a mitigation measure against
SWI.
At a circulating flow rate of 50,000 m3/day per each GCW, the
performance of the Inj-GCW measure was compared to the injection-
only scheme at various horizontal locations (in the x-axis direction).
Across the six runs (runs 1,5,9,13,17, and 21) where the GCW was
placed near the sea, the Inj-GCW measure could reduce the salinity of
the aquifer, particularly in terms of pushing back the 35000 mg/l isoline
by 2.6% to 5.8% relative to using injection only. The reduction in overall
aquifer salinity varied between 0 and 5.2% (Fig. 8). It was found that the
inland migration of the 10,000 mg/l and 17500 mg/l isolines ranged
from 0.59% to 0.71% and 0.16% to 1.26%, respectively (e.g. Fig. 9d for
run1). This migration was caused by the upward and inland lateral flows
induced by the injection head buildup, and the change in fluid density

10
S. Saad et al. Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Fig. 7. Goodness of fit of model outputs and their measured counterparts. Calibration results of (a) salinity at different depths, (b) hydraulic head.

Fig. 8. Intrusion length at the aquifer bottom of low and high salinity isolines and the total salt mass for runs 1 to 24 considering the same circulating flow of
100,000 m3/d, 75,000 m3/day for injection, and different locations for the GCW.

reflecting the replacement of higher salinity groundwater with injected
water. The study found that the effect of hydraulic gradient increase
vanished for the 1000 mg/l and 2000 mg/l isolines, resulting in no
significant impact.
Locating GCW, midway of the saltwater wedge, near 17500 mg/l
isoline (runs 2,6,10,14,18, and 22) caused more retreat for the 10000
mg/l and 17500 mg/l isolines than the other configurations, where the
repulsion of 10000 mg/l and 17500 mg/l ranged from 0.8% to 11% and
5.2% to 16.3% respectively relative to using injection alone. This can be
attributed to the curved shape of the freshwater-saltwater interface. The
maximum difference in salinity between the extracted water (from
fresh/brackish water) and where it would be injected (at saline water)
across this interface can be encountered (e.g. Fig. 9e for run2). This
circulating flow assisted in diluting the salinized groundwater and then
it was flushed out due to the seaward fluxes. Regarding the 35,000 mg/l
isoline, it did not exhibit significant repulsion. Injection rises the water
table in its vicinity, and hence inland migration is inevitable (Al-Yaqoubi
et al., 2021). As compared to using injection only across runs
2,6,10,14,18, and 22, the inland migration by the rest of the isolines
ranged from 0.4% to 1.9%. The maximum reduction in the total salt
mass (by 1.4% to 6.1%) was experienced when GCW was placed near the
midway of the interface (Fig. 8).
Placing the GCW at around 75% of the distance of the interface toe
measured from the coast (runs 3,7,11,15,19, and 23), resulting in the

11
S. Saad et al.
Fig. 9. Salinity distributions at a vertical cross-section along the aquifer passing through the GCW location and the velocity vectors (bullet shape tracks the di­
rection), (a) just before implementing the mitigation measure, (b) at the end of the management period for the no-management scenario, (c) injection only, (d),(e),(f),
and (g) Inj-GCW at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 and 1 Xtoe. (h) Reduced injection rate with GCW at 0.5 Xtoe. Rectangles indicate the GCW location.
maximum retreat for the 1000 mg/l and 2000 mg/l isolines relative to
all other configurations (ranged from 2% to 5.77%). This emphasizes
that the closer a site is to the GCW, the greater is the reduction in salinity
(e.g., Fig. 9f for run3). The reduction in total salt ranged from 0.5% to
2%.
In contrast, placing the GCW at the interface toe (runs 4, 8, 12, 16,
18, and 24) resulted in an insignificant reduction in aquifer salinity,
ranging from 0 to 0.72%. The repulsion for all the isolines ranged from
0 to 2.1%, with higher values in low salinity isolines. No inland
migration was observed for all the isolines (e.g., Fig. 9g for run4).
These simulation runs illustrated that the horizontal location of GCW
has a significant impact on SWI in terms of the total salt mass within the
aquifer and the intrusion length. The significant decrease in both com­
parison points, in any subregion of the model domain, was strongly
controlled by its distance from the GCW. Therefore, the chosen evalu­
ation criteria strongly influence the mitigation strategy. The optimal
location for pushing back one of the isolines might not be optimal for
repelling the others. This is similar to the finding reported by Ebeling
et al. (2019). The present study adopted the criterion of pushing back
the 17500 mg/l isoline, and the optimum location was found to be
midway through the interface toe and the coast (within the saline
wedge).
On the other hand, the vertical spacing between the extraction and
injection well screens and their locations varied to investigate their ef­
fects on the Inj-GCW measure with the same flow rates as previous runs
and by placing GCW at 0.5 Xtoe. Runs 2, 6, and 10 considered placing the
injection well screen at − 1000 m below the ground surface (at the
bottom of the aquifer), and the extraction well screen at separating
distances of 800 m (elevation − 200 m), 500 m (elevation − 500 m), and
12
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
100 m (elevation − 900 m) respectively. As can be seen in Fig. 8, run 2
was the most effective in controlling and mitigating SWI, which was
because of the large contrast in salinity between the extracted water and
where it would be injected. Freshwater floats on the top of the aquifer,
while the salinity increases getting deeper. Thus, the extracted water in
run 2 had lower salinity than runs 6 and 10, resulting in the most
dilution effect and flushing out of the saline groundwater. In run 2, the
reduction in aquifer salinity and 50% isoline repulsion were 6.1% and
16.3%, respectively; while they were 4.4% and 15.8% for run 6, and
1.4% and 12.3% for run 10. In runs 14 and 22, where the extraction well
screen was at − 200 m below the ground surface (near the top of the
aquifer) and the spacing to the injection well screen was at 600 m
(elevation − 900 m), and 300 m (elevation − 500 m) respectively, the
achieved SWI reduction in run 14 (4.6%) was less than that of run 2,
whereas, in run 22 it was much less (1.9%) (Fig. 8). Although the
spacing between the screens was the same in runs 18 and 22, and in runs
6 and 14, the SWI retreated more when the salinity difference between
the saline groundwater and the injected water across the circulating
flow was higher. The initial average salinity differences between both
extraction well and injection well screen locations for runs 18 and 22
were 5768 mg/l and 904 mg/l respectively, while for runs 6 and 14 they
were 8430 mg/l and 6672 mg/l (Fig. 8). The salinity difference between
extracted and injected water and their locations play a crucial role in
reducing SWI.
