Advertisement

Water, Air, & Soil Pollution

, 230:262 | Cite as

Assessment of Pollution Sources, Fate of Pollutants, and Potential Instream Interventions to Mitigate Pollution of Earthen Canals of Urban to Rural-Urban Fringe

  • Pattiyage I. A. GomesEmail author
  • Bothalage A. V. W. Fernando
  • Ganegeoda K. Dehini
Article

Abstract

Three representative earthen canals from urban, peri-urban, and rural-urban fringe of Sri Lanka were studied for a 2-year period against different seasons to capture insights important in ecological rehabilitation. Only the canal from rural-urban fringe showed a better water quality in wet season; elucidating, the impact of contaminated catchment runoff in the other canals. At a given sampling session, one or two peaks (relative maxima) were observed in urban and peri-urban canals for pollution representative parameters such as nitrate nitrogen and soluble reactive phosphorus. Those peaks were highly localised, an indication of poor advection. In general, two-dimensional variations of electrical conductivity and turbidity in dry season were uniform in urban and peri-urban canals, an indication of dominant molecular diffusion. This was further evidenced via physical models for different flow stages (low, high, and bankfull). Therefore, fate of contaminants had to be mainly governed by assimilation via sediments. However, grey water footprint analyses showed urban and peri-urban canals have over utilised the natural assimilation capacity of many water quality parameters by several folds. This study proved the importance of inducing attenuation by instream physical heterogeneity similar to natural streams or naturalised canals such as the canal from the rural-urban fringe of this study.

Keywords

Advection Assimilation Grey water footprint Molecular diffusion Spatiotemporal water quality variations Urban canals 

Notes

Funding Information

Authors wish to thank the National Research Council of Sri Lanka for funding this research project (Grant number NRC 17-066).

