INTRODUCTION
Water is an essential element of the ecosystem. In fact, it controls all processes related to the ecosystem. It acts as a base upon which all human, animal and plant life survives. The food consumed and the habitats of all animals and humans are all part and parcel of the positive impacts this natural resource holds over life. However, there have not been significant measures designed to protect this natural resource so as to keep it in its original form without placing an undue imbalance within the ecosystem (National Resources Defense Council, 2014). Environmental activists have come out several times agitating for better legislative and administrative measures to curb water pollution. Despite this, the issue has gained little attention that has placed the future of all life in a risky position. Water pollution if not controlled could in the near future affect the social and economic aspects of the generations ahead (Watson, S., Taylor, A., & Queensland Environmental Law Association, 2000).
This paper seeks to conduct a review of three experiments whose basis are on water pollution. The first experiment seeks to explore the effects of ground water contamination. The second experiment focuses on methods of water treatment during the final experiment seeks to explore the issue of water quality in relation to its origin and the processes it may undergo before consumption. The three experiments are objective base and each of them answers several questions related to the other three experiments. In general, the three experiments are interlinked to unearth the effects of water pollution and the costs of converting the polluted water to a substance that is safe for use by humans and other animals.
The first experiment explores the issue of different types of contaminants. ‘Oil does not contaminate groundwater, while vinegar and laundry detergents are pollutants’. The second experiment revolves around the hypothesis of water treatment. It seeks to find the truth behind the hypothesis ‘Using different coagulants coupled with materials with different alkalinity can remove most groundwater contaminants’. The third experiment will revolve around the three types of drinking water from different sources to determine their contamination level. The hypothesis behind this experiment is stated as ‘The tap water will contain the most contaminants because it is traveling through pipes in unknown condition, whereas, the bottled water is in a sterile, controlled environment. The Dasani water is treated whereas Fiji comes from natural springs. Therefore, Dasani will have the least contaminants.’
Experiment 1
This experiment sought to explore the different types of groundwater contaminants. The experiment involved marking 8 beakers with a permanent marker from 1-8. Beakers 1-4 were then filled with 100mL of water using a 100mL graduated cylinder. The other beakers (5-8) were then set aside. Beaker 1 was observed over the period of the experiment and results recorded. 10mL of vegetable oil were then added to the Beaker 2 and mixed thoroughly using a wooden stick. 10mL of vinegar was added to Beaker 3 and mixed thoroughly with a wooden stick. A similar amount of laundry detergents (10mL) was added to Beaker 4 and stirred thoroughly using a wooden stick. The cheesecloth was then cut and folded into four-thick layer and placed in the funnel. 10mL of soil was measured using a Beaker and placed into the cheesecloth-lined funnel. The funnel is placed inside Beaker 5, and the contents of beaker 1 are poured through the funnel such that it filters into beaker 5. The observations made were recorded in the Table 1. The filtering process was repeated for the Beakers 2-4 but using a new cheesecloth and Beakers 6-8 respectively. A different sample of soil but of the same quantity was used in each case. Results were recorded in the table below.
Experiment 2
The experiment sought to explore the effects of one method of water treatment. In this experiment, 100mL of soil was placed in a 250 ml beaker. Water was then added to the 200mL mark. For 15 times the solution was poured back and forth between the two beakers. 10mL of the contaminated solution was then poured into a clean 100mL beaker. This sample was used in the later stages of the experiment to compare with the treated water. 10mL of alum was added to the 250mL beaker containing the contaminated solution and mixed slowly using a wooden stick for 1-2 minutes and the solution allowed to sit for 15 minutes. A 40mL of sand, 20mL of activated charcoal and 40mL of gravel were placed on the cheese-cloth. This layer was then solidified by pouring clean water through it. The contaminated water was then poured through the layer of sand, gravel and activated charcoal. A few drops of bleacher solution were then poured into the filtered solution. The filtered solution was compared against the contaminated solution. The results were recorded according to the observations and smell.
Experiment 3
This experiment explored the issue of bottled water quality. It sought to compare two bottled types of bottled water against water from a running tap. The three samples of water were each put in a 250mL beaker each. They were labeled as ‘Tap water’, ‘Dasani’ and ‘Fiji’ corresponding to the content for each particular source. The contents were then tested against an ammonia test strip, chloride test strip, 4-in-1 test strip, iron test strip and phosphate test strip. During each test, the strip was allowed to remain in the water sample for 1 minute. The results were recorded in the tables below against standard color charts.
RESULTS
Experiment 1
Both vinegar and laundry detergents are water pollutants. Oil, on the other hand, does not pollute ground water. The tables below indicate the pollution levels from observance of both color and smell for each of the beakers.
The results above indicate a high level for intoxication for the filtered solution in beaker 7 and 8. The level of contamination in beaker 6 was low compared to that in 7 and 8. Similarly, beaker 7 had a dirt smell.
Experiment 2
The experiment was used to determine the effects of water treatment. After the method of water treatment was used to purify the water, there was significant in the water sample that was filtered through the mixture of sand, activated charco0al and gravel as compared to the contaminated solution from which it was extracted.
Experiment 3
The results from the tables above indicate a high level of contamination in the tap water. The table showing the test results for 4-in-1 shows a clear comparison of the three water samples. From this table the Dasani water has low level of contaminants, followed by the Fiji water and the tap water ranks highest in the level of contaminants it contains. In all tests, tap water indicated positive reaction. This behavior indicates presence of intoxicants.
DISCUSSION
The results of the experiments were adequate in satisfying the questions raised by the initial hypotheses. In experiment 1, there was a confirmation that Oil is trapped in the soil thus having insignificant effect on ground water. Vinegar passed through the soil mixing with the flowing ground water thus becoming a contaminant at the point of consumption. Laundry detergent also changed the viscosity of the water and mixing completely to form a solution. This solution contains high inorganic pollutants that contaminate the water.
"When water chokes you, what are you to drink to wash it down?" Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 384-322 B.C.” According to Wisconsin Natural Resource (1995), “Everyday activities can affect groundwater quality. Think about the ways you use water at home. If you've always considered pure, clean water to be a cheap, unlimited resource, chances are you're accustomed to wasting water and haven't been concerned about what you pour down the drain (DNR.WI.GOV, 1999).” We don’t realize how much toxins is released into the water if we’re not careful on the proper disposal of oil, laundry detergent. One way to destroy our water supply is adding unnecessary chemicals into our water supply and by doing this; we have added an unbalance into our water supply causing us to suffer and not to mention other animals that rely on the fresh water. I only can say that I do enjoy drinking fresh bottle water. To imagine if I start gulping down on not so clean water would be hazardous to our health. Water can carry an abundance of unknown bacteria that the eye can’t detect. Of course, drinking polluted water can make the whole town sick and may cause severe unknown sickness that the human body cannot fight.
Water treatment is an important issue especially in the current world of industrialization where most of the industrial waste is released into the environments. The uncontrolled release of industrial waste into the environment has gone to harm the unsuspecting population. Water treatment has become an important venture today. Companies have been established to supply treated water to the population. This has placed undue costs on the people but it’s worth the cash rather than when people fall sick due to consumption of contaminate products from the environment such as water. However, the controversy is determining the costs of treating water as compared to that of protecting the environment from pollution (National Resources Defense Council, 2014). If the environment was protected, the need to treat water would have been avoided. In the same way, fewer incidences of illnesses related to contaminated water would have minimized. There is a need to research better ways of protecting the environment. However, to protect the health of the population, research should focus on finding home-based means of treating water to save the costs incurred in purchasing clean water for consumption.
CONCLUSION
Water is a valuable natural resource that needs to be protected. The authorities and all community stakeholders should take an initiative to ensure the future is safe. The three experiments have given a proof that groundwater is contaminated by the ongoing human activities. Similarly, water treatment is a crucial process to ensure a healthy society. The potential health and economic problems associated to unclean water are enormous and present a dark future. Thus regulations should be set to protect the current population as well as the future (Council on Environmental Quality (U.S.), 2003).
References
Council on Environmental Quality (U.S.) (2003). Contamination of ground water by toxic organic chemicals (3rd ed.). Washington, D.C.: Council on Environmental Quality.
National Resources Defense Council (2014). Water Pollution Facts, Effects of Water Pollution, Clean Water Act | NRDC. Retrieved from http://www.nrdc.org/water/
Watson, S., Taylor, A., & Queensland Environmental Law Association (2000). Water pollution and the law. Brisbane, Qld: Queensland Environmental Law Association.
Wisconsin (1995). Forest practices for water quality in Wisconsin: Tools for loggers, landowners & natural resource managers. Madison, WI: Bureau of Forestry, Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources.