Additional runs were conducted with varying circulating flows to
further investigate the effect on intrusion lengths. Runs 25 to 48, 49 to
72, and 73 to 96 used the same configurations as runs 1 to 24, but with
75%, 50%, and 25% of the circulating flow, respectively. Fig. 10 shows
the intrusion lengths of 1000, 2000, 10000, 17500, and 35000 mg/l
S. Saad et al.
Fig. 10. Intrusion length of low and high salinity isolines for runs 2,6,10,14,18 &22 and their corresponding runs considering different circulating flows. The GCW
location was fixed within the saltwater wedge at a distance of 0.5 Xtoe.
isolines with GCW placed at 0.5 Xtoe and varying circulating flows of
12500, 25000, 37500, and 50000 m3/day per well. For runs 2, 6, and 14,
and their corresponding runs increasing the discharge resulted in more
retreats for the 10000 mg/l and 17500 mg/l isolines. However, the in­
crease in repulsion was disproportionately impacted by higher circu­
lating flow rates (Fig. 10). For instance, the repulsion of the 10000 mg/l
isoline increased from 4.7% to 11.1% for runs 2 and their corresponding
runs, from 3.3% to 10.3% for runs 6 and their corresponding runs, and
from 1.3% to 8.7% for runs 14 and their corresponding runs, when the
flow rate increased from 25% to 100%. Similarly, for the 17500 mg/l
isoline, the repulsion increased from 11.4% to 16.25%, from 8.4% to
16.6%, and from 7.2% to 14.8%, respectively. The rest of the isolines
showed insignificant improvement with varying flows. Regarding runs
10, 18, 22, and their corresponding runs in the other sets, they did not
show a substantial difference in the intrusion length with different flows
(Fig. 10). This can be attributed to the short spacing between the in­
jection well and extraction well screens (100 m, 300 m, and 400 m),
which resulted in short-circuiting. Short-circuiting occurs when there is
a direct flow from the injection interval of the higher hydraulic head to
the extraction interval of the lower hydraulic head without flowing
radially away from the well, thus limiting the area of effectiveness.
To investigate the influence of the injection rate on the effectiveness
of the Inj-GCW measure, the injection rate was decreased to 32000 m3/
day in run 97 using the same configuration as run 2, which was the most
effective mitigation measure. The measure’s ability to control SWI
significantly deteriorated compared to run 2, as shown in Fig. 9h. The
13
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
repulsion of 1000 mg/l, 2000 mg/l, 10000 mg/l, 17500 mg/l, and
35000 mg/l isolines decreased by 30%, 26.5%, 21%, 33%, and 6.6%,
respectively. Additionally, the total salt mass increased by 22.2%. This
deterioration may be due to the reduced ability of the measure to reverse
back the overall flow direction towards the sea and relieve regional
water deficiency.
Based on our results the optimal location for GCWs is where there is a
significant difference in salt concentration between the injection and
extraction well screens. This concentration difference leads to improved
mixing efficiency, resulting in a seaward retreat of the saltwater-
freshwater interface and a reduction in the overall salt mass. We have
found that a higher salinity difference yields a greater reduction in
saltwater intrusion (SWI). However, injecting water into a saline wedge
to achieve a high salinity difference may result in inland migration of
saltwater and increased salinity in some areas. Nonetheless, we have
observed a significant decrease in salinity near the location of the GCW.
Our study has also shown that increasing the circulation flow may
enhance SWI reduction, but the relationship is not strictly proportional.
Similarly, a higher injection rate results in a greater repulsive force on
the saltwater wedge, which pushes it back toward the sea. Therefore, it
is essential to consider the injection rate, circulating flow, GCW location,
and the location of injection and extraction well screens, as well as the
salinity difference when designing and implementing the Inj-GCW
measure for controlling SWI.
Overall, our findings provide valuable insights into the potential
effectiveness of GCW as a mitigation measure for SWI and underscore
S. Saad et al.
the importance of carefully evaluating and selecting the optimal GCW
location and operating parameters to achieve effective SWI reduction
while minimizing any potential adverse effects.
3.3.2. Controlling SWI in NDA using injection wells as hydraulic barriers
The potential impact of climate change and population growth on the
NDA system and freshwater availability has been studied, with a focus
on mitigating the expected increase in salinization. The study proposed
injecting high-quality treated wastewater and using groundwater con­
trol wells (GCWs) to control SWI.
To assess the efficacy of the injection scheme alone, the study
examined its impact on the salinity distribution in three vertical cross-
sections of the aquifer system (Figs. 11-13). As a baseline, the result­
ing aquifer salinization based on the future scenario, without imple­
menting the management strategy, was considered (Section 3.2). The
injection scheme successfully pushed back the average intrusion of the
17500 mg/l isoline towards the sea, reducing it from 48.9 km (baseline
scenario) to 45.6 km. Additionally, other isolines were also repulsed by
distances of 9.3 km, 15.1 km, 7.1 km, and 2.2 km for 1000 mg/l, 2000
mg/l, 10000 mg/l, and 35000 mg/l isolines, respectively. The total salt
mass decreased from 7.39 × 1010 to 7.03 × 1010 tons, resulting in an
overall decrease of 6.89% in salinity concentration relative to the
baseline concentrations of all model nodes. However, a small percentage
increase in salinity (0.15%) was observed, possibly due to the pressure
increase induced by the injected water, resulting in the inland flow of
relatively high salinity water. This issue can be resolved through
continuous groundwater extraction from the wellfields. The overall
hydraulic gradient towards the sea can also gradually remove residual
saltwater, although this process may take longer than the intrusion time
(Gao et al., 2021).
