kshipra river

 Journal of   Journal  of Indian Indian Water  Resources Society,  J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. Vol . 32, No. 1-2,Water Resources January-April, 2012 2012 Vol 32, Vol 32, No. 1‐2, January  2, January ‐ April, 2012

 ASSESSMENT  A SSESSMENT OF WATER WA TER QUAL ITY STATUS OF HOLY HOL Y RIVER KSHIPRA USING WATER QUALITY INDEX R.C. Gupta 1, Ajay K. Gupta 2 and R.K. Shriv astava 3 ABSTRACT  In this paper attempt is being made to assess the water quality of Kshipra, a holy river flowing through Ujjain city. Parameters namely Temperature, pH, Turbidity, Total Solids, Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Biochemical Oxygen Demand Demand (BOD), Phosphate, Ammonia Ammonia and Fecal Coliform ( F.C.) were determined at important important locations of River Khan and Kshipra for for summer, monsoon and winter seasons in the year 2010. Assessment was made through Water Quality Index (WQI), a single number representing large quantities of data. US National Sanitation Foundation WQI was calculated for each set of data with and without Phosphate parameter. The results shows that Kshipra River water is of medium to bad quality and Khan River water is the major cause of  pollution in Kshipra River. The study also revealed that Kshipra River water is unsuitable even  for bathing.

 Key words: Water Quality Parameter, Khan River, Kshipra River, Water Quality Intex.

INTRODUCTION Pollution of river bodies has become a major and global problem that is becoming critical in developing nations of the world because of inadequacy or non existence of surface water quality protection measures and sanitation. Lagoons, rivers and streams are sinks for wastes. Wastes are most often discharged into receiving water bodies with little or no regard to their assimilative capacities. This in effect makes pollution of river bodies a global issue that has no respect for national or international  boundaries. The degrees of pollution and natural purification are measurable  physically, biologically and chemically (Longe and Omole 2008). Hence a comprehensive river water quality monitoring programme is becoming a necessity in order to safeguard public health 1. Selection Grade Lecturer, Civil Civil Engineering, Engineering, Govt. Polytechnic College, Ujjain (M.P.)  Email: [email protected] [email protected] 2. Associate Professor, Professor, Civil Civil Engineering,Govt. Engineering,Govt.  Engineering College, College, Ujjain (M.P.) (M.P.) 3. Professor, Civil Civil Engg., S.G.S. Institute Institute of Technology and Science, Indore (M.P.)  Manuscript No.: No.: 1309

and to protect the valuable fresh water resources. Whereas water monitoring for different purposes is well defined, the overall water quality is sometimes difficult to evaluate from a large number of samples and parameters (Chapman 1992). Analysis of any monitored parameter, either in alone or group according to a common feature,  provides partial information on the overall water quality (pesce and Wunderlin 2000). Traditional approaches for assessing water quality are based on the comparison of experimentally determined parameter values with the existing local normative. However, it does not provide a global vision on the spatial and temporal trends in the overall water quality (Debels et al. 2005). Mathematical computation modeling of river water quality is possible but requires an extensive validation. Besides it requires  previous knowledge of hydraulics and hydrodynamics. To overcome these difficulties, a water quality index (WQI) was developed which is a numeric expression transforming large quantities of water characterization data into a single number, representing water quality level (Sanchez et al 2006; Bordalo et al. 2006). The WQI is a dimensionless number with values ranging 33

 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. 32, No. 1-2, January-April, 2012

 between 0 and 100. A higher index value represents a good water quality (Cude, 2001; Pandey and Sundaram, 2002). This numerical index can be used as a management tool in water quality assessment. WQI also permits the assessment of changes in water quality and to identify water quality trends (Chapman 1992). Based on the results of WQI, river water can be classified for the purpose of various uses. The Kshipra River has been considered as case study because it is a holy river of Malwa region of Madhya Pradesh and thousands of pilgrims take a holy dip all the year round. The objective of this study is to establish the water quality status of the river for all seasons of a year. The results reported here will provide base-line data for framing suitable remedial action plan. STUDY AREA River Kshipra is one of the sacred rivers of India. It originates from Kokri Bardi hills (747metres high) about 11 km. east of Indore. After travelling a distance of 70 km. through Indore district, it enters Ujjain district. It receives its tributary river Khan  just upstream of Ujjain and river Gambhir near Mehidpur d/s of Ujjain before merging with river Chambal. Total length of the river is about 195 kms (Tyagi et al.2003). The river is not perennial and flows only during monsoons. During the course of the river from the origin to just before the Ujjain city i.e. up to a distance of about 70 Kms.,some small villages are situated along the bank of the river and there are normal additions and abstractions of water. The real problem with the river starts as soon as it enters the territory of Ujjain city having a population over five lacs. There, River Khan coming from Indore city merges with it at Triveni Sangam. River Khan is the biggest source of contamination to River Kshipra carrying high organic content, chemicals and heavy

