THE EFFECTS OF STORAGE CONTAINER AND TIME ON PORTABLE WATER

ATTENTION:

BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPICS BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!

INFORMATION:

YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COST N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR

YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08137701720

WHATSAPP US ON: 08137701720

THE EFFECTS OF STORAGE CONTAINER AND TIME ON PORTABLE WATER

ABSTRACT

Water tanks are liquid storage containers that store water for human consumption. They are usually made of polyethylene (plastic), steel, clay, ceramics and fiber glass. The need to investigate the changes in water quality during storage in different types of water storage tanks or vessels is very crucial in establishing which tank contributes to deterioration or improvement of stored water during storage. Two sources of potable water (tap water and borehole water) were stored in twelve water storage reservoirs (six for each water source) for a period of six weeks. The tanks include black plastic tank, blue plastic tank, green plastic tank, coated steel metal tank, uncoated steel metal tank and clay pot. The water quality parameters examined were Temperature, Taste, Odour, Colour, Turbidity, Total solids, Conductivity, pH, Nitrate, Dissolved oxygen, Alkalinity, Total hardness, Calcium hardness, Chloride, Chlorine residual, Manganese, Iron, Total Heterotrophic Bacteria (THB) and Chlorophyll-A.However, all parameters listed above were analyzed at a sampling frequency of seven days interval.The results showedthat among the different container materials/colours used, black plastic tank was the best in terms ofpreserving water quality.The range in the following examined toxic parameters (i.e Nitrate, Manganese, Total heterotrophic bacteria and Chlorophyll-A) in tap water stored in black plastic tank were 8.0mg/L – 13.8mg/L, 0.099mg/L – 0.201mg/L, 2×102CFU/100mL – 116×102CFU/100mL and 0.000µg/L – 0.959µg/L respectively.On the other hand, the range for the said parameters for borehole water stored in black plastic tank are respectively 8.9mg/L – 13.6mg/L, 0.127mg/L – 0.226mg/L, 6×102CFU/100mL – 112×102CFU/100mL and 0.000µg/L –0.954µg/L. Also,findings from the study recommends that,the maximum retention period for storing tap water or borehole water in plastic tanks as well as coated steel metal tanks to be at most 3weeks while storage in clay pots should not to exceed 6days. On the other hand, uncoated steel metal tank wassuggested not to be used as storage vessel for potable/drinking water regardless of the retention time. The research also modeled the water quality results and identified that Electrical Conductivity (EC)is strongly influenced by Alkalinity, Calcium hardness and Chloride ions with R2values of 0.9926, 0.9958 and 0.9995 respectively. From this work, it was established that,black plastic materials should be considered first when selecting a container material for storing water in large capacity. CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND

Water, air, food and shelter are the essential items for any living being. It is possible to survive without food and shelter for some days, but without water, it is not possible to survive much of the time. Without air, one cannot live for a few minutes. Next to air is water which is of paramount importance to all organisms (Booker, 2000).

Water is a chemical substance that is composed of two atoms of hydrogen and an atom of oxygen (Hayward, 2004). In typical usage, water refers to only its liquid form or state, but the substance also has a solid state known as ice, and a gaseous state called steam or water vapor. According to Parsons and Jefferson (2006), water to be consumed by man/animals should fall within the range of certain limits set by World Health Organization (W.H.O.) often known as drinking water standards. Such water that is fit for human consumption is called potable water.

Water is readily available all over the world but only a very few proportion of it is potable or fit for human consumption (Nala and Jagals, 2003). Hence, there is the need of storing potable water in containers in order to ensure continuity in supply during interruption or disaster. Such containers used in storing water are called water storage reservoirs or tanks. Storage reservoirs are available in various forms based on the material of construction such as clay, galvanized steel, polyethylene, fiberglass, and concrete.

CHAPTER TWO

Literature review

2.0 INTRODUCTION

It is assumed that treated community water supplies in developed countries generally are of high microbiological quality and therefore safe with respect to waterborne microbial disease risks. However, significantly increased risks of waterborne gastrointestinal illness have been attributed to a centralized community water supply system in a large city of a developed country (Laval, Quebec, Canada) where water was extensively treated by modern methods and met all microbial quality requirements (Payment et al, 1991; 1996). These findings suggest that pathogens at levels below detection but high enough to cause measurable gastrointestinal illness either penetrated the multiple treatment barriers or they entered the treated water subsequently in the community distribution system or within household plumbing. Hence, even extensively treated community drinking water of high microbiological quality and assumed to be of low risk in developed countries may still be contributing significantly to community diarrheal illness. It is noteworthy that the apparent risks of waterborne diarrheal illness from the treated community water delivered by the distribution system were significantly decreased either by point-of-use water treatment or by protecting the treated water from post-treatment contamination (i.e., bottling it at the treatment plant and delivering the bottles to consumers). Additionally, the infectious disease risks from fecally contaminated and microbially unsafe water in developed countries is considered even greater in the water supplies of smaller communities than the larger ones. Small community water supplies are at greater risk than larger ones because they often lack the technical expertise and financial resources to adequately protect source waters, provide sufficient and technically reliable treatment and maintain the integrity of their distribution systems. For example, most waterborne outbreaks in the United States of America are due to systems with no or inadequate treatment, vulnerable watersheds and aquifers, distribution system deficiencies and serving smaller communities. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that in communities throughout the world, improving household water quality by point-of-use treatment reduces risks of diarrheal disease and significantly improves microbial quality.

In this review the candidate technologies and approaches for household water treatment and storage are examined on the basis of their technical feasibility, practicality and availability, effectiveness in improving the microbiological quality of the water and reducing waterborne disease, cost, and potential for sustainability and dissemination.

2.1. Household Water Storage, Microbial Quality and Infectious Disease Risks Key factors in the provision of safe household water include the conditions and practices of water collection and storage and the choice of water collection and storage containers or vessels. As shown in Table 1, numerous studies have documented inadequate storage conditions and vulnerable water storage containers as factors contributing to increased microbial contamination and decreased microbial quality compared to either source waters or water stored in improved vessels. Some studies also have documented increased risks of waterborne infectious diseases from inadequately stored water compared to water stored in an improved vessel (safe storage), treated in the home to improve microbial quality, or consumed from a quality source without storage (Table 1). Higher levels of microbial contamination and decreased microbial quality are associated with storage vessels having wide openings (e.g., buckets and pots), vulnerability to introduction of hands, cups and dippers that can carry fecal contamination, and lack of a narrow opening for dispensing water. Some studies have noted the vulnerability of storage vessels with these undesirable characteristics to fecal and other contamination without having reported microbiological data on water quality or increased levels of diarrheal disease (Miller, 1984). Other factors contributing to greater risks of microbial contamination of stored water are higher temperatures, increased storage times, higher levels of airborne particulates (dust storms), inadequate handwashing and the use of stored water to prepare weanling and other foods that also become microbiologically contaminated and contribute to increased infectious disease risks (Black et al., 1983; Dunne, 2001; Echeverria et al., 1987: Iroegbu et al., 2000; Knight et al., 1992; Luby et al., 2001a, van Steenbergen et al., 1983).

2.2 Collection Methods and Storage Vessels for Household Water

Since ancient times, water for household use is collected by a variety of physical methods ranging from manual (e.g., dipping), to passive (e.g., roof catchments and diversions) to mechanical (e.g., pumps), and it is stored in a variety containers. In developing countries, many of the traditional types of water collection and storage methods employing vessels of various compositions and sizes are still widely used today (CDC, 2001; Mintz et al., 1995; White et al., 1972). These include traditional pots or urns fashioned from natural materials (e.g., gourds or wood) or fabricated from clay, copper, brass and other impervious materials, and flexible bags or other vessels made of animal hides, other animal parts or fabrics treated to seal and prevent leakage. Today, other metals, including aluminum, steel and iron, as well as other materials, primarily plastics, have come into widespread use for water collection and storage in the form of buckets, jerry cans, picnic coolers and other vessel types and shapes. Cisterns and other basins are also still widely used for water collection and bulk storage near or adjacent to dwellings, as they have been since ancient times.

Some of the key factors influencing the impact of storage vessels and conditions on household water quality are: (1) portability and ease of use, based on capacity, size, shape, weight, presence of handles, (2) durability, weight and other properties related to resistance and longevity, (3) presence of a coverable (preferably screw-cap) opening for filling and cleaning access but small enough to reduce the potential for introducing contaminants by contaminated hands, dipping utensils and other vehicles (e.g., airborne dust), vectors, or other sources, (3) ability to withdraw water in a sanitary manner, such as via a tap, spigot, spout or other narrow orifice, and (4) presence and accessibility of documentation describing how to properly use the container for water treatment and sanitary storage.

The most desirable water storage vessels for many household treatment and storage options are: (1) between 10-25 liters capacity, rectangular or cylindrical with one or more handles and flat bottoms for portability and ease of storage, (2) made of lightweight, oxidation-resistant plastic, such as high-density polyethylene or polypropylene, for durability and shock resistance, (3) fitted with a 6-9 cm screw-cap opening to facilitate cleaning, but small enough to discourage or prevent the introduction of hands or dipping utensils, (4) fitted with a durable, protected and easily closed spigot or spout for dispensing water, and (5) provided with pictorial and/or written instructions for use affixed permanently to the container, as well as an affixed certificate of approval or authenticity. The cost of water storage vessels is also an important consideration, as they must be affordable or be subsidized. Locally available buckets, pots, urns, jerry cans, barrels, used beverage containers and flexible bags and flagons are usually low in cost and readily available. However, only some of these, in particular jerry cans, some plastic beverage containers, some urns and some flexible vessels, have properties and characteristics that are preferred or desirable as readily transported water storage vessels. Others, such as some buckets, cooking pots, some plastic beverage containers and other cylindrical vessels are less desirable for household water storage, but may be suitable for water collection and transport, especially if they are lightweight, have protective lids and are composed of easily cleaned materials (e.g., plastics).