Previous studies using physical or hydraulic barriers have also
observed similar behavior of the high-salinity water inland migration
(Ebeling et al., 2019; Gao et al., 2021; Saad et al., 2022). While injecting
water directly at the interface toe or inland between the interface toe
and the extraction wells would have been more effective in controlling
SWI (Al-Yaqoubi et al., 2021; Ebeling et al., 2019), it was not feasible in
the present study due to the high cost and technical difficulties in
conveying treated wastewater over long distances from its source to the
injection wells.
To determine the locations of injection wells, several factors were
considered (Fig. 14): 1) the boundary of each administrative district was
considered to reduce the inconvenience and high cost of water
conveyance from its wastewater treatment plants to the injection wells
(El-Rawy et al., 2019), 2) injecting closer to the toe of the SWI interface
to effectively act as hydraulic barriers controlling the SWI, 3) injecting
the aquifer at the moderate hydraulic conductivity zone (≥8.64 m/day)
to store the water, thus the water can be readily available (Alam et al.,
2021) (Fig. 6b), 4) injecting in areas with a relatively thicker vadose
zone to provide significant volume for the groundwater storage
(Mohammad-Hosseinpour and Molina, 2022), and 5) injecting near the
irrigated lands to relieve the stress caused by over-exploitation of the
irrigation wells (Bachtouli and Comte, 2019).
To evaluate the impact of well screen location on the efficiency of the
injection scheme, different injection depths were assessed. The locations
of the well screens were varied between an average depth of 60 m
ranging from − 10 m to − 75 m below the ground surface and 500 m
ranging from − 200 m to − 900 m. Simulations were performed with the
same horizontal location and injection rates, and the intrusion lengths of
1000, 2000, 10000, 17500, and 35000 mg/l isolines were determined.
The results showed that the efficiency of the injection scheme was
significantly enhanced for shallow injection depths, as depicted in
Figs. 11- 13. The intrusion lengths of all the considered isolines
increased with increasing injection depth. Specifically, for an increase in
injection depth from 60 m to 500 m, the intrusion length of 1000, 2000,
10000, 17500, and 35000 mg/l isolines increased by 14.1, 10.4, 7.4, 5.1,
and 1.8 km, respectively.
14
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
It was found that a significant deterioration of the desalinization
efficiency occurred for deep penetrating wells (injected at the bottom of
the aquifer). This can be attributed to two factors. First, the hydraulic
gradient produced by the high rate of injection caused the migration of
brine and high-salinity water from the bottom of the aquifer, leading to
an increase in salinity. The salinity at the bottom of the aquifer, prior to
the implementation of the injection scheme, ranged from about 500 mg/
l to 108,500 mg/l, which was mainly caused by seawater intrusion,
downward seepage mass flux, and the upward transport of hypersaline
groundwater that was assumed to be originated from the compaction
(Van Engelen et al., 2018; Van Engelen et al., 2019). Second, the in­
jection wells were located far from the position of the toe which caused
lateral saline water inland migration. Al-Yaqoubi et al. (2021) also
observed in their physical experiments that shallow injection was more
effective in reducing salinity and cleaning salts from the upper zone of
the saline wedge than deep injection, especially when the injection was
placed far from the original interface toe, near the freshwater and
seawater boundaries of the sand tank.
The efficiency of the injection scheme decreased as the injection rate
increased, despite the reduction in SWI into the aquifer. This decrease in
efficiency can be attributed to the loss of groundwater flowing to either
the sea (Russo et al., 2015) or inland (Al-Yaqoubi et al., 2021). We used
Eq (4) to quantify the efficiency and found that doubling and halving the
injection rates led to a decrease and increase in efficiency by 0.29 and
0.92, respectively. Our injection scheme was compared with previous
studies that applied the same scheme but with different configurations
and injection rates, focusing on parts of the aquifer. Our results showed
good agreement with previous studies, with an estimated efficiency of
1.97 in our study, 2.31 in Abd-Elaty et al. (2021), and 1.89 in Mabrouk
et al. (2019a). This indicates that the injection scheme alone is efficient
compared to other previous studies, providing a fair comparison when
combined with groundwater circulation wells (GCWs) as a subsequent
measure (Inj-GCW measure).
L17500red × Ared
E= (4)
T yrs × rinj
where, E: Injection scheme efficiency, L17500red is the average reduc­
tion of the 50% isochlor intrusion length, Ared is the average area
reduced by the repulsion,Tyrs is the management period in years, and rinj
is the annual injection rate.
3.3.3. Controlling SWI in NDA using Inj-GCW measure
In the previous section, it was shown that injection of treated
wastewater has the potential to displace brackish and saline water,
thereby increasing the availability of freshwater. However, the feasi­
bility of this approach is limited by water availability. Alternatively,
using GCW only (aligned spatially with the 17500 mg/l isoline) was able
to push back the 2000 mg/l and 17500 mg/l isolines by 9.1 km and 0.33
km towards the sea, respectively. However, approximately 0.2 km
further intrusion was observed for the 1000 mg/l and 10000 mg/l iso­
lines compared to the no management scenario. The 35000 mg/l isoline
and the total salt mass within the aquifer remained unaffected.
Comparing the GCW scheme to injection scheme, no further improve­
ment in terms of the aquifer salinity and the repulsion of the isolines was
observed (Figs. 11- 13). To address the constraints of the injection
scheme and enhance GCW performance, GCWs are proposed as a com­
plementary measure to be employed in conjunction with the injection
scheme (Inj-GCW measure).
The effectiveness of the Inj-GCW in controlling SWI is highly
dependent on the salinity difference between the extracted and injected
water in the circulating flow. Fig. 14 illustrates the initial salinity dif­
ference between the extracted water at the top of the Pleistocene layer
and the water that would be injected at the bottom of the layer. At the
locations of the extraction well screens, the salinity ranged from 547
mg/l to 14,700 mg/l, with an average of 4,280 mg/l. While, at the
S. Saad et al. Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Fig. 11. Salinity distribution at the east vertical section presented in Fig. 14 (section 2) and the velocity vectors (arrows show the overall direction and bullet shape
tracks the direction). (a) No management applied, (b) Shallow injection, (c) Deep injection, (d) GCW, (e) Inj-GCW measure. The GCW location is indicated by dashed-
line rectangle.

