The Effect of Common Environmental Pollutants on Water Quality

This report summarizes the results of three controlled laboratory tests to understand the effects of adding common environmental pollutants to pure water. Pollutants such as oil and detergent were added, and water quality was then assessed by how cloudy it had become by the addition of each pollutant, and by assessing the water via additional tests after each pollutant was added. Not surprisingly, the addition of common environmental pollutants, while some more than others, debases the quality of pure water to a significant degree. Given that clean and uncontaminated water is vital to the health of the world’s peoples, the experiments point to a need for advanced monitoring efforts worldwide as well as education and changes regarding how the world maintains and enhances its pure water supply.

Background

Water is a scarce commodity worldwide necessitating rational use both in human and animal consumption. Polluted water can cause serious health issues and/or unwanted genetic mutations putting undue strain on nations and societies. Additionally, water for recreational use needs to be pure or outbreaks of E. coli and other serious ailments can spread, rapidly putting additional strain on scarce medical facilities. Since water is so precious to the world, serious attention needs to be brought to its management. In 1990, fecal contamination of Stonelick Lake in Stonelick Lake State Park, Ohio, was high enough to cause enough concern to close the park to swimming. Investigators found the contamination was due mostly to leaky sewer systems and livestock operations that produced high fecal matter and fertilizer run-off from cattle farming. Once these issues were rectified, water quality in the park improved, but now the water in Stonelick Lake is sampled repeatedly throughout the year so that the water is kept safe for swimming (Ingram, 1993, p.19).

Similarly, a study in 2011 showed that changing land use from agriculture, with all its additions of fertilizers to the soil, to open range land with no additions of fertilizers, resulted in cleaner water. Water quality is not just filtration and adding alum to ensure water used by mankind is pure enough for drinking, but increasingly science is looking for other methods to stay ahead of new and rapidly degrading environmental pollutants to our water supply such as the presence of environmental chemicals in drinking water. Scientists knew that pristine areas of the world, untouched by fertilizers and fecal run-off, have river systems much purer than rivers that see more than their fair share of man-made pollutants. They theorized that returning unneeded farmland to its original state significantly reduced polluted run-off and would result in a significantly improved water supply. Their theory proved true, and similar projects are underway elsewhere in the world. Maintaining a clean water supply is of paramount importance to the overall health of the entire world (Advances in Environmental Biology, 2011, p. 2308).

Experiment Hypotheses

This report summarizes the results of three experiments to demonstrate how pure water is easily polluted by the addition of common environmental pollutants. The information gleaned from these experiments shows how easy it is to pollute pure water and how little it takes in terms of environmental pollutants to do so.

Experiment one hypothesized that potting soil, oil, vinegar, and laundry detergent added to each of four samples of water, all will become four different types of murky water and the addition of each pollutant causes a different shade of brown. Hypothesis two states that if the resulting four samples of brown water can be treated, it can become potable once again. Hypothesis three states that of the four samples tested against regular tap water and brand name Fiji and Dasani brand water, the bottled water will be the cleanest and tap water will be the dirtiest.

While the above experiments were performed in a laboratory using small samples, nature affords us an opportunity to see what happens on a much larger scale. Consider, for example, torrential spring rains from NY to VA in 2003. The rains dislodged large amounts of fertilizer, sewage, garbage, and other sediments in the soil, which then found their way into the Chesapeake Bay. That, in turn, caused some of the bay grasses to die, causing some animal species that relied on the grasses to suffer without enough food (Environment, 2003, p.4).

Methods

Carrying out each test was relatively simple. In each case, equal volumes of water from the same source were tested with the same amount of pollutants. For example, the same amount of each pollutant (oil, vinegar, etc.) was added separately to each vial of water. Test readings were then made of each vial and placed in lab notes. The clarity/cloudiness of each vial of water was noted as well as its smell. Additional readings were also taken such as Ph level and some additional chemical tests. For the last hypothesis tested, each of the test vials was examined against regular untreated tap water and Fiji and Dasani brand bottled water to see which was cleanest.

Results

Of the major pollutants added to the four water samples, the soil and water mixture seemed to be the most potent and causing the water to become the darkest. It is easy to imagine this on a larger scale when considering what happened when the heavy spring rains of 2003 hit the US East Coast as noted earlier. Additionally, the tests demonstrated that each sample of water could be cleaned via filtration and treatment with alum. All of the test samples became clear with treatment, and hence suitable for drinking.