Another consideration of household water storage vessels is their compatibility with household water treatment methods. In some cases, water treatment takes place in the collection and storage vessel or the treated water is delivered to the storage vessel. The design and composition of the vessel should be compatible with these tasks and also protect water quality. In some household water treatment systems, multiple containers are needed, for example, one for raw, untreated water and another for treated water. The materials of which the vessel is composed must be compatible with the physical and chemical agents used for water treatment. In the case of treatment chemicals, such as oxidant disinfectants (e.g., chlorine), the vessel must not exert excessive oxidant demand or result in chemical reactions forming excessive concentrations of toxic disinfection by-products. In the case of solar or heat treatments, the vessel must be capable of withstanding high temperatures, and depending on the type of solar treatment, they must allow the penetration of UV radiation and/or the absorption of heat energy.

Overall, the properties of household water collection, treatment and storage vessels must be compatible with the intended uses (collection, treatment and storage), meet the daily water volume needs of the household, be practical and manageable for the users (women, men or children) and be socio-culturally acceptable.

2.3 Water Treatment Methods – Overview and Historical Perspective

The various physical and chemical methods for water treatment at the household level or point-of-use are summarized in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. These methods are listed along with categorizations (listed as high medium and low) of their availability and practicality, technical difficulty, cost and microbial efficacy. Availability, practicality and technical difficulty are considered on a worldwide basis, including availability, practicality and technical difficulty for use at the household level. Cost is categorized as low, medium and high on a worldwide basis including the poorest people. Categories for annual household cost estimates in US dollars are less than $10 for low, >$10-100 for moderate and >$100 for high. Clearly, these cost categories will be different for different economic situations in different regions and countries of the world. The categories for microbial efficacy are based on estimated order-of-magnitude or log10 reductions of waterborne microbes by the treatment technology. The categories are <1 log10 (<90%) is low, 1 to 2 log10 (90-99%) is moderate and >2 log10 (>99% is high). The values of these categories also may differ in different situations and settings, but they are intended to distinguish among the various water treatment technologies available for use at the household level. On this basis, clear differences are discernable in the available candidate technologies for household water treatment.

Most of the methods or processes to purify water and make it safe for drinking and other potable purposes can be historically traced to ancient versions of them used since recorded history (Baker, 1948; Jahn, 1980). The practice of many of these water purification methods since ancient times has been documented by pictorial, written and archaeological records from a variety of original sources and recounted by scholars and historians of water treatment and water quality (Baker, 1948). Although the ancients may not have been aware of how such treatments improved the microbiological quality of water, they apparently were aware of and appreciated the benefits of these methods in making the water more healthful by reducing disease and improving its aesthetic qualities. Recorded in ancient history are the physical methods of sedimentation, filtration, boiling or heating, and exposure to sunlight (UV irradiation and heating), and the chemical methods of coagulation or adsorption with alum, lime, and plant extracts, adsorption with carbon (charcoal), clay and plant materials, and exposure to germicidal metals such as silver and copper. However, the development and use of chlorine and other chemical oxidants, such as ozone and chlorine dioxide, for water disinfection are more recent developments, dating back only to the mid-nineteenth century or later, when modern chemistry emerged as a science. Two of the earliest methods of generating chlorine, electrolyzing brine (NaCl) to produce sodium hypochlorite and reacting lime with chlorine gas to produce bleaching powder (calcium hypochlorite), are still widely used today. They are the basis for some of the most promising systems to produce chlorine for water treatment at the household level.

Most of the physical and chemical methods for on-site or point-of-use treatment of household water in developing countries are also employed in developed countries, either at point-of-use or in community (municipal) water treatment systems, using the same or similar technologies (AWWA, 1999; LeChevallier and Au, 2000). In developed countries, a number of point-of-use treatment technologies not widely employed in community water systems also have been employed, including various filters, adsorbents, ion exchange resins and softeners (Geldreich and Reasoner, 1990). Key differences in the application of these technologies in developing countries compared to developed countries are in the availability and affordability of the materials and the need to adapt the technologies to local conditions and personal or community preferences. Furthermore, point-of-use or point-of-entry treatment devices or systems in developed countries are often being applied to waters already subjected to extensive treatment, including disinfection, or withdrawn from high quality water sources. Hence, such waters are already likely to be relatively safe or low risk with respect to microbial quality and waterborne disease risks without pointof-use or point-of-entry treatment. In many developing countries as well as in many settings in developed countries, point-of-use, point-of-entry and household treatment often must be applied to water that is microbiologically contaminated.

HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERICAL(S)

After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to

08068231953 or 08168759420

(1) Your project topics

(2) Email Address

(3) Payment Name

(4) Teller Number

We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert

BANK ACCOUNTS

Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI

Account Number: 0046579864

Bank: GTBank.