metals. Another major source of contamination is the domestic wastewater generated from Ujjain city. About half of 110 MLD of wastewater generated is discharged directly into the river. Thus about 20 Km stretch of the river is highly  polluted and even unsuitable for bathing. Many of the important ghats like Triveni ghat, Ramghat and Siddhvat ghat are situated in this stretch where hundreds of  pilgrims take a holy dip daily. During Simhastha fair which is organized every twelve years, about two crores of pilgrims visit Ujjain in a month’s time to take a holy dip in the river. Thus about 20 km stretch of the river in the vicinity of the Ujjain city has  been chosen under study because of its religious importance. Fig.1 shows the location of important ghats and sampling  points on the course of the river. Sampling Points

Sampling points have been decided in such a way so as to cover all important points and ghats so that results obtained will depict the true status of the river and impact of tributaries on it. Fig.1 shows the details of the sampling stations. Samplin

Description

g Station 1

At Khan River (before the confluence with Kshipra River)

2

At Kshipra River (before the confluence with Khan River)

3

At Triveni Sangam (confluence of Khan River and Kshipra River)

4

At Gaughat

5

At Ramghat

6

At Siddhwat Ghat

Fig 1: Location of Important Ghats and Sampling Stations 34

 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. 32, No. 1-2, January-April, 2012

Station 1 and 2 will depict the true status of Khan River and Kshipra River respectively  before confluence while station 3 will depict the influence of Khan River on Kshipra River. Station 3, 4, 5 and 6 are the important  bathing ghats on river Kshipra. Samples were collected for three seasons i.e. summer, monsoon and winter in the year 2010 to assess the variation of characteristics over the full year. Samples were collected and examined strictly in accordance with the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA 1998). Water Quality Index

There are various water quality indices to compare various physico –chemical and  biological parameters such as Bhargava method, Hortons method, Delphi method etc.(Pandey and Sundaram 2002; Chetana and Somshekhar 1997; Ram and Anandh 1996). However most of these indices are  based on the first water quality index developed by Brown, et al. (1970) which was later supported by the US National Sanitation Foundation (NSF). For this reason Browns index is also referred as  NSFWQI. This index is similar in structure to Hortons index but with much greater vigour in selecting parameters, developing a common scale and assigning weights for which elaborate Delphic exercise were  performed. This is a multiplicative form of index and has been widely field tested and applied to data from a number of geographical areas all over the world to calculate WQI of various water bodies for which critical pollution parameters were considered.  NSF WQI is an excellent management and general administrative tool in communicating water quality information (Samantray et al. 2009). The mathematical expression for NSF WQI is given by:

 p  NSF WQI = ∑ Wi Ii i=1 Where th

 Ii  is the sub index for i   water quality  parameter, Wi  is the weight (in terms of importance) associated with ith water quality parameter  p is the number of water quality parameters.

The NSF Water Quality Legend is given in Table1. Table 2 shows the parameters considered for calculating WQI and there relative weights. When test results from fewer than nine measurements are available, relative weights for each parameter is  preserved and scaled the total so that the range remains 0-100.

RESULTS Physical parameters namely Temp., Turbidity and Total Solids, chemical  parameters namely pH, DO, BOD, Phosphate, Ammonia and biological  parameter namely Fecal Coliform have been analyzed at locations shown in Fig 1. Parameters were selected for assessing the  bathing water quality status at important ghats of the river. Seven parameters namely  pH, Turbidity, T.S., DO, BOD, Phosphate and F.C. has been considered for calculating WQI. Table 3 shows the water quality data at each station during summer (S), monsoon (M) and winter (W) seasons. Further NSF WQI was calculated for each station with and without Phosphate parameter. This was done in order to assess the impact of  phosphate on overall water quality. Presence of Phosphate indicates the use of fertilizers in catchment area of the river. Table 4 summarizes the WQI.

