Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Quality and Suitability of Ground Water For Drinking Purposes
Quality and Suitability of Ground Water For Drinking Purposes
Study Team:
Coordinator
Professor Dilip Kumar Datta, Ph.D
Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna-9208
Supervisor
Masudur Rahman
Assistant Professor, Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna-9208.
Research Intern
Md. Muhyminul Islam
B.Sc. Student, Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna-9208
with
Khondakar Arifuzzaman
MS Graduate, Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna-9208
Project
Water Security in Peri-Urban South Asia: Adapting to Climate Change and Urbanization
December 2011
ABSTRACT
This study has conducted to assess the quality and suitability of groundwater for drinking
purpose in peri-urban area of Khulna City which is situated in the south-western part of
coastal Bangladesh. To complete this research work, 20 ground water samples of 10 shallow
aquifers and 10 deep aquifers, were collected from 5 different sampling spots which are
located on the both banks of the Mayur River. The analysis reveals that the chemical
composition of the groundwater in this area is variable, with electrical conductance ranging
from 813 to 9800 µs/cm. The pH values range from 7.02 to 8.44. Most of the groundwater is
weakly alkaline. Higher value of electrical conductivity (EC) and concentration of sodium
ion suggest that water quality of shallow aquifer in this locality is quite unsatisfactory and
exceeds the standard guideline value of drinking water of DoE, Bangladesh and WHO. But
the major parameters concentration of deep aquifers meets the both standards and is quite
satisfactory in respect to drinking purposes.
1. INTRODUCTION
Although water is the most frequently occurring substance on earth, lack of safe drinking
water is more prominent in the developing countries. Groundwater is the main source of
water supply throughout the world. Due to increasing world population, extraction of
groundwater is also increasing for irrigations, industries, municipalities and urban and rural
households day by day. During dry season extensive withdrawal of groundwater for irrigation
purpose is lowering the water table in the aquifer and also changing the chemical composition
of water quality (for different aquifer chemistry) (Saha et al.,2007).
Land use has significant impacts on ground water quality. Typical observed changes include
increased nitrate concentrations and detection of pesticides in agricultural
areas (Burkhart and Kolpin, 1993; Anderson, 1993; Keeney and DeLuca, 1993; Bauder et al.,
1993; Cain et. al, 1989), increased nitrate concentrations and pesticide detections in
residential areas (Anderson, 1993; Geron et al., 1993; Eckhardt and Stackelberg, 1995), and
increased nitrate concentrations and volatile organic compound (VOC) detections in
commercial and industrial areas (Eckhardt and Stackelberg, 1995) compared to undeveloped
land use settings (Haycock and Pinay, 1993; Anderson, 1993). Some mega or big-cities are
allocated near shore or the groundwater resources are underlain by salt waters. In these cases
excessive groundwater abstraction may force salt water to move either laterally or vertically
into the freshwater, so deteriorating groundwater quality. (Megic et al., 2004).
The Khulna City Corporation (KCC) in southwest Bangladesh lies on young Holocene-
Recent Alluvium of the Ganges deltaic plain in north and Ganges tidal plain in south. The
area is composed of coarse to very fine sand, silt and silty clay up to a depth of 300m with
peaty soil and calcareous as well as non-calcareous soil at the top (Roy et al., 2005).
Vulnerability of coastal aquifers due to saline water intrusion and other anthropogenic
pollution is one of the major environmental hazards restricting availability of fresh water in
most coastal cities of the world. KCC is one such city where the aquifers are subjected to
marine influence due to intense anthropogenic pressure from within and outside the region
(Datta and Biswas, 2004). And within the KCC areas, only 30% of households are under
piped water supply, where the rest are self-managed and many of the people face extreme
water crisis. For this reason all the peri-urban dwellers along the both banks of the Mayur
River are totally dependent on the GW (ground water) sources for drinking and other
household purposes. So quality assurance for groundwater has become the most prior concern
in this fringe of the KCC.
To determine the health risk of GW by assessing its suitability for drinking purpose.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
For physical, chemical and biological analysis of those water samples a number of
sophisticated instruments were used and following established world recognized analytical
methods were followed (Table 2.4).