The most compelling finding of the experiments showed that when tap water was compared to both Fiji and Dasani brand bottled water, the tap water was, by and large, the cleanest or was not significantly different from the bottled brands on the chemical variables tested.

Water Cleanliness

(Table omitted for preview. Available via download)

Conclusions

The first three hypotheses were confirmed by the lab tests, but the fourth was not. It is somewhat counter-intuitive in our society to regard ordinary tap water as cleaner than any of the bottled water brands on the market today. It is fashionable in some circles to only drink bottled water and to disparage those who do not as being not current on taking care of one’s health. Bottled water drinkers lay claim to the fact that bottled water is cleaner than tap waters, proven false, at least by these small tests.

The other major finding is water contaminated by the pollutants used in these tests, is somewhat “easy” to clean. Alum and filtration systems restore clarity and remove pollutants. While relatively easy to do in a simple lab test, water filtration and cleansing is an expensive process for governments and municipalities to undertake. Water consumers also feel the bite in rising water utility bills.

Other Factors to Consider

It is important to realize that these lab tests were on a small scale and relatively controlled from test to test. This means temperature, barometric pressure, and the like, were about the same from time to time. In the world’s environments, however, huge variability exists in the amount of pollution spilled into our water resources. BP spilled an estimated 4.9 million barrels of crude oil into the Caribbean Sea, affecting not only recreational water use, but fishing populations and farming as well. Some environmentalists note that we have only just begun to assess the full damage of this oil spill (Popular Mechanics, 2010).

Keeping our water resources clean and potable also means we address complicated pollutants in our environment. Chemical plants and oil refineries often produce arsenic as a by-product of their processes. Arsenic is highly toxic to humans. Researchers in Australia recently developed a method of cleaning pure arsenic out of water and converting it into a far less toxic and soluble form. Their ingenious method combined particular kinds of algae and bacteria into a system to convert the arsenic. This process is illustrative of one of the key problems facing water quality scientists today as opposed to years ago: Our demand for fuel and ever-more sophisticated medicines, plastics, electronics, and the like have caused the formation of new pollutants into our air and water as never seen before. To address today’s water pollution problems, scientists are increasingly multi-disciplined, marrying engineering to microbiology, or medicine to fluid dynamics (Ordrey, 2014).

The quest for clean water free of pollutants is a major goal of many of the world’s countries. The mission, however, is daunting. Consider Pakistan in 2010 when an extremely heavy monsoon season affected 20 million of its citizens. The health threats alone were breathtaking with the threat of cholera and other waterborne illnesses always on everyone’s minds. Other nations chipped in and contributed portable sanitation systems to guard against illness, but Pakistan and other poorer nations still have many of their people without the basics of sanitation and clean water (The Nation’s Health, 2010, p. 11).

While the three small laboratory tests were simple to perform and the results fairly clear, it is incumbent on us to think about what the results mean in a larger world view. Do we need more stringent laws and regulations to stem the pollution of our water supply? Do we need to start educating our citizenry about how they can combat water pollution? Do we need more sophisticated methods of addressing current pollution issues just as the Australians figured out how to change arsenic into a less toxic substance? Do we need to train ourselves to think twice about using too much detergent, oil, and other common pollutants as we mindlessly watch them go down the sink or down the driveway and into the neighborhood sewer system? These and other unanswered questions abound as we look ahead to provide clean water for everyone.

References

Advances in Environmental Biology. (July 2011). “Investigation of Land Use Changes Impact on Water Quality”. Farzimeh Golkaran, Alizza Shademaji, Hohammad Jafar Soltanis, Farzad Taghizadeh.

Environment. “Spring Showers Bring Pollution” (Sept. 2003).

“Health and Safety in Recreational Water”. (Feb. 2014). Saverio Grampoli, Vincenzo Romano Spica. Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

Ingram, T. I. (April 1993). Journal of Environmental Health. “A Preliminary Investigation into the Bacteriological Water Quality Problems of Stonelick Lake State Park, Ohio.”

The Nation’s Health. (Oct. 2010). “Flooding in Pakistan Linked to Cholera, After Other Risks to Health.”

Ordrey, G. (Jan. 2014). Chemical Engineering. “Bacteria and Algae Team Up to Tackle Arsenic Contaminated Water.”

Popular Mechanics. (Aug. 10, 2010). “The Deep Water Horizon Spill by the Numbers”.