15
S. Saad et al.
Fig. 12. Salinity distribution at the middle vertical section presented in Fig. 14
(section 1) and the velocity vectors (arrows show the overall direction and
bullet shape tracks the direction). (a) No management applied, (b) Shallow
injection, (c) Deep injection, (d) GCW only, (e) Inj-GCW measure. The GCW
location is indicated by dashed-line rectangle.
injection well screen locations, the salinity varied from 14,372 mg/l to
22,713 mg/l, with an average value of 17,928 mg/l. The amount of
improvement achieved due to the dilution effect and increase in the
velocity in the proximity of the GCW was higher using the Inj-GCW
measure than using the GCW measure only (Figs. 11 - 13). The higher
effectiveness of the Inj-GCW measure can be attributed to the induced
seaward fluxes. The seaward fluxes induced by the injection scheme play
a crucial role in the hydrodynamics of SWI. This agrees with the findings
of previous studies (Abdoulhalik et al., 2017; Armanuos et al., 2020;
Chang et al., 2021) on the influence of seaward fluxes.
The salinity distributions at three vertical sections are presented in
Figs. 11 -13, to demonstrate the efficacy of the Inj-GCW measure in
repelling the 17500 mg/l isoline by 1.05 km beyond what the injection
scheme alone achieves. Additionally, the 2000 mg/l isoline was slightly
pushed back (by 52 m), while no significant improvement was observed
for the 35000 mg/l isoline. However, the implementation of the Inj-
GCW measure resulted in the inland migration of the 1000 mg/l and
10000 mg/l isolines by 152 m and 324 m, respectively. The maximum
repulsion was observed for the 17500 mg/l isoline because the GCW was
located just upstream of this isoline before implementing the manage­
ment strategy. The total salt mass was reduced from 7.03 × 1010 to 7.0
× 1010 tons. The percent of the overall further decrease across all model
16
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
nodes in the salinity was 0.21%, while the increase was by 0.05%.
The Inj-GCW measure significantly improved the injection scheme,
leading to an 8.9% increase in the repulsion of the 17500 mg/l isoline
and a 5.2% reduction in aquifer salinity compared to the no manage­
ment scenario. This surpassed the improvements achieved using the
injection scheme alone, which resulted in a 6.7% increase in repulsion
and a 4.9% reduction in salinity. In addition, Inj-GCW significantly
reduced the salinity concentration distribution compared to no man­
agement (Fig. 2c and 2d), demonstrating its potential as a promising
strategy for improving the performance of the injection scheme and
controlling SWI. Notably, Inj-GCW outperformed other measures
implemented by Abd-Elaty et al. (2021), including a combined measure
of Treatment and Recharge of wastewater, Abstraction, and Desalination
of brackish water (TRAD) along with pumping reduction, which resulted
in only a 1.8% higher repulsion rate compared to injection alone in
controlling SWI in the NDA. While Inj-GWC resulted in a 2.2% increase.
These findings suggest that Inj-GWC is a highly effective method for
controlling SWI in the NDA, outperforming other measures.
A quantitative evaluation was conducted to determine the impact of
the circulating flow on SWI repulsion in NDA using the Inj-GCW measure
while fixing the injection amount. Our findings indicate that doubling
the circulating flow (to around 20000 m3/day per each well) exacer­
bated the inland migration of higher salinity water (≥10000 mg/l),
resulting in a further intrusion of all isolines except 10000 mg/l. The
10000 mg/l isoline retreated slightly by 50 m. On the other hand,
halving the circulating flow decreased the negative impact of the inland
migration, resulting in a maximum intrusion of 223 m, while the
repulsion of the 17500 mg/l isoline significantly decreased to 643 m.
Therefore, further research should focus on optimizing the circulating
flow to minimize intrusion while also reducing the adverse impact of
inland migration of brackish water. Various approaches for groundwater
management optimization, as described in the literature (e.g., Abarca
et al., 2006; Saad et al., 2022), can be adopted and implemented.
3.4. Investigating the mechanism of Inj-GCW measure as a hydraulic SWI
barrier
The formation of a hydraulic barrier to repel SWI, including the use
of GCWs, relies on two key factors: the significant difference in salinity
between the extracted water and the ambient groundwater at the in­
jection well screen of the GCW, and the enhanced velocity induced by
the circulating flow. These factors give rise to three observed phenom­
ena: (1) the creation of a bubble of fresh/brackish water within the
higher saline water, (2) the dilution of the salinized groundwater due to
the difference in salinity across the circulating flow, and (3) the change
of the groundwater flow path near the GCW due to the enhanced
velocity.
The bubble of fresh/brackish water gradually expanded upward and
connected to the upper zones of lower salinity (Figs. 11 - 13), as brackish
water was injected into the saline water through each GCW. This process
displaced the higher salinity water in all directions, effectively building
a hydraulic barrier against intrusion. Our findings align with those of Al-
Yaqoubi et al. (2021), who experimentally observed similar dynamics of
the SWI interface when freshwater was injected near the saline water
boundary. A bubble was created, which was topologically isolated from
the fresh groundwater, retarded the intrusion of the saline water when
the injection stopped by a time of around 500% longer than the other
scenarios where no bubble was formed. They stopped the injection to
mimic the cyclic managed aquifer recharge schemes experimentally.
Additionally, our study supports the findings of Zang and Li (2021), who
suggested that injecting compressed air as an alternative to freshwater
also depends on forming a bubble due to the air’s lower density that can
create a desaturated zone within the aquifer, impeding the SWI.
The dilution of the groundwater in the lower part of the GCW is
facilitated by the circulating flow. The abstracted water from the upper
part of the GCW is injected and mixed with the ambient groundwater
S. Saad et al. Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Fig. 13. Salinity distribution in the west vertical section presented in Fig. 14 (section3) and the velocity vectors (arrows show the overall direction and bullet shape
tracks the direction). (a) No management applied, (b) Shallow injection, (c) Deep injection, (d) GCW only, (e) Inj-GCw measure. The GCW location is indicated by
dashed-line rectangle.

17
S. Saad et al. Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139

Fig. 14. Spatial locations of extraction well screen and injection well screen of GCW, and injection wells. (a) Salinity distribution at an average depth of − 60 m
where the injection screens and the extraction screen of GCW were located. (b) Salinity distribution at an average depth of − 350 m where the injection screen of GCW
was located.

near the injection well screen. The mixing ratio between the regional
flow, the injected water by the GCW, and the ambient groundwater at
the injection well screen, defined the salinity concentrations near and
seaward the GCWs. This mixing is mainly dominated by forced con­
vection due to the injection and free convection resulting from the un­
stable density stratification when less saline water is injected into the
higher salinity water (the formed bubble). The mixing mechanism helps
to dilute the salinized groundwater and reduce its salinity, further
impeding the progress of SWI. This mechanism is similar to that
explained by Li et al. (2021) in their study of assessing the performance
of aquifer storage and recovery scheme by injecting freshwater into a
layered saline aquifer.
Additionally, the installation of the GCWs changed the flow path of
the groundwater near the wells to a circulating pattern, increasing the

18
S. Saad et al.
regional flow velocity and consequently creating a higher hydraulic
gradient. The high velocity at the injection well screens repulsed the SWI
by affecting the lower part of the mixing zone close to these wells, while
the upper part remained largely unchanged (compared to that using the
injection scheme only) (Figs. 11 -13).
The formation of the bubble, the dilution effect induced by the
circulating flow, and the enhanced velocity can delay the progress of the
SWI. However, the lateral retreat of the saltwater wedge is commonly
dominated by the advective forces driven by the seaward fluxes (Motz
and Sedighi, 2013). The regional flow in NDA was insufficient to turn
the overall flow direction towards the sea, as can be seen from the ve­
locity vectors in Figs. 11 - 13. Even though the Inj-GCW measure suc­
ceeded to achieve repulsion of the SWI and reduction to the total salt
mass, the system of NDA was still dominated by the density-driven flux
under the combined effect of the worst-case climate change scenario
(RCP 8.5) and projected population growth. By the end of the man­
agement period, the overall groundwater flow was still flowing inland
(from north to south) (Figs. 11-13). The study observed that a decrease
in the injection rate of the Inj-GCW measure led to a change in the
overall groundwater flow direction from seaward to inland, as seen in
the illustrative case study (run 2 and run 97). The decrease of 42%,
negatively affected the effectiveness of the Inj-GCW measure, reducing
the repulsion of 17500 mg/l isoline by 33% and the aquifer salinity by
22.2% (Fig. 9). The difference in improvement achieved in controlling
the SWI between the two runs can be attributed to the magnitude and
direction of the regional flow, highlighting the importance of the
regional freshwater fluxes in determining the extent of the SWI and the
salinization of the aquifer, and in enhancing the workability of the
mitigation measure.
The regional freshwater flux is affected by the over-exploitation of
groundwater and sea level rise. Mitigation strategies such as altering
crop patterns and using modern irrigation techniques, particularly in
water-scarce regions, can complement the Inj-GWC measure in reducing
their adverse impacts (e.g., Mabrouk et al., 2019a). Additionally, con­
trolling deforestation and adopting clean and renewable sources of en­
ergy can mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and reduce sea level rise (e.
g., Yoro and Daramola, 2020). Coastal protection structures can also be
constructed to mitigate SWI (e.g., Le Xuan et al., 2022). Further studies
are required to assess the effectiveness of combining these measures
with Inj-GCW in mitigating SWI in the NDA.
Additional research on biogeochemical processes in NDA is essential
as clogging is inevitable in any artificial recharge scheme during its
operational life including inj-GCW measure. However, effective design
addressing the biogeochemical processes (Dillon et al., 2020) and reg­
ular maintenance can help alleviate this concern.
4. Conclusions
In this study, we examined the potential impacts of sea level rise and
population growth on SWI in the NDA, which could lead to intensified
salinization without appropriate intervention. To address this issue, we
proposed a new mitigation measure called Inj-GCW, which involves
injecting the available treated wastewater and circulating groundwater
near the initial 50% isochlor (17500 mg/l isoline) to promote sustain­
able management of the coastal aquifer. Our analysis relied on a cali­
brated 3D transient model of density-dependent groundwater flow and
salt transport in the NDA. The main conclusions from the results of the
simulation model and the implementation of the Inj-GCW mitigation
measure are as follows:
1) The NDA is severely deteriorating due to salinization from SWI,
hypersaline groundwater flow, and mass fluxes from various sources
such as river branches, water networks, and irrigation return flows.
This has resulted in the intrusion of the 50% isochlor up to an
average distance of 36 km from the shoreline. Furthermore, under
the future scenario of a gradual sea level rise of 0.45 m and a three-
19
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
fold increase in groundwater abstractions, the intrusion is expected
to extend another 12.4 km by year 2100. Therefore, implementing a
sustainable management strategy is imperative.
2) The location of GCWs relative to the interface toe of the saltwater
wedge had a significant impact on intrusion reduction and aquifer
salinity. Placing GCWs near the toe pushed back low salinity isolines
due to increased velocity induced by the circulating flow. However,
circulating flow within the saline wedge repelled high salinity iso­
lines and resulted in a greater aquifer salinity decrease. This was due
to the dilution effect from the large salinity contrast between the
extracted water and the ambient groundwater at the GCW’s injection
well screen, as well as the velocity increase due to flow circulation.
Efficiency was enhanced when GCWs were placed within the saline
wedge, with extraction at the top and injection at the bottom of the
aquifer.
3) Placing the injection well screen of the GCW within the saline wedge
resulted in the formation of a fresh/brackish water bubble. This
bubble displaced the saline water as it grew and acted as a hydraulic
barrier.
4) The retreat of isolines near the GCW is positively correlated with the
circulating flow rate, but it can lead to inland migration of saline
water upstream of the GCW. However, short-circuiting may occur
due to the short spacing between injection well and extraction well
screens, resulting in insignificant differences in the retreat of isolines
with varying flows. To determine the optimal design variables, such
as circulating flow, GCW locations, and screen placement, a coupled
simulation–optimization model with objective functions of minimum
total cost and maximum reduction in saltwater intrusion (SWI) is
necessary.