Table 2.4: The methods/instruments, book references used to measure the parameters
Table 3.1: Physical parameters of samples in the month of August, 2011 (Sample: 01)
* Red Color marks exceed the recommended limit for drinking water.
Table 3.2: Chemical composition of Groundwater in the month of August, 2011 (Sample: 01)
S₁S₁ Shallow 250 19.57935 0.40119 1.5469 2.0235 14.50064 0.16981 0.1263 0.0501687
S₁S₂ Deep 1200 17.01894 0.03390 0.1497 0.2961 1.000044 0.03946 0.0924 0.0264088
S₁S₃ Deep 1050 7.06179 0.05968 0.1497 0.3454 1.000044 0.03496 0.0247 0.0109338
S₁S₄ Shallow 260 19.662 0.38830 1.3972 1.8755 10.50046 0.17482 0.0586 0.0353763
S₁G₁ Deep 1200 9.26376 0.02746 0.1497 0.098712 2.500111 0.02145 0.0586 0.0260675
S₁G₂ Shallow 120 6.5076 0.04034 0.1996 0.246 1.500066 0.15450 0.1063 0.0274117
S₁G₃ Shallow 200 57.85065 0.45274 3.5429 4.5407 64.00284 0.06614 0.0247 0.0308248
S₁G₄ Deep 950 13.70424 0.02746 0.1996 0.1480 1.000044 0.06864 0.0824 0.0311879
S₁M₁ Deep 960 12.03906 0.08545 0.1497 0.3948 1.500066 0.01244 0.0586 0.0074064
S₁M₂ Shallow 150 60.1953 0.05323 4.0419 6.0707 76.50326 0.01736 0.0824 0.0057917
S₁M₃ Shallow 255 42.15585 0.04679 3.493 2.9613 64.50272 0.01736 0.0366 0.0126189
S₁M₄ Deep 1050 7.59858 0.10478 0.3992 0.5429 2.000089 0.00644 0.0207 0.0070650
S₁C₁ Deep 1100 7.63077 0.08545 0.2994 0.4442 4.500200 0.01695 0.0864 0.0149163
S₁C₂ Shallow 215 58.90553 0.45274 4.2415 7.3046 85.50366 0.05989 0.0466 0.0167369
S₁C₃ Deep 1200 9.6222 0.09189 0.2994 0.4442 2.500111 0.02395 0.0884 0.0083167
S₁C₄ Shallow 185 53.8008 0.39474 5.1896 6.8604 50.00222 0.10367 0.0366 0.0137568
* Red Color marks exceed the recommended limit for drinking water.
Table 3.3: Physical parameters of samples in November, 2011 (Sample: 02)
Note: S₁R₁= Sample of Reyermahal, S₁S₁= Sample of Shonadanga, S₁G₁= Sample of Gollamari,
S₁M₁= Sample of Mohammadnagar and S₁C₁= Sample of Sachibunia.
* Red Color marks exceed the recommended limit for drinking water.
