Risk assessment of ground water sources for emergency supply

2014 ◽  
pp. 1483-1488 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Ground Water ◽  
Water Sources ◽  
Emergency Supply

scholarly journals Dataset for effect comparison of irrigation by wastewater and ground water on amount of heavy metals in soil and vegetables: Accumulation, transfer factor and health risk assessment

Data in Brief ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 1702-1710 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elhameh Cheshmazar ◽  
Hossein Arfaeinia ◽  
Kamaladdin Karimyan ◽  
Hooshmand Sharafi ◽  
Seyed Enayat Hashemi
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metals ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Health Risk ◽  
Ground Water ◽  
Health Risk Assessment ◽  
Transfer Factor

scholarly journals RISK ASSESSMENT OF CHILDREN’S HEALTH DUE TO THE CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF DRINKING WATER SOURCES OF THE NON-CENTRALIZED WATER SUPPLY OF THE CITY OF EKATERINBURG

2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (9) ◽  
pp. 997-1003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidia G. Konshina
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Drinking Water ◽  
Water Supply ◽  
Oral Route ◽  
Carcinogenic Risk ◽  
Water Sources ◽  
The Body ◽  
Arsenic Compounds ◽  
Traditional Assessment ◽  
The City

Introduction. In recent years, the risk assessment methodology has become the leading tool for assessing the health of various groups of the population, allowing identifying priority negative environmental factors. Material and methods. There were explored 212 wells, including 150 in collective gardens and 62 in cottage settlements. The priority oral route of chemical intake into the body was studied. Results. Nitrates and arsenic compounds create the main non-carcinogenic risk in the sources of non-centralized water supply in the territory of the Municipal Settlement of the city of ekaterinburg. When using water from wells in cottage settlements levels of non-carcinogenic risks are significantly lower than non-carcinogenic risks in horticultural partnerships. Acceptable level of non-carcinogenic risk for children under 6 years are related with 17.4% of water sources in collective gardens and 25% of wells in cottage settlements; for adults - 60.8% and 93.8% respectively. The detected nitrate concentrations in individual wells of horticultural associations can create a high non-carcinogenic risk. The total individual lifetime carcinogenic risk, both in the water of collective gardens and in the water wells of cottage settlements ranges from 10-5 to 10-4 and, therefore, is at a low level, the greatest contribution is made by arsenic compounds. Discussion. In contrast to the earlier traditional assessment of drinking water quality, when the main substances for which the discrepancy was found to hygienic standards were manganese, nitrates, iron and silicon, in the assessment of water danger using the methodology of risk assessment, nitrates and arsenic come to the first place, with a much smaller role of manganese. The calculation of carcinogenic risks using age correction factors (ADAF) has increased the risk values calculated by the traditional method by almost 2 times. Summary Levels of non-carcinogenic risks when using water from wells in cottage settlements are significantly lower than non-carcinogenic risks in horticultural partnerships.

scholarly journals Heavy metal levels in drinking water sources of Chingola District, Zambia

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Hamwiinga ◽  
Chisala D. Meki ◽  
Patricia Mubita ◽  
Hikabasa Halwiindi
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metals ◽  
Heavy Metal ◽  
Drinking Water ◽  
Ground Water ◽  
Water Samples ◽  
Tap Water ◽  
Water Sources ◽  
Wet Season ◽  
Drinking Water Sources ◽  
Metal Levels

Abstract Background: One of the factors impeding access to safe water is water pollution. Of particular concern is heavy metal contamination of water bodies. This study was aimed at determining the levels of heavy metals in drinking water sources of Chingola District of Zambia. Methods: A cross sectional study was employed. A total of 60 water samples were collected. Thirsty (30) samples were collected in the dry season in the month of October 2016 and another 30 in the wet season in the months of February and March, 2017. For each season 10 water samples were collected from each of the three water sources. i.e. Tap water, Urban ground water sources and Rural ground water sources. Heavy metal analysis was done using Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (AAS).Results: This study revealed that the concentrations of Iron, Manganese, Lead, Nickel and Arsenic were beyond maximum permissible levels in various water sources. Combined averages for both dry and wet seasons were as follows: Iron: 2.3, Copper: 0.63, Cobalt: 0.02, Manganese: 0.36, Lead: 0.04, Zinc:3.2, Nickel: 0.03, Arsenic: 0.05. Chromium and Cadmium were below detection limit in all water samples. The median concentrations of iron, arsenic, copper, manganese in drinking water from the Tap, rural and urban ground water sources were different, and this difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). The median concentrations of arsenic, nickel, manganese and cobalt were different between dry and wet season, and this difference was statistically significant (p<0.05).Conclusions: Sources of heavy metals in water seems to be both natural and from human activities. The concentration of heavy metals in different water sources in this study was found to be above the recommended levels. This calls for improvement in water monitoring to protect the health of the public. Therefore, there is need for continuous monitoring of heavy metals in drinking water sources by regulatory authorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document