5) The efficiency of shallow injection in repulsing saline water intrusion
and reducing salt mass was higher than deep injection. The injection
wells were distributed across the entire model domain, not just near
the interface toe for sewage treatment plant proximity. Conse­
quently, injecting in less saline upper layers mitigated adverse im­
pacts of inland migration of saline water.
6) The hydrodynamic mechanism of the Inj-GCW measure relies on
several key factors. Firstly, the seaward freshwater flux induced by
artificial recharge creates a repulsive force that acts on the entire
saltwater wedge. Secondly, the relatively high velocity at the injec­
tion well screen results from the circulating flow, which increases the
hydraulic head at the bottom of the GCW and alters the salinity
distribution in its proximity. Lastly, the salinity difference across the
circulating flow also plays a significant role.
7) The effectiveness of the Inj-GCW measure for SWI control increases
as the seaward hydraulic gradient becomes steeper.
8) The Inj-GCW measure demonstrated superior effectiveness in
retreating the SWI in the NDA compared to other measures,
including injection scheme only, GCW measure only, and a combi­
nation of injecting treated wastewater and abstracting brackish
water (TRAD measure), as well as reducing regional abstractions (in
previous studies identified as the most effective measure). This em­
phasizes that the circulating flow with no net loss or gain of the
groundwater can alleviate the potential problem of abstracting
freshwater, and enhance the feasibility of the injection scheme
considering water availability constraints.
In summary, the study has demonstrated the hydraulic effectiveness
of the Inj-GCW measure in mitigating SWI in the NDA and has high­
lighted the need for further research to optimize its design and assess its
economic feasibility in comparison to combining injection with other
hydraulic or physical barriers. These findings contribute to the under­
standing of SWI mitigation measures and support the implementation of
sustainable management strategies for coastal aquifers facing saliniza­
tion challenges.
S. Saad et al.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Samia Saad: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal
analysis, Investigation, Validation, Resources, Visualization, Writing –
original draft, Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition. Akbar A.
Javadi: Supervision, Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing.
Hany F. Abd-Elhamid: Visualization, Writing – review & editing.
Raziyeh Farmani: Supervision, Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
The first author is funded by the Ministry of Higher Education of the
Arab Republic of Egypt, Netwon Mosharafa scholarship [ID: NMM26/
17]. The authors would like to express their gratitude to the DHI group
for providing the free license of FEFLOW. The authors would also like to
thank Mohammed Marzouk, research assistant at Nile research institute,
National water research center, Egypt for discussions on seawater
intrusion modeling of the Nile Delta aquifer.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130139.
References
Abarca, E., Vázquez-Suñé, E., Carrera, J., Capino, B., Gámez, D., Batlle, F., 2006. Optimal
design of measures to correct seawater intrusion. Water Resour. Res. 42 (9).
Abd-Elaty, I., Javadi, A.A., Abd-Elhamid, H., 2021. Management of saltwater intrusion in
coastal aquifers using different wells systems: A case study of the Nile Delta aquifer
in Egypt. Hydrogeol. J., 29(5): 1767-1783.
Abd-Elaty, I., Zelenakova, M., 2022. Saltwater intrusion management in shallow and
deep coastal aquifers for high aridity regions. J. Hydrol.: Reg. Stud. 40, 101026.
Abd-Elhamid, H., Abdelaty, I., Sherif, M., 2019. Evaluation of potential impact of Grand
Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on seawater intrusion in the Nile Delta aquifer. Int. J.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 16 (5), 2321–2332.
Abd-Elhamid, H.F., Abd-Elaty, I., Hussain, M.S., 2020. Mitigation of seawater intrusion
in coastal aquifers using coastal earth fill considering future sea level rise. Environ.
Sci. Pollut. Res. 27 (18), 23234–23245.
Abdoulhalik, A., Ahmed, A., Hamill, G., 2017. A new physical barrier system for seawater
intrusion control. J. Hydrol. 549, 416–427.
Ainscough, T.J., Oatley-Radcliffe, D.L., Barron, A.R., 2021. Groundwater remediation of
volatile organic compounds using nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes—A
field study. Membranes 11 (1), 61.
Alam, S., Borthakur, A., Ravi, S., Gebremichael, M., Mohanty, S.K., 2021. Managed
aquifer recharge implementation criteria to achieve water sustainability. Sci. Total
Environ. 768, 144992.
Al-Yaqoubi, S., Al-Maktoumi, A., Kacimov, A., Abdalla, O., Al-Belushi, M., 2021. Fresh-
saline water dynamics in coastal aquifers: Sand tank experiments with MAR-wells
injecting at intermittent regimes. J. Hydrol. 601, 126826.
Armanuos, A.M., Ibrahim, M.G., Mahmod, W.E., Takemura, J., Yoshimura, C., 2019.
Analysing the combined effect of barrier wall and freshwater injection
countermeasures on controlling saltwater intrusion in unconfined coastal aquifer
systems. Water Resour. Manag. 33 (4), 1265–1280.
Armanuos, A.M., Al-Ansari, N., Yaseen, Z.M., 2020. Assessing the Effectiveness of Using
Recharge Wells for Controlling the Saltwater Intrusion in Unconfined Coastal
Aquifers with Sloping Beds: Numerical Study. Sustainability 12 (7). https://doi.org/
10.3390/su12072685.
Bachtouli, S., Comte, J.-C., 2019. Regional-Scale Analysis of the Effect of Managed
Aquifer Recharge on Saltwater Intrusion in Irrigated Coastal Aquifers: Long-Term
Groundwater Observations and Model Simulations in NE Tunisia. J. Coast. Res. 35
(1), 91–109.
Barnett, B. et al., 2012. Australian groundwater modelling guidelines. Waterlines report
series, National Water Commission, Canberra: 203.
20
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
Chang, Q., Zheng, T., Chen, Y., Zheng, X., Walther, M., 2021. Influence of inland
freshwater influx on the natural desalination of coastal aquifers with a cutoff wall.
Desalination 499, 114863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2020.114863.
Dibaj, M., Javadi, A.A., Akrami, M., Ke, K.-Y., Farmani, R., Tan, Y.-C., Chen, A.S., 2021.
Coupled three-dimensional modelling of groundwater-surface water interactions for
management of seawater intrusion in Pingtung Plain, Taiwan. J. Hydrol. Regl. Stud.