References

  1. Alam, M. J., Islam, M. R., Muyen, Z., Mamun, M., & Islam, S. (2007). Water quality parameters along rivers. International Journal of Environmental Science & Technology, 4(1), 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Public Health Association A.P.H.A. (1998). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. Google Scholar
  3. Beltaos, S. (1979). Transverse mixing in natural streams. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 6(4), 575–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bottacin-Busolin, A., Marion, A., Musner, T., Tregnaghi, M., & Zaramella, M. (2011). Evidence of distinct contaminant transport patterns in rivers using tracer tests and a multiple domain retention model. Advances in Water Resources, 34(6), 737–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CCME. (2013). Canadian water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life.Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Winnipeg, Canada. http://ceqg-rcqe.ccme.ca/download/en/221 Date accessed 31-12-2013Google Scholar
  6. Chapman, D., UNESCO, WHO, & UNEP. (1996). Water quality assessments - a guide to use of biota, sediments and water in environmental monitoring (2nd ed.). London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Edwards, A., Cook, Y., Smart, R., & Wade, A. (2000). Concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus in streams draining the mixed land-use Dee Catchment, north-east Scotland. Journal of Applied Ecology, 37(s1), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eppley, R. W., & Rogers, J. N. (1970). Inorganic nitrogen assimilation of Ditylum brightwellii, a marine plankton diatom 1, 2. Journal of Phycology, 6(4), 344–351.Google Scholar
  9. Ettema, R., Arndt, R., Roberts, P., & Wahl, T. (2000). Hydraulic modeling. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers.Google Scholar
  10. Franke, N., Boyacioglu, H., & Hoekstra, A. (2013). Grey water footprint accounting: tier 1 supporting guidelines. Delft: UNESCO-IHE.Google Scholar
  11. Gali, R. K., Soupir, M. L., & Helmers, M. J. (2012). Electrical conductivity as a tool to estimate chemical properties of drainage water quality in the Des Moines Lobe, Iowa. In 2012 Dallas, Texas, July 29-August 1, 2012 (p. 1). American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.Google Scholar
  12. Gomes, P. I. A., & Wai, O. W. H. (2014). Sampling at mesoscale physical habitats to explain headwater stream water quality variations: its comparison to equal-spaced sampling under seasonal and rainfall aided flushing states. Journal of Hydrology, 519, 3615–3633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gomes, P. I. A., Wai, O. W., Kularatne, R. K. A., Priyankara, T. D. P., Anojika, K. G. M. S., & Kumari, G. M. N. R. (2014). Relationships among anthropogenic disturbances representative riparian and non-riparian herbaceous indicators (biomass and diversity), land use, and lotic water quality: implications on rehabilitation of lotic waters. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 225(9), 2060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gomes, P. I. A., Weerasinghe, G., & Paulnath, R. C. M. (2016). Deriving eco-hydraulic reference conditions for physical heterogeneity for canals in Colombo, 110th Annual Sessions of Institution of Engineers Sri Lanka (IESL), Colombo, Sri Lanka, 17–18 October 2016.Google Scholar
  15. Jinadasa, K. B. S. N., Wijewardena, S. K. I., Zhang, D. Q., Gersberg, R. M., Kalpage, C. S., Tan, S. K., et al. (2012). Socio-environmental impact of water pollution on the mid-canal (Meda Ela), Sri Lanka. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 4(07), 451–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaye, J., Groffman, P., Grimm, N., Baker, L., & Pouyat, R. (2006). A distinct urban biogeochemistry. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 21(4), 192–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kiat, C., Ghani, A., Abdullah, R., & Zakaria, N. (2008). Sediment transport modeling for Kulim River – a case study. Journal of Hydro-Environment Research, 2(1), 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim, H., & Jang, C. (2019). A review on ancient urban stream management for flood mitigation in the capital of the Joseon Dynasty, Korea. Journal of Hydro-Environment Research, 22, 14–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kumar, A., & Reddy, M. (2008). Assessment of seasonal effects of municipal sewage pollution on the water quality of an urban canal—a case study of the Buckingham canal at Kalpakkam (India): NO3, PO4, SO4, BOD, COD and DO. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 157(1–4), 223–234.Google Scholar
  20. Lenart-Boroń, A., Wolanin, A., Jelonkiewicz, Ł., Chmielewska-Błotnicka, D., & Żelazny, M. (2015). Spatiotemporal variability in microbiological water quality of the Białka River and its relation to the selected physicochemical parameters of water. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 227(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
  21. Martin, F. D., Robert M., & Colpitts P. G. (1996). Standard handbook of petroleum and natural gas engineering. (6th ed). 2(38).Google Scholar
  22. McCorquodale, J. A., Imam, E. H., Bewtra, J. K., Hamdy, Y. S., & Kinkead, J. K. (1983). Transport of pollutants in natural streams. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 10(1), 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ministry of Megapolis and Western Development, Western Region Megapolis Planning Project. (2018) The Megapolis; Western Region Master Plan-2030 Sri Lanka, Ministry of Megapolis and Western Development. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1G-GtIjc-sOZ_tO6p-2-lEGKQsQlF9zpB/view. Accessed 8 May 2018.
  24. Nakamura, K., Tockner, K., & Amano, K. (2006). River and wetland restoration: lessons from Japan. BioScience, 56(5), 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Statistics.gov.lk. (2016). Population and population density by sectors and D.S. Division-2015. http://www.statistics.gov.lk/statistical%20Hbook/2016/Colombo/Table2.4.pdf. Accessed 22 Mar 2019.
  26. Urbaniak, M., Kiedrzyńska, E., Kiedrzyński, M., Mendra, M., & Grochowalski, A. (2013). The impact of point sources of pollution on the transport of micro pollutants along the river continuum. Hydrology Research, 45(3), 391–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Veuger, B., Middelburg, J., Boschker, H., Nieuwenhuize, J., van Rijswijk, P., Rochelle-Newall, E., et al. (2004). Microbial uptake of dissolved organic and inorganic nitrogen in Randers Fjord. Estuarine. Coastal and Shelf Science, 61(3), 507–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vidal, M., & Melgar, M. (2000). Spatiotemporal characterization of groundwater contamination as a result of urban effects. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 121(1/4), 367–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Walker, W. J., McNutt, R. P., & Maslanka, C. K. (1999). The potential contribution of urban runoff to surface sediments of the Passaic River: sources and chemical characteristics. Chemosphere, 38(2), 363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang, A., Tang, L., & Yang, D. (2015). Spatial and temporal variability of nitrogen load from catchment and retention along a river network: a case study in the upper Xin’anjiang catchment of China. Hydrology Research, 47(4), 869–887.Google Scholar
  31. Yuan, S., Tang, H., Xiao, Y., Chen, X., Xia, Y., & Jiang, Z. (2018). Spatial variability of phosphorus adsorption in surface sediment at channel confluences: field and laboratory experimental evidence. Journal of Hydro-Environment Research, 18, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhang, J., & Millero, F. (1993). Kinetics of oxidation of hydrogen sulfide in natural waters. ACS Symposium Series (pp. 393-409).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringSri Lanka Institute of Information TechnologyMalabeSri Lanka
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringCurtin UniversityBentleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations