1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 23, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 23, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

Abstract

This case study examines the mapping of old landfill boundaries using a short‐coil spacing frequency domain electromagnetic (EM) system in western Finland. Geophysics was used to supplement the preceding soil drillings, test pits and samples taken. In many places at the site area, there were difficult access conditions and obstacles that flexible moving geophysical surveying could bypass and avoid. Short‐coil spacing EM mapping with three frequencies was chosen as the method of investigation. The frequency‐sounding effect was analysed and shown that it is present under typical conditions met. The depth of investigation can also be calculated with the specific system parameters specified. Frequency‐traverse tabulated graphical presentation of apparent resistivities was aefficient method to present EM results for qualitative assessment. In practice, on‐site applicability was first tested with two reference lines for natural ground and landfill area characteristics. The results showed clear differences in terms of resistivities, as well as the real (Re) and imaginary (Im) component values, Re/Im ratios and signal characteristics. The main survey consisted of another 20 investigation lines at various places intersecting presumed landfill boundaries. Interpretation of the data and point‐by‐point classification were based on reference line data and inferred waste disposal material indicators. The quality of the data was assessed with calibration points and static offsets determined with the help of resistive bedrock point. Finally, EM data values were compared against test pits and drillings at close proximity, supporting the reliability of the EM survey and the differentiation between waste and contamination made. Layer modelling was tested to study the depth penetration and to assess whether additional information could be produced from calculated resistivities and magnetic material indications.

© 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70004
2025-05-21
2025-06-22

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70004
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andrade, F.C.M., Fischer, T. & Valenta, J. (2016) Study of errors in conductivity meters using the low induction number approximation and how to overcome them. EAGE near surface geophysics, conference 2016. Extended abstract we 22P2 24. Utrecht, the Netherlands, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. p. 5.
  2. Delgado‐Rodriguez, O. (2017) Mapping of hydrocarbon‐ and scrap‐metal‐contaminated soil using volatile organic compounds and electromagnetic profiling methods. Near Surface Geophysics, 15, 312–321.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Dumont, G., Robert, T., Marck, N. & Nguyen, F. (2017) Assessment of multiple geophysical techniques for the characterization of municipal waste deposit sites. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 145, 74–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Finnish Meteorological Institute. (2022) Available from: https://en.ilmatieteenlaitos.fi/sealevelstatistics.html
  5. Frischknecht, F.C., Labson, V.F., Spies, B.R. & Anderson, W.L. (1991) Profiling methods using small sources. In: Nabighian, M.N. (Ed.) Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 105–270.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Geological Survey of Finland . (2022) Acid sulphate soils map service (in Finnish). Available at: https://gtkdata.gtk.fi/hasu/index.html
  7. Godio, A. & Naldi, M. (2009) Integration of electrical and electromagnetic investigation for contaminated site. American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 5(4), 561–568.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Huang, H. (2005) Depth of investigation for small broadband electromagnetic sensors. Geophysics, 70(6), G135–G142.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Inauen, C.M., Chambers, J.E., Watlet, A., Whiteley, J.S., Gunn, D.A., Dashwood, B. et al. (2019) Landfill characterization with a multi‐method geophysical approach—a case study from Emersons Green, UK. Proceedings of near surface geoscience conference, 2019. Extended abstract we_25_P15. The Hague, Netherlands, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–5.
  10. McNeill, J.D. (1980) Electromagnetic terrain conductivity measurement at low induction numbers. Canada: Geonics Limited.
  11. Mitsuhata, Y., Ando, D., Imasato, T. & Tahagi, K. (2014) Characterisation of organic‐contaminated ground by a combination of electromagnetic mapping and direct‐push in situ measurements. Near Surface Geophysics, 12, 613–621.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Mitsuhata, Y., Ueda, T., Kamimura, A., Kato, S., Takeuchi, A., Aduma, C. & Yokota, T. (2022) Development of a drone‐borne electromagnetic survey system for searching for buried vehicles and soil resistivity mapping. Near Surface Geophysics, 20, 16–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Narciso, J., Azevedo, L., Van De Vijver, E. & Van Meirvenne, M. (2020) Geostatistical electromagnetic inversion for landfill characterisation [Expanded abstracts]. Near Surface Geoscience Conference & Exhibition Online 2020, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–5.
  14. Reynolds, J.M. (2011) An introduction to applied and environmental geophysics, 2nd edition, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley‐Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Saksa, P. (2016) Frequency effects in hand‐held electromagnetic short coil spacing data. Proceeding of poster presentation, EAGE annual conference, WIEN 2016. Utrecht, the Netherlands, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–5.
  16. Soveri, J., Mäkinen, R. & Peltonen, K. (2001) Pohjaveden korkeuden ja laadun vaihteluista Suomessa 1975–1999. Suomen ympäristö 420. Suomen ympäristökeskus Helsinki (in Finnish).
  17. Spies, B.R. & Frischknecht, F.C. (1991) Electromagnetic sounding. In: Nabighian, M.N. (Ed.) Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 285–426.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Vahanen Environment Oy . (2015) Environmental investigation report; Suvilahti, old landfill area. Vahanen Environment Oy. Report ENV605.
  19. Won, I.J. (2003) Small frequency‐domain electromagnetic induction sensors. The Leading Edge, 22, 320–322.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Won, I.J. & Huang, H. (2004) Magnetometers and electro‐magnetomenters. The Leading Edge, 23, 448–451.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70004
Loading
Electromagnetic survey of old landfill boundaries—A case study
Near Surface Geophysics 23, 153 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.70004
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70004
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70004
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): case histories; electromagnetic; environmental; interpretation

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error