The aim of this study was to investigate groundwater potential and aquifer protective capacity of an area behind the College of Science, Federal University of Petroleum Resources, Effurun-Warri area of Delta State, Nigeria. The data was acquired using ABEM SAS 4000 Terrameter and processed using IPI2win and Interpex software. Five Vertical Electrical Soundings were carried out with maximum current electrode separation (AB) of 120 m. The VES curves generated from the data revealed HKH curve type for VES 1 and VES 2, KQH curve for VES 3 and KH curve for VES 4 and 5. Five resistivity layers were identified for VES 1 - 3 while four resistivity layers were identified for VES 4 – 5. Analysis and interpretation of VES data obtained from the study area showed VES 3, VES 4 and VES 5 to be most appropriate locations to be explored for borehole development due to low resistivity of the weathered/fractured aquiferous layers coupled with the relatively high thicknesses of the weathered layers. However, all the aquifers in the VES locations are poorly protected due to the very low aquifer protective capacity parameters in the VES locations.

1. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
IJGM
Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer
Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State,
Nigeria
Bello Rasaq
Department of Physics, University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt, Nigeria
Tel.: +234(0)8036684498; Email: rasaq.bello@uniport.edu.ng
The aim of this study was to investigate groundwater potential and aquifer protective capacity of
an area behind the College of Science, Federal University of Petroleum Resources, Effurun-Warri
area of Delta State, Nigeria. The data was acquired using ABEM SAS 4000 Terrameter and
processed using IPI2win and Interpex software. Five Vertical Electrical Soundings were carried
out with maximum current electrode separation (AB) of 120 m. The VES curves generated from
the data revealed HKH curve type for VES 1 and VES 2, KQH curve for VES 3 and KH curve for
VES 4 and 5. Five resistivity layers were identified for VES 1 - 3 while four resistivity layers were
identified for VES 4 – 5. Analysis and interpretation of VES data obtained from the study area
showed VES 3, VES 4 and VES 5 to be most appropriate locations to be explored for borehole
development due to low resistivity of the weathered/fractured aquiferous layers coupled with the
relatively high thicknesses of the weathered layers. However, all the aquifers in the VES locations
are poorly protected due to the very low aquifer protective capacity parameters in the VES
locations.
Keywords: Aquifer, Resistivity, Vertical Electrical Sounding, Groundwater, Protective Capacity
INTRODUCTION
Aquifer protection is essential for a sustainable use of the
groundwater resources, protection of the dependent
ecosystems, and a central part of spatial planning and
action plans Egbai et al., 2015). The key expression for a
quantification of aquifer protection is vulnerability. Aquifer
vulnerability solely indicates whether the physical and
biochemical characteristics of the subsurface prevent or
favour the transport of pollutants in and into aquifers. It
does not take into account the actual pollutant loading in
an area.
Transmissivity is a major property of an aquifer and aids in
the characterization of rocks as water conducting
media/strata. The ability of the overburden to retard and
filter percolating fluid is a measure of its protective
capacity. Estimating these properties from pumping tests
can be very expensive and time consuming. Surface
geoelectrical methods offer an alternative, rapid and cost-
effective approach for aquifer evaluation and groundwater
quality assessment using empirical relations between
hydraulic and geoelectric parameters (Ehirim and
Nwakwo, 2010).
Poor quality water and inadequate water supply have
accounted for a number of preventable diseases in many
communities across the world. These factors have also
affected agriculture in terms of the types of crops grown
and yield as well as animals (Anomohanran, 2014).
According to Anomohanran (2013), pollution has
continued to make good quality water unavailable for use
despite the fact that nature has endowed the world with so
much water.
Groundwater is contributing significantly in the
development of agricultural economy and domestic water
usage. Groundwater is the water that fills all pores and
International Journal Geology and Mining
Vol. 3(3), pp. 141-150, November, 2017. © www.premierpublishers.org. ISSN: XXXX-XXXX
Research Article

2. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Bello R. 142
openings within the zone of saturation. Exploration for
groundwater in sedimentary environments involves
locating formations that possess appropriate porosity and
permeability. While the location of permeable clean sands
that are capable of yielding useful quantities of water to
wells is important, the quality of water yielded is also
crucial (Aweto, 2014).