36, 100850.
Diersch, H.-J.-G., 2013. FEFLOW: finite element modeling of flow, mass and heat
transport in porous and fractured media. Springer Science & Business Media.
Dillon, P., Fernández Escalante, E., Megdal, S.B., Massmann, G., 2020. Managed aquifer
recharge for water resilience. MDPI 12 (7), 1846.
Ebeling, P., Händel, F., Walther, M., 2019. Potential of mixed hydraulic barriers to
remediate seawater intrusion. Sci. Total Environ. 693, 133478 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.07.284.
Elmore, A.C., Hellman, J.B., 2001. Model-predicted groundwater circulation well
performance. Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste
Management, 5(4): 203-210.
El-Rawy, M., Al-Maktoumi, A., Zekri, S., Abdalla, O., Al-Abri, R., 2019. Hydrological and
economic feasibility of mitigating a stressed coastal aquifer using managed aquifer
recharge: a case study of Jamma aquifer, Oman. J. Arid Land 11 (1), 148–159.
Elshinnawy, H., Zeidan, B., Ghoraba, S., 2015. Impact of hydraulic conductivity
uniformity on seawater intrusion in the Nile Delta aquifer, Egypt.
Eltarabily, M.G.A., Negm, A.M., 2017. Groundwater management for sustainable
development east of the nile delta aquifer. Groundwater in the Nile Delta 687–708.
Eltarabily, M.G.A., Negm, A.M., 2018. Groundwater management for sustainable
development plans for the Western Nile Delta. Groundwater in the Nile Delta
709–727.
Fang, Y., Chen, X., Gomez Velez, J., Zhang, X., Duan, Z., Hammond, G.E., Goldman, A.E.,
Garayburu-Caruso, V.A., Graham, E.B., 2020. A multirate mass transfer model to
represent the interaction of multicomponent biogeochemical processes between
surface water and hyporheic zones (SWAT-MRMT-R 1.0). Geosci. Model Dev. 13 (8),
3553–3569.
Ganot, Y., Holtzman, R., Weisbrod, N., Russak, A., Katz, Y., Kurtzman, D., 2018.
Geochemical processes during managed aquifer recharge with desalinated seawater.
Water Resour. Res. 54 (2), 978–994.
Gao, M., Zheng, T., Chang, Q., Zheng, X., Walther, M., 2021. Effects of mixed physical
barrier on residual saltwater removal and groundwater discharge in coastal aquifers.
Hydrol. Process. 35 (7), e14263.
Gelhar, L.W., Welty, C., Rehfeldt, K.R., 1992. A critical review of data on field-scale
dispersion in aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 28 (7), 1955–1974.
Hussain, M.S., Abd-Elhamid, H.F., Javadi, A.A., Sherif, M.M., 2019. Management of
seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers: a review. Water 11 (12), 2467.
Idowu, T.E., Lasisi, K.H., 2020. Seawater intrusion in the coastal aquifers of East and
Horn of Africa: a review from a regional perspective. Scientific African 8, e00402.
Jiao, J., Post, V., 2019. Coastal hydrogeology. Cambridge University Press.
Kacimov, A., Sherif, M., Perret, J., Al-Mushikhi, A., 2009. Control of sea-water intrusion
by salt-water pumping: Coast of Oman. Hydrogeol. J., 17(3): 541-558.
Ketabchi, H., Mahmoodzadeh, D., Ataie-Ashtiani, B., Simmons, C.T., 2016. Sea-level rise
impacts on seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers: Review and integration. J. Hydrol.
535, 235–255.
Le Xuan, T.u., Ba, H.T., Thanh, V.Q., Wright, D.P., Hasan Tanim, A., Tran Anh, D., 2022.
Evaluation of coastal protection strategies and proposing multiple lines of defense
under climate change in the Mekong Delta for sustainable shoreline protection.
Ocean Coast. Manag. 228, 106301.
Li, H., Ye, Y., Lu, C., 2021. Aquifer Storage and Recovery in Layered Saline Aquifers:
Importance of Layer-Arrangements. Water 13 (18), 2595.
Mabrouk, M., Jonoski, A., Oude Essink, G.H., 2019a. Regional Groundwater Modelling
For Determining Adaptation Strategies In The Nile Delta Aquifer. E-Proceedings of
the 38th IAHR World Congress, Panama City, Panama. 10.3850/38WC092019-1397.
Mabrouk, M., Jonoski, A., Oude Essink, H.P., G., Uhlenbrook, S., 2018. Impacts of sea
level rise and groundwater extraction scenarios on fresh groundwater resources in
the Nile Delta Governorates. Egypt. Water 10 (11), 1690.
Mabrouk, M., Jonoski, A., Oude Essink, G.H., Uhlenbrook, S., 2019b. Assessing the
fresh–saline groundwater distribution in the Nile delta aquifer using a 3D variable-
density groundwater flow model. Water 11 (9), 1946.
Mohammad-Hosseinpour, A., Molina, J.-L., 2022. Improving the Sustainability of Urban
Water Management through Innovative Groundwater Recharge System (GRS).
Sustainability 14 (10), 5990.
Motz, L.H., Sedighi, A., 2013. Saltwater Intrusion and Recirculation of Seawater at a
Coastal Boundary. J. Hydrol. Eng. 18 (1), 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
HE.1943-5584.0000594.
Negm, A.M., Sakr, S., Abd-Elaty, I., Abd-Elhamid, H.F., 2018. An overview of
groundwater resources in Nile Delta aquifer. Groundwater in the Nile Delta 3–44.
Nofal, E.R., 2016. Seawater Intrusion in Nile Delta in perspective of climate changes and
aquifer heterogeneity. Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Egypt. Ph.D. Thesis.
Nofal, E., Amer, M., El-Didy, S., Fekry, A., 2015. Sea water intrusion in Nile Delta in
perspective of new configuration of the aquifer heterogeneity using the recent
stratigraphy data. J. Am. Sci. 11 (6), 281–292.
Nofal, E.R., Fekry, A.M., Ahmed, M.H., El-Kharakany, M.M., 2018. Groundwater:
Extraction versus recharge; vulnerability assessment. Water Sci. 32 (2), 287–300.