35

 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. 32, No. 1-2, January-April, 2012 Table 1:  NSF Water Quality Legend

Range

0-25

25-50

50-70

70-90

90-100

Quality

Very Bad

Bad

Medium

Good

Excellent

Table 2: Water Quality Parameters and Weigths

Parameter

D.O.

Weight

F.C.

0.17

pH

0.16

B.O.D.

0.11

Temp.

Total

change

Phosphate

0.11

0.10

 Nitrates

Turb

T.S.

idity

0.10

0.10

0.08

0.07

Table 3: Water Quality Data at Sampling Stations

Locati on

Season

Temp.

 pH

0

( C)

Turbidity

T. S.

DO

BOD

Phosphate

Ammonia

F. C.

(NTU)

(Mg/l)

(Mg/l)

(Mg/l)

(Mg/l)

(Mg/l)

(MPN/ 100ML)

1

2

3

4

5

6

S

34

8.2

56

1200

4.3

36

5.9

7.2

2000

M

26

7.5

210

1500

7.8

28

4.5

8.2

650

W

26

7.5

48

1050

6.1

18

5.1

6.2

2550

S

34

7.5

16

650

6.0

7.0

0.85

3.2

940

M

26

7.3

500

1150

6.8

4.2

1.1

3.6

310

W

25

8.0

32

800

7.3

8.0

1.2

2.8

1400

S

35

8.3

26

950

5.2

12.0

1.2

5.8

1200

M

27

7.4

600

1200

5.8

6.8

1.6

4.6

460

W

26

8.4

40

950

6.2

13.6

2.1

3.4

2500

S

35

8.4

23

1070

4.8

13.2

1.6

5.8

1750

M

26

7.6

650

1320

6.0

6.7

1.9

6.6

470

W

26

8.3

45

950

6.4

15.1

2.1

5.9

2480

S

34

26

1150

4.8

14

2.1

5.6

2000

M

27

8.5 7.6

650

1400

6.2

6.2

1.8

7.2

500

W

27

8.5

46

900

7.3

15.6

2.2

5.7

2440

S

34

8.5

28

1150

3.9

15.0

1.9

6.2

2000

M

27

8.2

600

1450

6.3

7.2

2.0

6.8

500

W

26

8.5

50

2480

7.0

15.8

2.2

6.1

2480

36

 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. 32, No. 1-2, January-April, 2012

Table 4: Water Quality Indices with and without Phosphate Parameter

Station

Season

WQI

1

S M W

With Phosphate 32 44 42

Without Phosphate 36 48 47

2

S M W

56 54 52

58 56 55

3

S M W

45 48 43

47 50 45

4

S M W

41 47 44

43 50 46

S M W S M W

40 49 44 36 46 43

42 52 47 37 49 46

5

6

The water quality index data are plotted station wise and season wise. Fig. 2 & 3 shows the variation of WQI at each station with respect to seasons. Fig. 4 & 5 shows the variation of WQI for each season with respect to stations 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 pertaining to River Kshipra. Following observations are made looking to these data and charts: Fig 3: Variation of WQI at each station w.r.t. season (Without Phosphate)

Fig 2: Variation of WQI at each station w.r.t. season (With Phosphate)

Fig 4: Variation of WQI for each season w.r.t. stations (With Phosphate)

37

 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. 32, No. 1-2, January-April, 2012

5)

Fig 5: Variation of WQI for each season w.r.t. stations (Without Phosphate)

DISCUSSION 1) As per NSF water quality legend (Table 1), Khan River water is of bad quality and the Kshipra River water is of medium to  bad quality. 2) A close look at the water quality data of Kshipra River at all ghats indicates that except pH & DO other parameters like BOD & F. C. do not satisfy the class ‘B’ water quality standards as prescribed by CPCB (pH = 6-8.5, DO > 5 mg/l, BOD < 3 mg/l & MPN/100ml < 500). Hence river water in territory of Ujjain city is unsuitable even for bathing. 3) Water quality at station 2 is of medium quality because in that stretch there is no heavy input of waste water. Water quality at stations 3, 4, 5 and 6 is of bad quality indicating sudden deteriotion. This is due to merging of River Khan at triveni sangam whose water is of bad quality. At stations 4, 5 and 6 there is further input of domestic waste water from Ujjain city. 4) Water quality at station 2 slightly deteriotes during winter season. At station 3, 4, and 5 water quality is poor in summer. It improves significantly during monsoon and then again deteriotes during winter.

Phosphate is responsible for algal formation. The effect of phosphate is more or less constant at all stations and during all seasons in Kshipra River. Water quality gets lowered to the extent of 5-10% due to the presence of  phosphate. However Phosphate effect is more predominant in Khan River. Hence remedial action should be taken to control  phosphate input.

CONCLUSION River kshipra was considered as case study  because of its religious importance. The sampling was done at six important locations of the river and its tributory. Nine  parameters namely pH, Temp, Turbidity, T.S., DO, BOD, Phosphate, Ammonia and F.C. were analyzed for three seasons i.e. summer, monsoon and winter. NSF water quality index was calculated for each set of data. WQI was calculated with and without  phosphate parameter. The study revealed that WQI for khan river water ranges  between 32 and 42 while WQI for kshipra river water after Triveni Sangam ranges  between 36 and 49 indicating their bad quality. The study also confirmed that khan river solely and drains to some extent are responsible for water quality deteriotion in river Kshipra. The river water is unsuitable even for bathing as though pH and DO are within acceptable limits but BOD and FC values are far above the minimum acceptable limits. Hence there is an urgent need to implement suitable pollution control measures in River Khan and Kshipra including maintaining minimum dilution flow, reaeration and disinfection so as to keep the pollutants within limit and to restore its old age glory.

REFERENCES 1.  American Public Health Association,  American Water work Association, and 38

 J. Indian Water Resour. Soc., Vol. 32, No. 1-2, January-April, 2012

Water Environment Federation (APHA/  AWWA/WEF), (1998). Standard methods  for the Examination of water and th wastewater, 20   Ed., APHA, Washington, D.C. 2.  Bordalo A. A., Teixeira R., & Wiebe W. J. 2006. “A water quality index applied to an International shared river basin: the case of the Douro River.”  Environmental Management, 38, 910920. Doi: 10.1007/s00267-004-0037-6. 3. Chapman D., 1992. “Water Quality  Assessment” (585pp). London: Chapman & Hall (on behalf of UNESCO, WHO AND UNEP). 4. Chetana Suvarna A., & Somashekar R. K., 1997. “Evaluation of water quality index of the river Cauvery and its tributaries.” Current science (Current Science Association and Indian Academy of Science, Banglore), 72(9), 640-646. 5. Cude C., 2001. “Oregon water quality index: A tool for evaluating water quality management effectiveness.”  Journal of the American Water  Resources Association, 37(1), 125-137. 6.  Debels P., Figueeroa R., Urrutla R.,  Barra R., & Niel X., 2005. “Evaluation of water quality in the Chillan river (central Chile) using physicochemical  parameters and modified. Water quality index.” Environmental Monitoring and  Assessment, 110, 301- 322 7.  Longe E. O., & Omole D. O., 2008. “Analysis of pollution status of River

 Illo, Ota, Nigeria.” Environmentalist, 28, 451-457. 8. Pandey M., & Sundaram S.M., 2002. “Trend of water quality of river Ganga at Varanasi using WQI approach.”  International Journal of Ecology and  Environmental Science, 28, 139-142,  New Delhi: International Scientific Publications. 9. Pesce S.F., & Wunderlin D. A., 2000. “Use of water quality indices to verify the impact of Cordoba city (Argentina) on Suqua River.”. Water Research, 34(11), 2915-2926. 10. Ram K. S., & Anandh H., 1996. “Water quality index of some Indian rivers”,  Indian Journal of Environmental Health,  NEERI, Nagpur, 38(1), 21-34. 11. Samantray Pradyusa, Mishra B.K., Panda C. R. and Rout S.P., 2009. “Assessment of Water Quality Index in  Mahanadi and Atharbanki Rivers and Taldana Canal in Paradip Area, India”  Hum Ecol, 26(3), 153-161 12. Sanchez E., Colmenarejo M. F., Vicente  J., Rubio A., Gaecia M. G., Travieso L., et al., 2006. “Use of the water quality index and dissolved oxygen deficit as simple indicators of Watershed  pollution”, Ecological Indicators, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind. 2006.02.005. 13. Tyagi Aditya, Sharma M.K. and Bhatia K.K.S., 2003. “The study of temporal and spatial trends of water quality of river Kshipra using Water Quality  Index”, Environ. Hlth, 45, 1, 15-20.

39