Table 3.4: Chemical composition of Groundwater in the month of November, 2011 (Sample: 02)
S2S₁ Shallow 250 18.14472 0.752908 1.3473 2.36908 15.5005 0.01228 0.12150 0.029060 15.493286
S2S₂ Deep 1200 10.37388 0.092358 0.0998 0.19742 1.00004 0.01507 0.12150 0.016681 8.0033681
S2S₃ Deep 1050 5.37834 0.127798 0.1497 0.24678 3.50015 0.00589 0.05188 0.013927 7.2065682
S2S₄ Shallow 260 29.667 0.752908 1.3972 2.02359 11.0004 0.01163 0.07625 0.029747 15.227686
S2G₁ Deep 1200 10.92894 0.084764 0.0998 0.14806 2.00008 0.00736 0.08510 0.02097 7.6406082
S2G₂ Shallow 120 6.21093 0.102484 0.1497 0.24678 1.50006 0.00310 0.10423 0.033874 9.2782478
S2G₃ Shallow 200 64.35825 0.879480 3.3932 4.9356 60.5025 0.01360 0.07447 0.011179 15.306686
S2G₄ Deep 950 13.14918 0.087296 0.0998 0.19744 0.50002 0.00802 0.12549 0.019326 10.234407
S2M₁ Deep 960 8.7087 0.163238 1.1976 0.69098 1.50006 0.00359 0.08085 0.009525 6.9940883
S2M₂ Shallow 150 79.6224 0.135393 3.5429 6.36692 76.5032 0.00195 0.14887 0.008425 10.287527
S2M₃ Shallow 255 65.7459 0.13033 3.2435 4.34332 69.0030 0.00195 0.03834 0.018603 14.484006
S2M₄ Deep 1050 5.9334 0.201210 0.2994 0.49356 1.50006 0.00146 0.06172 0.007737 6.3035284
S2C₁ Deep 1100 4.26822 0.170833 0.1996 0.39484 2.50011 0.00408 0.07625 0.017228 8.0033681
S2C₂ Shallow 215 112.926 0.879480 4.2914 7.15662 86.0038 0.00736 0.03447 0.018056 10.924967
S2C₃ Deep 1200 2.32551 0.173364 0.3493 0.39484 2.50011 0.00753 0.07660 0.011176 7.6846481
S2C₄ Shallow 185 31.05465 0.790880 4.5908 7.30468 46.5019 0.01294 0.07235 0.026309 21.124005
3.2 DISCUSSION OF THE STUDY
Drinking water quality in respect to consumer health safety refers to that water which is free
from any potential health hazard to the consumers. To assess the suitability of groundwater for
drinking purposes, in this study two standards, namely the WHO (World Health Organization)
and Bangladesh standards were considered to compare with the analyzed data (Table: 3.1 &
Table: 3.2) for different parameters.
The pH, physical characteristic of all waters or solutions, has no health significance except that
extreme values will show excessive acidity or alkalinity, with organoleptic consequences (EPA,
2001). pH in all samples were within the both standard (Table 3.1 and Table 3.3).
Electrical conductivity (EC), which has no direct significance on health, reflects mineral salt
content of water (EPA, 2001). EC values of all deep-tubewells were within the standards in the
month of August and November, 2011 except S2R1 which exceeded the range in the month of
November. But all the shallow aquifer groundwater samples exceeded the standards both in
August and November, 2011.
DO is the natural characteristic of clean waters. The value of DO in all samples was within the
standard both in August and November, 2011.
Sodium is also an essential dietary requirement and the normal intake is as common salt (sodium
chloride) in food; daily consumption may amount to 5 grams or more. The main reason for
limiting is the joint effect which it exercises with sulphate but too excessive intake can cause
hypertension (EPA, 2001). All samples except S₁R₃, S₁Rs, S ₁S₃, S₁Ss, S₁G₂, S₁Gs, S₁M₄,
S₁Ms, S₁C₁ and S₁Cs exceeded both the WHO and Bangladesh standard in August and
November, 2011. The highest value of sodium may be due to intrusion of saline water into the
aquifer system.
Table 3.5: Chemical composition of Groundwater in the month of August, 2011 (Sample: 01)
Sample Type of Depth Cations (mg/L) Anions (mg/L)
ID Tubewell (feet)
Na+ K+ Ca 2+ Mg2+ Cl - NO3- SO42- PO43- SiO2
S₁R₁ Deep 960 253.9 3.342 8 4.8 88.625 3.81174 5.11 0.486594 17.1112
S₁R₂ Deep 1050 417.4 2.334 4 4.2 35.45 2.75706 1.2844 0.457778 2.9848
S₁R₃ Deep 960 129.64 3.09 7 3.6 53.175 3.00522 2.14516 0.432564 3.6824
S₁S₁ Shallow 250 450.1 15.69 31 24.6 514.025 10.5282 6.0664 1.58812 2.1128
S₁S₂ Deep 1200 391.24 1.326 3 3.6 35.45 2.44686 4.44052 0.835988 4.0312
S₁S₃ Deep 1050 162.34 2.334 3 4.2 35.45 2.16768 1.18876 0.346116 4.9032
S₁S₄ Shallow 260 452 15.186 28 22.8 372.225 10.8384 2.81464 1.11986 17.8088
S₁G₁ Deep 1200 212.96 1.074 3 1.2 88.625 1.33014 2.81464 0.825182 3.1592
S₁G₂ Shallow 120 149.6 1.578 4 3 53.175 9.579 5.11 0.86772 7.3448
S₁G₃ Shallow 200 1329.9 17.706 71 55.2 2268.8 4.10085 1.18876 0.97578 18.8552
S₁G₄ Deep 950 315.04 1.074 4 1.8 35.45 4.25595 3.96232 0.987272 4.5544
S₁M₁ Deep 960 276.76 3.342 3 4.8 53.175 0.77178 2.81464 0.234454 4.0312
S₁M₂ Shallow 150 1383.8 2.082 81 73.8 2711.92 1.0764 3.96232 0.18334 21.9944
S₁M₃ Shallow 255 969.1 1.83 70 36 2286.52 1.0764 1.7626 0.39946 12.5768
S₁M₄ Deep 1050 174.68 4.098 8 6.6 70.9 0.39954 .99748 0.223648 4.0312
S₁C₁ Deep 1100 175.42 3.342 6 5.4 159.525 1.05096 4.1536 0.472186 4.5544
S₁C₂ Shallow 215 1354.15 17.706 85 88.8 3030.97 3.7131 2.2408 0.529818 21.4712
S₁C₃ Deep 1200 221.2 3.594 6 5.4 88.625 1.48524 4.24924 0.26327 3.1592
S₁C₄ Shallow 185 1236.8 15.438 104 83.4 1772.5 6.42735 1.7626 0.43548 12.5768
Standards WHO 200 - 75-200 30 250 50 250 5 -
BD 200 12 75 30-35 150-600 10 400 6 -
Remark S₁R₃, S₁S₃, All deep Without Most of Most of the All All All samples
S₁S₄, S₁C₁, tube-well S₁C₄, S₁C₂ the samples samples samples are within
S₁M₄, S₁G₂ samples & S₁M₂ samples satisfy the are within are within standards
are within satisfy the others satisfies standards standards standards
standards standards satisfy the
standards standards
Note: Red colored values show the exceeding standards for drinking water.
Table 3.6: Chemical composition of Groundwater in the month of November, 2011 (Sample: 02)
High levels of calcium may be beneficial and waters which are rich in calcium (and hence are
very hard) are very palatable. This element is the most important and abundant in the human
body and an adequate intake is essential for normal growth and health. The presence of the
element in a water supply is beneficial to health because it helps to reduce the heart disease
(EPA, 2001). All values Without S₁C₄, S₁C₂ & S₁M₂ were within the standard (Table 3.5 and
Table 3.6).
Magnesium is the second major constituent of hardness and it generally comprises 15-20 per
cent of the total hardness expressed as CaCO3. Its concentration is very significant when
considered in conjunction with the sulphate and it has indirect effects on health (EPA, 2001).The
shallow water sample of S₁C₄, S₁M₂, S₁M₃, S₁C₂, S₁G₃ exceeded both the WHO and Bangladesh
standard in August and November, 2011. From the reconnaissance survey it was evident that,
consumers were suffering from eczema due to use of excess hard water. A suggested explanation
relative to hard water is that increased soap usage in hard water results in metal or soap salt
residues on the skin (or on clothes) that are not easily rinsed off and that lead to contact irritation
(WHO, 2010).
Chloride does not pose a health hazard to humans and the principal consideration is in relation to
palatability (EPA, 2001). Without S₁C₄, S₁C₂, S₁M₂, S₁M₃, S₁G₃ others satisfied the Bangladesh
standard while most of the samples are exceeding the WHO standard (Table 3.5 and Table 3.6).
Excess sulphate has a laxative effect, especially in combination with magnesium and/or sodium
(EPA, 2001). The values were within the standard (Table 3.5 and Table 3.6).
Most importantly, high nitrate levels in waters to be used for drinking will render them
hazardous to infants as they induce the "blue baby" syndrome (methaemoglobinaemia) (EPA,
2001). The values were within the standard (Table 3.5 and Table 3.6).