Page, D., Bekele, E., Vanderzalm, J., Sidhu, J., 2018. Managed aquifer recharge (MAR) in
sustainable urban water management. Water 10 (3), 239.
Panday, S., Bedekar, V., Langevin, C.D., 2018. Impact of Local Groundwater Flow Model
Errors on Transport and a Practical Solution for the Issue. Groundwater 56 (4),
667–672. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12627.
S. Saad et al.
Pennington, B.T., Sturt, F., Wilson, P., Rowland, J., Brown, A.G., 2017. The fluvial
evolution of the Holocene Nile Delta. Quaternary Science Reviews 170, 212–231.
Pool, M., Carrera, J., 2010. Dynamics of negative hydraulic barriers to prevent seawater
intrusion. Hydrgeol. J. 18 (1), 95–105.
Pörtner, H.-O., et al., 2022. Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability.
IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.
RIGW, 1992. Hydrogeological map of Egypt: map sheet of Nile Delta. Research Institute
for Groundwater, National Water Research Center, Kanater El Khairia, Egypt.
Saad, S., Javadi, A.A., Chugh, T., Farmani, R., 2022. Optimal Management of Mixed
Hydraulic Barriers in Coastal Aquifers using Multi-objective Bayesian Optimization.
J. Hydrol. 612, 128021.
Saad, S., Javadi, A.A., Farmani, R., Sherif, M., 2023. Efficient uncertainty quantification
for seawater intrusion prediction using Optimized sampling and Null Space Monte
Carlo method. J. Hydrol. 620, 129496.
Sefelnasr, A., Sherif, M., 2014. Impacts of seawater rise on seawater intrusion in the Nile
Delta aquifer, Egypt. Groundwater 52 (2), 264–276.
Sestini, G., 1989. Nile Delta: a review of depositional environments and geological
history. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 41 (1), 99–127.
Sharan, A., Lal, A., Datta, B., 2021. A review of groundwater sustainability crisis in the
Pacific Island countries: Challenges and solutions. J. Hydrol. 603, 127165.
Shen, C., Fan, Y.u., Wang, X., Song, W., Li, L., Lu, C., 2022. Effects of Land Reclamation
on a Subterranean Estuary. Water Resour. Res. 58 (6).
Sherif, M., Sefelnasr, A., Javadi, A., 2012. Incorporating the concept of equivalent
freshwater head in successive horizontal simulations of seawater intrusion in the
Nile Delta aquifer, Egypt. J. Hydrol. 464–465, 186–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jhydrol.2012.07.007.
Sherif, M., Sefelnasr, A., Ebraheem, A.A., Javadi, A., 2014. Quantitative and qualitative
assessment of seawater intrusion in Wadi Ham under different pumping scenarios.
J. Hydrol. Eng. 19 (5), 855–866.
Sherif, M., 2003. Assessment, modeling and management of seawater intrusion in the
Nile delta aquifer. Tecnología De La Intrusión De Agua De Mar En Acuíferos
Costeros: PAÍSES MEDITERRÁNEOS© IGME, Madrid.
Shi, L., Lu, C., Ye, Y., Xie, Y., Wu, J., 2020. Evaluation of the performance of multiple-
well hydraulic barriers on enhancing groundwater extraction in a coastal aquifer.
21
Journal of Hydrology 626 (2023) 130139
Adv. Water Resour. 144, 103704 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
advwatres.2020.103704.
Song, J., Yang, Y., Wu, J., Wu, J., Sun, X., Lin, J., 2018. Adaptive surrogate model based
multiobjective optimization for coastal aquifer management. J. Hydrol. 561,
98–111.
Tatti, F., Petrangeli Papini, M., Torretta, V., Mancini, G., Boni, M.R., Viotti, P., 2019.
Experimental and numerical evaluation of Groundwater Circulation Wells as a
remediation technology for persistent, low permeability contaminant source zones.
J. Contam. Hydrol. 222, 89–100.
Tawfik, M.H., Hoogesteger, J., Elmahdi, A., Hellegers, P., 2021. Unpacking wastewater
reuse arrangements through a new framework: insights from the analysis of Egypt.
Water Int. 46 (4), 605–625.
Torresan, S., Furlan, E., Critto, A., Michetti, M., Marcomini, A., 2020. Egypt’s coastal
vulnerability to sea-level rise and storm surge: Present and future conditions. Integr.
Environ. Assess. Manag. 16 (5), 761–772.
Van Engelen, J., Essink, G.H.O., Kooi, H., Bierkens, M.F., 2018. On the origins of
hypersaline groundwater in the Nile Delta aquifer. J. Hydrol. 560, 301–317.
van Engelen, J., Verkaik, J., King, J., Nofal, E.R., Bierkens, M.F.P., Oude Essink, G.H.P.,
2019. A three-dimensional palaeohydrogeological reconstruction of the groundwater
salinity distribution in the Nile Delta Aquifer. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 23 (12),
5175–5198.
Vats, O.P., Sharma, B., Stamm, J., Bhattacharjya, R.K., 2020. Groundwater circulation
well for controlling saltwater intrusion in coastal aquifers: numerical study with
experimental validation. Water Resour. Manag. 34 (11), 3551–3563.
Vu, D., Yamada, T., Ishidaira, H., 2018. Assessing the impact of sea level rise due to
climate change on seawater intrusion in Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Water Sci. Technol.
77 (6), 1632–1639.
Yin, J., Tsai, F.-T.-C., 2019. Steady-state approximate freshwater–saltwater interface in a
two-horizontal-well scavenging system. J. Hydrol. Eng. 24 (10), 06019008.
Yoro, K.O., Daramola, M.O., 2020. Chapter 1 - CO2 emission sources, greenhouse gases,
and the global warming effect. In: Rahimpour, M.R., Farsi, M., Makarem, M.A.
(Eds.), Advances in Carbon Capture. Woodhead Publishing, pp. 3–28. https://doi.
org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819657-1.00001-3.
Zang, Y., Li, M., 2021. Numerical assessment of compressed air injection for mitigating
seawater intrusion in a coastal unconfined aquifer. J. Hydrol. 595, 125964.