| PCRWR |

                    

                                                                 CHAPTER # 5

To Download print Friendly format click [Download]                  . pdf  (30 KB)

                                              

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 

Conclusions

The conclusions of the above analysis are briefly presented below:

  1. About 64% water samples of Central Sindh (Khairpur Mirs and Dadu Districts) were found within safe limits prescribed by WHO guidelines and PSQCA standards i.e. 10 ppb.

  2. More than 84% water samples were found to be fit if we follow guidelines recommended by PCRWR i.e. 50 ppb for arsenic contamination.

  3. Arsenic contamination problem is comparatively more pronounced in Dadu District than District Khairpur Mirs.

  4. Field testing kits can be used only for preliminary survey as these kits showed un-acceptable levels of errors and can be considered reliable for the filed testing only upto 500 ppb.

  5. Major water sources for sampling were handpumps, tubewells and wells. Maximum water table depths for handpumps and wells were 250 and 190 feets respectively.

  6. Analytical results indicate the presence of arsenic both in deep and shallow water source regardless of watertable depths.

Recommendations

  • Corrective measured should be undertaken immediately to remove arsenic contamination from the affected areas. Low cost arsenic removal filters developed by PCRWR should be distributed among the people of the affected areas.

  • Epidemiological studies should be conducted to assess the impacts of arsenic contamination on the health of local people.

  • Arsenic free alternate water supply should be ensured to the people of the affected areas.

  • All tube wells, hand pumps and irrigation wells having arsenic content higher than 50 ppb should be sealed and those with less than 50 ppb should be monitored regularly atleast once  a year.

  • Arsenic testing facilities for tube wells, hand pumps should be made available to the people of the affected areas at a reasonable cost.

  • Extensive sampling from the surroundings of the affected areas should be carried out to locate the source of arsenic contamination.

  • Research should be carried out on risk assessment of arsenic in food chain, impacts of arsenic contaminated water on soil health and crop quality.

  • Mass awareness program must be launched in the affected areas to make the people aware of the health impacts and solution of the arsenic poisoning in the groundwater.

Top