Phosphorus occurs widely in nature in plants, in micro-organisms, in animal wastes and so on. It
has no significance on health (EPA, 2001). The values were within the standard (Table 3.5 and
Table 3.6).
Silica is not a water pollutant but excess of silica in groundwater indicates the active degradation
of silicate minerals (Appelo and postma, 1993). The silica content of natural water is usually 1-
30 ppm. In the study area the concentration of silica varies from 2.9848 mg/L (S₁R₁) to 21.4712
mg/L (S₁M₂) (Table 3.5 and Table 3.6).
4. CONCLUSION
In the present study, the groundwater quality and its chemical composition have been made to
characterize the water in the shallow and deep aquifer in respect to community health in the
western peri-urban fringe of Khulna city. The groundwater shows a very variable chemical
composition, e.g. electrical conductance ranges from 813 to 9800 µs/cm. However, the chemical
quality of the water with respect to sodium ion concentration at most sampling points exceeds
the WHO and Bangladesh drinking water standards. Magnesium ion concentration in respect to
carbonate hardness is high in shallow aquifers. The water is therefore not suitable for laundry.
This study confirms that major chemical parameters of groundwater in Khulna meets the
Bangladesh and WHO standard and reflect the suitability of drinking and domestic purposes.
However, continuous assessment and monitoring is needed to verify the temporal as well as
special variability of the groundwater resources in Khulna for water security and public health.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study is a part of the research project titled “Water Security in Peri-Urban South Asia:
Adapting to Climate Change and Urbanization” supported by the International Development
Research Centre (IDRC). We are grateful to Professor M.S. Khan, Professor, Institute of Water
and Flood Management (IWFM) of Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
(BUET) for giving the opportunity in joining with this research project and conducting this
study. Thanks are given to IDRC for their support in the development of the study. We are
particularly indebted to Dr. Dilip Kumar Datta, Professor and Head, Environmental Science
Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna for his continuous invaluable assistance during the study.
REFERENCES
Datta D. K., Biswas, D., (2004). “Chemical Vulnerability of Aquifers in Khulna City
Corporation Area”. BSc. thesis of Environmental Science Discipline, Submitted in
Khulna University.
Oluyege, J. O., Koko, A. E. and Aregbesol, O. A., (2011). “Bacteriological and physico-
chemical quality assessment of household drinking water in Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria”, Water
Science & Technology: Water Supply 11.1 2011.
Vivier, J.C., Ehlers, M. M., Grabow, W. O. K. and Havelaar, A. H., (2002). “Assessment
of the risk of infection associated with Coxsackie B-viruses in drinking water, J. Water
Science and Technology, Vol. 2 (3): 1–8.
Meybeck, M., Kimstach V. and Helmer, R., (1992). “Strategies for Water Quality
Assessment”, Chapman D (eds.) Water Quality Assessment: A Guide to the Use of Biota,
Sediments and Water in Environmental Monitoring. Chapman and Hall. pp19-50.
Zessner, M., Blaschke, A. P., Farnleitner, A. H. Fenz, R. Kavka, G. G. and Kroiss, H.,
(2007). “Risks for groundwater contamination from domestic waste water: tracers, model
applications and quality criteria”, J. Water Science & Technology: Water Supply Vol. 7
(3): 121–130.
Sabbir, W., Al-Masud, A., Islam, S., Rahman, A., Islam, R. and Rahi, L., Some Aspects
of Water Quality Parameters of the Mayur River, Khulna: An Attempt to Estimate
Pollution Status. Bangladesh Rsearch Publications Journal, Vol. 4, Issue. 1: 95-102,
2010.
Roy M. K., Datta, D. K., Adhikari, D. K., Chowdhury, B. K., and Roy, P. J., (2005).
“Geology of the Khulna City Corporation”. J. Life Earth Science, Vol. 1(1), pp.57-63.
Ramesh, R, M. and Anbu, (1996). “Chemical Methods for Environmental Analysis Water
and Sediment”. MacMillan India Limited Pub. 15-67p.
WHO, (2010). “Guideline for Drinking Water Quality”, World Health Organization,
Geneva, Swizerland.
Appendix-A
Unit of analysis