preview

Drinking Water Case Study

Decent Essays

Discussion and Conclusions The present study reveals that about 25% and 62% of the total respondents were drinking water from which contained arsenic and E.coli at a level of >10 ppb and 1 cfu/100ml, respectively. The situation seems to be very concerning because in comparison with arsenic and E.coli contaminated water in HH, the percentage of HH respondents arsenic is much less than E.coli. The findings (percentages) are relatively higher than the findings in a past survey conducted in 2009 on the arsenic concentration, where in the HH level it was 23.1% [19]. Moreover, E. coli contamination in the HH drinking water is also remarkably higher in the present study compared to other past survey (more than 50%) reported in 2009 (Bangladesh …show more content…

According to the present study, having a non-improved source of drinking water in the HH was significantly less likely to arsenic contamination problem. Majority of the HHs used improved water sources (such as piped water, public tap, borehole/tube-well, protected well, protected spring or rainwater), arsenic is mainly found in groundwater and most non-improved sources are surface water could be a possible reason. About 60 percent of HH members did not know their tube-wells had been tested and they were not aware of the result [19], then lack of awareness among the people could be another reason of arsenic contamination in the HH water. On the other hand, E.coli contamination in the HH drinking water was higher among HHs who had access to non-improved water sources, this finding agrees with earlier studies [26, 28]. Improved sources clearly offer a greater degree of protection compared to unimproved sources and could be the underlying reason of this. But the findings would be substantially overestimated because water collected from improved sources are often re-contaminated during collection, transportation and storage [22], which were not measured. In addition, hand-pump water sources are also often broken and non-functional [29], which would further reduce the actual number of HHs reported to have access to an improved water source. Location of the water source was also associated with arsenic in the HH water sample. Water

Get Access