The Niger Delta is endowed with rich groundwater
resources in several aquifers, but unfortunately, the public
water supply by State Water Agency is inadequate and
unable to satisfy the demanded quantities (Akpoborie et
al., 2000) and consumers must make alternative
arrangements. These arrangements in most cases consist
of hand dug wells or relatively cheaper shallow boreholes
that are constructed with the aid of augers operated
manually. These boreholes are usually slightly deeper
than the dug wells but also exploit the shallow aquifers that
are the most susceptible to contamination from various
sources.
According to Tijani et al., (2002), one of the commonest
ways of waste disposal in the Niger Delta is by open
dumping. The primary environmental consequence of
these indiscriminate dumping of waste in open dump is the
generation of leachates due to decomposition of the waste
materials. The leachates are subsequently released into
the groundwater by infiltration and this poses serious
environmental problems including health hazard.
Surface geophysical survey as a veritable tool in
groundwater exploration, has the basic advantage of
saving cost in borehole construction by locating target
aquifer before drilling is embarked upon (Obiora and
Ownuka, 2005). The vertical electrical sounding (VES)
survey used in this work has been used extensively for
location of the aquifer and determining their hydraulic
parameters because the instrument is simple and analysis
of the data is easy and less tedious than other methods
(Lashkaripour et al., 2005; Batayaneh, 2007; Sikandar et
al., 2009; Anomohanran, 2013; Anomohanran, 2014). VES
method with Schlumberger array assumes considerable
importance in the field of groundwater exploration because
of its ease of operation, low cost and its capability to
distinguish between saturated and unsaturated layers.
This method is regularly used to solve a wide variety of
groundwater problems such as determination of depth,
thickness and boundary of aquifer, determination of zones
with high yield potential in an aquifer, determination of the
boundary between saline and fresh water zones and
estimation of aquifer transmissivity (Hadi, 2009).
Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the aquifer
systems in order to provide information about the
subsurface layers of the area using geophysical tools and
also to determine the aquifer protective capacity of the
study area.
Study Area
This work was carried out behind the College of Science,
Federal University of Petroleum Resources, Effurun,
Nigeria. Table 1 shows the location of the study area. The
area lies within Longitude 050 50’ 31.4” – 050 50’ 31.5” E
and Latitude 050 34’ 14.0” – 050 34’ 14.5” N. The average
elevation in these areas is about 9 m above sea level.
Figures 1 and 2 show the contour map and surface map
respectively of the study area. The area is slightly flat as
the area was sand filled. Figure 3 shows the geological
map of the study area.
Table 1: Latitude, Longitude and Elevation of the Study area
Latitude Longitude Elevation (m)
VES 1 050 34’ 13.6” N 0050 50’ 31.3” E 9.5
VES 2 050 34’ 14.0” N 0050 50’ 31.4” E 9.0
VES 3 050 34’ 14.0” N 0050 50’ 31.4” E 9.0
VES 4 050 34’ 14.2” N 0050 50’ 31.5” E 9.0
VES 5 050 34’ 14.3” N 0050 50’ 31.4” E 9.5
Figure 1: Contour Map of the Study Area Figure 2: Surface Map of the Study Area
5.76 5.78 5.8 5.82 5.84 5.86 5.88 5.9 5.92 5.94
Longitude
5.48
5.5
5.52
5.54
5.56
5.58
5.6
5.62
5.64
5.66
Latitude
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
9.2
9.25
9.3
9.35
9.4
9.45
9.5
9.55
9.6
9.65
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

3. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Int. J. Geol. Min. 143
Figure 3: Geologic map of the western Niger Delta showing location of Effurun-Warri
Metropolis (Akpoborie et al., 2015)
Climate, Geology and Hydrogeology of the Study Area
Climate
The study area enjoys a hot (230C - 370C) and humid
(Relative Humidity, 50 - 70 per cent) equatorial climate with
a dry season that extends from about November to
February, and a wet season that begins in March, peaks
in July and October. 30-year mean annual rainfall is 3000
mm (Akpoborie et al., 2015).
