60

50
Percentage of Respondents

40

30

20

10

0
Noise pollution Air pollution Land pollution Defacing of property
due to soot
Responses

Figure 1. depicts the major effects the location of the DDL plant has on residents

Majority of the respondents believed air pollution was the major factor with 55% of
responses recorded. The second highest depicted 20% of the responses towards noise
pollution and the minority of respondents believed land pollution at 15%. The remaining 10%
of respondents seemed to be faced with the soot which emits from the DDL plant. The
difference was vast between the highest frequency of response and the lowest. The difference
was 45% which showed the vast variety of problems faced by the residents who reside in the
vicinity of this industry. The results were not surprising as observed of the dark clouds
forming above the industry and loud machinery being utilised when distributing the
questionnaires. Based on the discovery of these results, it can be said the location of DDL
affect residence majorly in the form of air pollution.

What effect does the Tally Frequency Percentage

location of DDL has on
the residence and their
 surroundings?
Area is Safe as a result |||| |||| 10 50%
of the location of DDL
Area is more | 1 5%
Dangerous
Area is Quiet |||| 5 25%
Area is Noisy |||| 4 20%
Total 20 20 100%

Figure 2. depicts the effect DDL has on the residence and their surroundings

Majority of the respondents insinuated the overall surroundings is more safe as a result in the
location of DDL with a response of 50% recorded. The second highest depicted 25%
responses who believed the surroundings was quiet and the minority of 20% respondents
believed it was noisy. The remaining 5% assumed the area was dangerous. The difference
was vast between the highest frequency of response and the lowest. The difference was 45%
which depicts how residence have somewhat of a similarity of opinions on the surrounding
environment as a result of DDL. The results were quite surprising as observed when
distributing the questionnaires, the researchers found the area to be quite noisy as they were
machines being put to work at the time. Based on the discovery of these results, it can be said
that the location of the DDL plant does not affect majority of the residences and their
surroundings who reside in the vicinity of DDL.

TABLE OF CONTENT
TITLE PAGES
INTRODUCTION:
Literature
Review………………………………………………………………… 1
Statement of Problem…………………………………………………………. 3
Aim………………………………………………………………………………
……. 4
METHODOLOGY:
Experimental Design……………………………………………………………
5
List of materials and Equipment used…………………………………… 6
Usage of materials and Equipment…………………………………….…. 7
Activities………………………………………………………………………….
…. 8
Data Collection
…………………………………………………………………...11
RESULTS…………………………………………………………………….….
……12
Interpretation of results…………………………………………………..…...14
DISCUSSION……………………………………………………………………
...…15
CONCLUSION, LIMITATION AND
RECOMMENDATION……………….17
ESTIMATED VS PROJECTED
BUDGET………………………………………18
DISSCUSSION OF
BUDGETS…………………………………………………...20
 PROJECTED VS ESTIMATED BUDGET

Estimated budget

Income $
20 parcels at 500 10,000

Total income 10,000

Expenditure
2 dozen seedlings at 200 400
Urea 2,500
Containers 2,500
Labour 1,000
Water 1,500
Plastic bag 120

Total expenditure 8,020

Surplus/ short fallen

10,000 – 8,020 1,980
18