Geology of Niger Delta
The Niger Delta is situated in the Gulf of Guinea and
extends throughout the Niger Delta Province as defined by
Klett et. al., (1997). From the Eocene to the present, the
delta has prograded south-westward, forming depobelts
that represent the most active portion of the delta at each
stage of its development. These depobelts form one of the
largest regressive deltas in the world with an area of some
300,000 km2, a sediment volume of 500,000 km3 and a
sediment thickness of over 10 km in the basin depocenter
(Akpoborie, 2015).
Warri town is underlain by a sequence of sedimentary
formations with a thickness of about 8000 m, which include
from bottom to top, the Akata Formation, the Agbada
Formation, the Benin Formation and the Somebreiro Warri
Deltaic Plain Sands (Israel, 2012).
Hydrogeology
Local hydrogeological setting indicates that Warri is
underlain by the Somebreiro-Warri Plain Sands aquifer
which consists of fine to medium and coarse grained
unconsolidated sands, gravels and. shales. The aquifer in
most cases unconfined, has thickness that ranges from 60
to 95 m (Israel, 2012; Ariyo and Adeyemi, 2005).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Geophysical resistivity techniques are based on the
response of the earth to the flow of electrical current. With
an electrical current passed through the ground and two
potential electrodes to record the resultant potential
difference between them, we can obtain a direct measure
of the electrical impedance of the subsurface material. The
resistivity of the subsurface, a material constant, is then a
function of the magnitude of the current, the recorded
potential difference, and the geometry of the electrode
array. Depending upon the survey geometry, the data are
plotted as 1-D sounding or profiling curves, or in 2-D cross-
section in order to look for anomalous regions. In the
shallow subsurface, the presence of water controls much
of the conductivity variation. Measurement of resistivity is,
in general, a measure of water saturation and connectivity
of pore space. Resistivity measurements are associated

4. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Bello R. 144
with varying depths relative to the distance between the
current and potential electrodes in the survey, and can be
interpreted qualitatively and quantitatively in terms of a
lithologic and/or geohydrologic model of the subsurface.
VES survey can be used to determine aquifer parameters
and fresh groundwater formation below
ground surface. Vertical electric sounding (VES) employs
collinear arrays designed to output a 1-D vertical apparent
resistivity versus depth model of the subsurface at a
specific observation point. In this method a series of
potential differences are acquired at successively greater
electrode spacing while maintaining a fixed central
reference point. The induced current passes through
progressively deeper layers at greater electrode spacing.
The potential difference measurements are directly
proportional to the changes in the deeper subsurface.
Apparent resistivity values calculated from measured
potential differences can be interpreted in terms of
overburden thickness, water table depth, and the depths
and thicknesses of subsurface strata. The two most
common arrays used for VES are the Wenner array and
the Schlumberger array (Steve, 2017).
The geophysical method used in this work is the VES. For
adequate depth penetration, the Schlumberger electrode
configuration was used with maximum current electrode
separation (AB) of 120 m.
A total of five VES using Schlumberger configuration were
carried out in the study area in order to investigate the
aquifer characteristics, aquifer protective capacity and
groundwater potential of the subsurface layer. The field
data was interpreted using IPI2win and interpex softwares.
The depth and resistivity of the surface layers were
determined (Hadi, 2009). These surveys were performed
to also get information regarding potential of groundwater
resources in the area, thickness of fresh groundwater
layers and soil layering below the ground surface.
Resistivity, the inverse of electrical conductivity, is the
resistance of the geologic medium offered to current flow
when a potential difference is applied,
R=V/I 1
where R is resistance in ohms (Ω), V is voltage in Volt, I is
current in Ampere. For resistivity surveys, a direct current
was applied through ground surface between two metal
electrodes A and B. The voltage loss that occurs as the
current moves through the ground was measured at the
potential electrodes M and N placed in between the current
electrodes (figure 3). Resistivity values were measured
using electrical sounding for vertical exploration. In this
procedure, a series of stations were established and
careful depth soundings were taken. Resistivity survey
was conducted at the site using resistivity meter (ABEM
SAS 4000) (Hafiz and Allah, 2015).
Figure 3: Two current and two potential electrodes on the
surface of homogeneous isotropic ground of resistivity 𝜌
Correlation between the layer lithology and VES is
achieved by correlating the resistivity values with the
standard values of resistivity as shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Resistivity of common geologic materials.
Materials Normal Resistivity (Ω𝑚)
Ash 4
Laterite 800 – 1500
Lateritic Soil 120 – 750
Gravel (Dry) 1400
Gravel Saturated) 100
Dry sandy Soil 80 – 1050
Sand Clay/Clayed Sand 30 – 215
Sand and Gravel 30 – 225
Saturated Landfill 15 – 30
Glacier Ice (Temperate) 2 x 106 – 1.2 x 108
Glacier Ice (Polar) 5 x 104 – 3 x 105
Permafrost 103 - > 104
Source: AbdulRahim et al., 2016.
A multilayer resistivity interpreted model consists of layer
apparent resistivities, thickness and depth. Further
derivatives are convolved to generate the geoelectric
parameters. These show electric boundaries separating
layers of different resistivity (Zohdy et al., 1990). A
geoelectric layer is described by two fundamental
parameters: its layer apparent resistivity (𝜌a) and its
thickness (h). The geoelectric parameters derived based
apparent resistivity and thickness,
Longitudinal conductance (S)
The longitudinal conductance (S) is the geoelectric
parameter used to define target areas of groundwater
potential. High S values usually indicate relatively thick
succession and should be accorded the highest priority in
terms of groundwater potential (Olusegun et al., 2016).
S = h/𝜌a
2
Where S is the longitudinal conductance, h is thickness
and ρa is apparent resistivity of the aquiferous layer.

5. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Int. J. Geol. Min. 145
Transverse resistance (R)
The transverse resistance (R) is one of the parameters
used to define target areas of good groundwater potential.
It has a direct relation with transmissivity and the highest
R values reflect most likely the highest transmissivity
values of the aquifers or aquiferous zones.
R = h.𝜌a 3
Where R is the transverse resistance, h is thickness and
ρa is apparent resistivity of the aquiferous layer. The
parameters R and S were named the “Dar – Zarrouk
parameters“ by Maillet (1947).
The concept of Dar Zarrouk parameters was first proposed
by Maillet (1947). This postulation holds from the fact that,
when the thickness and resistivity of a lithologic
subsurface layer is known, its transverse resistance (R)
and longitudinal conductance (S) can be calculated easily.
Hence their correlative resistivities determined. Dar –
Zarrouk parameters have since been used in the
estimation/study of the hydraulic properties of aquifers
(Austin and Gabriel, 2015).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The analyses of the VES survey data were made using the
computer software IP12win and Interpex. The summary of
resistivity and thicknesses of the geo-electric/lithology
layers within the subsurface are presented in table 3. Table
4 shows the longitudinal conductance and the transverse
resistance of the aquifer, while the aquifer protective
capacity as modified by Olusegun et al., (2016) are
presented in table 5. The iterative curves generated for the
apparent resistivity data using IPI2win and interpex
software are presented in figures 5 – 9 for the VES carried
out in this study. The geo-electric section for the study area
is presented in figure 10.
Figure 5: VES Curve for Traverse 1
Figure 6: VES Curve for Traverse 2
Figure 7: VES Curve for Traverse 3
Figure 8: VES Curve for Traverse 4
1 10 100
1000
4
10
T raverse 1
ApparentResistivity(Ohm-m)
A B /2 (m )
100 1000
4
10
5
10
0.1
1
10
Depth(m)
R esistivity (O hm-m )
Unregistered Version
1 10 100
100
1000
4
10
traverse 2
ApparentResistivity(Ohm-m)
A B /2 (m )
1 10 100
100
1000
4
10
T raverse 3
ApparentResistivity(Ohm-m)
A B /2 (m )
1 10 100
1000
4
10
T raverse 4
ApparentResistivity(Ohm-m)
A B /2 (m )

6. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Bello R. 146
Figure 9: VES Curve for Traverse 5 Figure 10: Geoelectric Section for the Five VES
Figure 11: Contour Map of the Aquifer Protective Capacity
1 10 100
100
1000
4
10
T raverse 5
ApparentResistivity(Ohm-m)
A B /2 (m )
100 1000
4
10
5
10
6
10
0.1
1
10
100
Depth(m) R esistivity (O hm -m )
U nregistered V ersion
5.35 5.4 5.45 5.5 5.55 5.6 5.65 5.7 5.75 5.8 5.85 5.9 5.95 6
Longitude
5.3
5.35
5.4
5.45
5.5
5.55
5.6
5.65
5.7
5.75
5.8
5.85
5.9
5.95
Latitude
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

7. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Int. J. Geol. Min. 147
Figure 12: Surface Map of the Aquifer Protective Capacity
Table 3: Summary Table for the Vertical Electrical
Sounding Interpretation
VES 1 VES 2
𝜌 𝑎 (Ω𝑚) h (m) Depth
(m)
Remarks 𝜌 𝑎 (Ω𝑚) h (m) Depth
(m)
Remarks
Layer
1
1659.7 0.46 0.46 3023.2 0.62 0.62
Layer
2
768.0 0.24 0.70 371.5 0.61 1.23
Layer
3
1080.9 1.81 2.51 3964.3 3.01 4.24
Layer
4
777.4 5.06 7.57 220.5 8.06 12.30
Layer
5
36214.0 - - 69143.0 - -
VES 3 VES 4
Layer
1
3192.3 1.05 1.05 1457.8 0.21 0.21
Layer
2
5967.3 1.49 2.54 2348.2 3.81 4.02
Layer
3
811.4 8.17 10.71 720.1 14.96 18.98
Layer
4
625.1 15.41 26.12 3219.7 - -
Layer
5
3931.0 - - - - -
VES 5
Layer
1
2260.3 0.19 0.19
Layer
2
2676.9 3.52 3.71
Layer
3
666.5 18.85 22.56
Layer
4
44064.0 - -
Layer
5
- - -
Table 4: Table Showing Longitudinal Conductance and
Transverse Resistance of the Aquifer
h (m) 𝜌 𝑎 (Ω𝑚) Longitudinal
Conductance
Transverse
Resistance
VES 1 5.063 777.40 0.0065 3935.98
VES 2 8.062 220.45 0.0370 1777.27
VES 3 15.420 625.05 0.0250 9638.27
VES 4 14.960 720.13 0.0210 10,773.15
VES 5 18.850 666.51 0.0280 12,563.71
Table 5: Table showing Aquifer protective Capacity Rating
(Olusegun et al., 2016)
Rating Remarks
Greater than 10 Excellent
5 t0 10 Very Good
0.2 to 4.9 Moderate
0.1 to 0.19 Weak
Less than 0.1 Poor
Figure 5 shows that VES 1 is HKH curve. The curve
revealed five resistivity layers for VES 1. The first layer
which is the top soil has resistivity value of 1659.7 Ωm. It
is thought that the survey area being semi-swamp area
was sand filled with sandy soil. The layer has thickness of
0.46 m. This was followed by another layer of resistivity
768.0 Ωm. This layer has a thickness of 0.24 m. This layer
is interpreted to be sandy clay. The third layer has a
resistivity of 1080.9 Ωm. This layer has a thickness 0f 1.81
m and interpreted to be fine-medium sand. The fourth layer
has a resistivity value of 777.4 Ωm with a thickness of
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
0.01
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
0.02
0.022
0.024
0.026
0.028
0.03

8. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Bello R. 148
5.06m. This layer is interpreted to be coarse sand and the
layer constitute the aquifer. Underlain the fourth layer is
the fifth layer having resistivity of 36214.0 Ωm with an
infinite thickness. This layer is interpreted to contain fine-
medium sand.
Figure 6 shows that VES 2 is typically HKH curve. The
curve also revealed five resistivity layers for VES 2. The
first layer which is the top soil has resistivity of 3023.2 Ωm
with a thickness of 0.62 m. The second layer has resistivity
of 371.5 Ωm with a thickness of 0.62 m. This layer is
interpreted to be sandy clay. The third layer has a
resistivity of 3964.3 Ωm with a thickness of 3.01 m. This
layer is interpreted to contain fine-medium sand. Underlain
this layer is the fourth layer with a resistivity of 220.45 Ωm
with a thickness of 8.06 m. This layer is interpreted to be
sand and the layer constitute the aquifer. The fifth layer
has a resistivity value of 69143.0 Ωm with a infinite
thickness. This layer is interpreted to contain fine-medium
sand.
Figure 7 shows that VES 3 is typically KQH curve. The
curve also revealed five resistivity layers for VES 3. The
first layer which is the top soil has resistivity value of
3192.3 Ωm with a thickness of 1.05 m. This layer is
underlain by the second layer having resistivity value of
5967.3 Ωm with a thickness of 1.49 m. This layer is
interpreted to be fine-medium sand. The third layer has a
resistivity value of 811.4 Ωm with a thickness of 8.12 m.
This layer is interpreted to be clayed sand. The fourth layer
has a resistivity value of 625.1 Ωm with a thickness of
15.41 m. This layer is interpreted to be coarse sand and
the layer constitute the aquifer. The fifth layer has a
resistivity value of 3931.0 Ωm with an infinite thickness.
This layer is interpreted to contain fine-medium sand.
VES4 exhibit typical KH curve as shown in figure 8. The
curve revealed four resistivity layers. The first layer which
is the top soil has resistivity value of 1457.8 Ωm with a
thickness of 0.21 m. This layer is underlain by the second
layer with resistivity value of 2348.2 m with a thickness of
3.81 m. This layer is interpreted to be fine-medium sand.
The third layer has resistivity value of 720.1 Ωm with a
thickness of 14.96 m. This layer is interpreted to be coarse
sand and the layer constitute the aquifer. The fourth layer
has resistivity value of 3219.7 Ωm with an infinite
thickness. This layer is interpreted to contain fine-medium
sand.
Figure 9 shows that VES 5 exhibit typical KH curve. The
curve revealed four resistivity layers. The first layer which
is the top soil has resistivity value of 2260.3 Ωm with a
thickness of 0.19 m. The layer is underlain by the second
layer with resistivity value of 2676.9 Ωm with a thickness
of 3.52 m. This layer is interpreted to be fine-medium sand.
The third layer has a resistivity value of 666.5 Ωm with a
thickness of 18.85 m. This layer is interpreted to be coarse
sand and the layer constitute the aquifer. The fourth layer
has resistivity value of 44064.0 Ωm with an infinite
thickness. This layer is interpreted to contain fine-medium
sand.
The aquifer protective capacity was determined using the
parameters longitudinal conductance and transverse
resistance presented in table 5. The parameters were
calculated using equations 2 and 3. Using the results
obtained from the study area presented in table 3,
estimation of the aquifer longitudinal conductance and
transverse resistance were made and presented in table
4. The contour map of the aquifer protective capacity is
shown in figure 11 while figure 12 shows the surface map
of the aquifer protective capacity for the study area. The
result shows that all the aquifers in VES 1, VES 2, VES 3,
VES 4 and VES 5 show evidence of poor aquifer protective
capacity having longitudinal conductance values ranging
from 0.0065 to 0.037 and transverse resistance values
ranging from 1,777.27 to 12,563.71. The aquifer in this
area may be prone to contamination resulting from short
residence time in the coarse sand layers. The thicknesses
of the overlain layers for the aquifers are not enough to
protect the aquifers from percolating fluids. The
thicknesses of the overlain layers range from 2.5 m to
maximum of 4.25 m except in VES 3 where the thickness
is up to 10.71 m. Usually, groundwater is given protection
by geologic barriers having sufficient thickness and also
called protective layers and low hydraulic conductivity.
Silts and clays are suitable protective layers and when they
are found as thick layers above aquifer, they constitute a
protective cover (Olusegun et al., 2016). However, this is
not the case for this study.
CONCLUSION
This study investigated the groundwater potential and
aquifer protective capacity of an area behind the College
of Science, Federal University of Petroleum Resources,
Effurun, Nigeria. Five VES using the Schlumberger array
configuration were acquired in the study area. Analysis
and interpretation of VES data obtained from the study
area showed VES 3, VES 4 and VES 5 to be most
appropriate locations to be explored for borehole
development due to low resistivity of the porous and
permeable sand in the aquiferous layers coupled with the
relatively high thicknesses of the sandy layers. However,
all the aquifers in the VES locations are poorly protected
due to the very low aquifer protective capacity parameters
in the VES locations.
It is therefore recommended that for future groundwater
development in the study area, measures should be taken
to ensure treatment of groundwater that may be explored
from the area to make it fit for domestic use.

9. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Int. J. Geol. Min. 149
REFERENCES
AbdulRahim Asif, Syed Samran Ali, Nazish Noreen,
Waqas Ahmed, Sarfraz Khan, Muhammad Younis
Khan and Muhammad Waseem (2016). Correlation of
electrical resistivity of soil with geotechnical
engineering parameters at Wattar area district
Nowshera, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Journal of
Himalayan Earth Sciences 49(1): 124-130
Akpoborie, I. A. Ekakite, O. A. and Adaikpoh, E. O. (2000).
The quality of groundwater from dug wells in parts of
the western Niger Delta. Knowledge Review, 2(5):72-
75.
Akpoborie Irwin Anthony, Kizito Ejiro Aweto and Oghenero
Ohwoghere-Asuma (2015). Urbanization and Major Ion
Hydrogeochemistry of the Shallow Aquifer at the
Effurun - Warri Metropolis, Nigeria. Environment and
Pollution, Published by Canadian Center of Science
and Education. ISSN 1927-0909 E-ISSN 1927-0917.
4(1); 37-46
Anomohanran, O. (2013). Investigating the geoelectric
response of water saturated and hydrocarbon impacted
sand in the vicinity of petroleum pipeline. International
Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 3(2): 14-
21.
Anomohanran, Ochuko (2014). Determination of the
Protective Capacity of the Aquitard Stratum in Some
Coastline Towns of Delta State, Nigeria. Nigerian
Journal of Basic and Applied Science. 22(1&2): 11-17.
ISSN 0794-5698. Available online at
http://www.ajol.info/index.php/njbas/index
Ariyo, S.O. and Adeyemi, G.O., (2005). Geochemical
characterization of aquifers in the
Basement complex-sediment transition zone around
Ishara, Southwestern Nigeria. Journal of NAH. 16 28-
31.
Austin C. Okonkwo and Gabriel Z. Ugwu (2015).
Determination of Dar-zarrouk parameters for prediction
of Aquifer protective capacity: A case of Agbani
Sandstone Aquifer, Enugu State, Southeastern Nigeria.
International Research Journal of Geology and Mining
(IRJGM) (2276-6618). 5(2); 12-19. Available online
http://www.interesjournals.org/irjgm
Aweto Kizito Ejiro (2014). Integration of Resistivity
Methods and Single Point Resistance Log Data in
Evaluation of Aquifer Vulnerability and Groundwater
Quality in Western Niger Delta. PhD Thesis,
Department of Geology, University of Nigeria Nsukka,
Nigeria. (Unpublished)
Batayneh, A. (2007). Mapping subsurface formations on
the eastern red sea coast in Jordan using geoelectrical
techniques: Geological and hydrogeological
implications. Earth Sci. Res. J., 11, 97-107.
Egbai J.C., Efeya P. and Iserhien-Emekeme R.E. (2015).
Geoelectric Evaluation of Aquifer Vulnerability in
Igbanke, Orhionmwon Local Government Area of Edo
State, Nigeria. International Journal of Science,
Environment and Technology, 4(3): 701-715. ISSN
2278-3687. www.ijset.net
Ehirim C. N. and Nwankwo C. N. (2010). Evaluation of
aquifer characteristics and groundwater quality using
geoelectric method in Choba, Port Harcourt. Scholar
Research Library. Archives of Applied Science
Research. 2(2): 396-403. ISSN 0975-508X. Available
online at www.scholarsresearchlibrary.com
Hadi Tahmasbi Nejad (2009). Geoelectrical Investigation
of the Aquifer Characteristics and Groundwater
Potential in Bahbadan Azad University Farm,
Khuzestan province, Iran. Journal of Applied Sciences.
ISSN: 1812 – 5654. 9(20); 3691-3698.
Hafiz Umar Farid and Allah Bakhsh (2015). Use Of Vertical
Electrical Sounding (VES) Techniques to Explore the
Groundwater Potential. Asian Journal of Science and
Technology. ISSN: 0976-3376. 6(01); 915-923.
Available Online at http://www.journalajst.com
Israel Godwin Omanudhowho (2012). Hydrochemical
Characteristics and Quality Assessment of
Groundwater in Warri, South South Nigeria. M.Sc.
Research Project, Department of Geology, University of
Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria. Unpublished.
Klett, T.R., Ahlbrandt, T.S., Schmoker, J.W., and Dolton,
J.L., (1997), Ranking of the world’s oil and gas
provinces by known petroleum volumes: U.S.
Geological Survey Open-file Report-97-463, CD-ROM.
Lashkaripour, G.R., Ghafoori, M. and Dehghani, A. (2005).
Electrical resistivity survey for predicting Samsor
aquifer properties, southeast Iran. Geophysical
Research Abstracts, 7: 01999. European Geosciences
Union.
Maillet R (1947). The fundamental equations of electrical
prospecting. Geophysics. 12:529-556.
Obiora D. N. and Onwuka O. S. (2005). Groundwater
Exploration in Ikorodu, Lagos – Nigeria: A Surface
Geophysical Survey Contribution. Pacific Journal of
Science and Technology. 6: 86-93.
Olusegun O. Alabi, Adeolu Olabanji Ojo and Dolapo F.
Akinpelu (2016). Geophysical Investigation for
Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity
Around Osun State University (UNIOSUN) College of
Health Sciences. American Journal of Water
Resources. 4(6); 137-143. DOI: 10.12691/ajwr-4-6-3.
Sikandar, P., Bakhsh, A., Arshad, M. and Rana, T. (2009).
The Use of Vertical Electrical sounding Resistivity
Method for the Location of Low Salinity Groundwater
for Irrigation in Chaj and Rachna Doabs. Environ Earth
Sci. 60:1113-1129.
Steve Cardimona (2017). Electrical Resistivity technique
for Subsurface Investigation
Tijani, M. N., Onibalusi, S. O. and Olatunji, A. S. (2002).
Hydrochemical and Environmental Impact Assessment
of Orita Aperin Waste Dumpsite, Southwestern Nigeria.
Water Resources Journal, 13:78-85.

10. Investigation of Groundwater Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria
Bello R. 150
Zohdy AAR, Eaton GP, Mabey DR (1990). Application of
surface Geophysics to ground – water investigation”.
USGS publications. 4th Edition. Pp116.
Accepted 30 October 2017,
Citation: Bello R. (2017). Investigation of Groundwater
Potential and Aquifer Protective Capacity of Part of
Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria. International Journal
Geology and Mining 3(3): 141-150.
Copyright: © 2017 Bello R. This is an open-access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original author and source are cited.