i
ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY IN BOREHOLES AND WELLS IN
WAA LOCATION, KWALE COUNTY - KENYA
JOSEPH WANJALA KILWAKE
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
Masters of Environmental Science of Pwani University
May, 2016 ii
iii
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my wife, Everlyne, son Ian and late grandfather Patroba for their love, sacrifice, prayers and support in my study.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge and thank my supervisors Prof. Mwakio Tole and Dr. Okeyo
Benards for guidance, encouragement and support in my study period. I am indebted to
Prof. Halimu Shauri and Dr. Maarifa Mwakumanya of Pwani University for the support in proposal development. I register my special gratitude to Mrs. Salome Mwaruwa, Principal
Waa Girls' School for support and encouragement, Mr. Ali Harun, Hamisi Masito, Ali
Mshindo and Juma Kanga during mapping, data collection and for linkage with the local community.
I do appreciate Mr. Patrick Oduma, OCPD Kwale District, Dr. Remmy Shiundu, Barasa
Joel, Twahir Mohammed, Eng. John Wanjala (EPHRAIM Company) and Josephat Orina for material support and advise.
I gratefully thank Miss Nyambura Mwangi, Mr. Peter Karanja (Pwani University) and
David Bett (Fisheries Department) for support in sample collection, data analysis and consultation.
I sincerely thank the Almighty God for the guidance in my study.
v
ABSTRACT
Water from boreholes and dug wells is extensively used in Kwale County, especially by rural communities living away from established market centers, where piped water is commonly available. The study aimed to assess the quality of water in boreholes and dug wells found in Waa location of Kwale County – Kenya.
Selection of the boreholes and dug wells was carried out using purposive sampling and simple random sampling. All the seventy one boreholes and wells in Waa location were visited and inspected to determine their sanitary condition and functionality.
Twenty eight samples of water that were collected in duplicate from 14 boreholes and dug wells (30% of total number) were analyzed for faecal coliform ( Escherichia. coli ), total coliform count, pH, total dissolved solids, turbidity, colour, total hardness, salinity, chloride content, electrical conductivity, total alkalinity, Ca2+ and Mg2+ using 3M
Petrifilm™ method, pH meter, HACH digital titrator, Total dissolved solids/Conductivity meter, and DR 2000 (HACH) spectrophotometer at KIMAWASCO laboratory.
The study revealed that 32% of the boreholes and dug wells have either permanently or temporarily failed to discharge good quality drinking water to the local community reliably.
This state has been attributed to negligence from the relevant authorities and agencies in terms of water quality monitoring and low level of community involvement in the development of these water projects.
There was high bacterial contamination (65%) of most of the water samples. The faecal coliform ( Escherichia coli count) ranged from 0 to 460 cfc/100ml.
Similarly, 50% of the collected water samples failed to meet WHO guideline values for investigated physico-chemical parameters (total hardness, salinity, chloride content, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids, total alkalinity, and Ca 2+ ). Salinity was extremely high in the samples from water points closer to the ocean such as Kaya Waa well which recorded 2697.8 mg/l as compared to WHO guideline of 250 mg/l, due to sea water intrusion.
vi
The existence of open defaecation points, lack of cover for hand dug wells and close proximity of wells/boreholes to the septic tanks and pit latrines have made these water points susceptible to contamination.
The County government of Kwale and water resource providers should build the capacity of the community in water resource management, introduce desalination and water treatment plants to provide safe drinking piped water. Proper refuse disposal and construction of communal toilets/pit latrines should be encouraged.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION………………………………………………………………………… ii
DEDICATION…………………………………………………………………………… iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………… iv
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………… v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………………………… vii
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………. x
LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………… xi
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS………………………………………………… xii
CHAPTER ONE…………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………. 1
1.1 Background information……………………………………………………………… 2
1.2 Statement of the problem……………………………………………………………… 3
1.3 Justification of the study…………………………………………………………… 4
1.4 General Objective………………………………………………………………….. 5
1.4.1 Specific objectives…………………………………………………………………. 5
1.5 Research questions………………………………………………………………… 6
CHAPTER TWO………………………………………………………………………….. 7
2.0 LITERATUREREVIEW………………………………………………………………7
2.1 Global overview and statistics overwater………………………………………… 7
2.2 Continental perspective…………………………………………………………… 10
2.3 National perspective……………………………………………………………… 12
2.4 Local perspective (Kwale County) …………………………………………………12
vii i
CHAPTER THREE……………………………………………………………………….. 17
3.0 MATERIALS ANDMETHODS……………………………………………………… 17
3.1 Research design…………………………………………………………… …….. 17
3.2 Description of the Project Area and scope of study…………………………………… 18
3.2 Sample size………………………………………………………………………… 25
3.3 Materials and instruments for Data Collection and laboratory testing……………. 26
3.4 Data Collection procedures and laboratory testing/analysis……………………….. 26
3.4.1 Faecal coliform and Total coliform……………………………………………… 26
3.4.2 Water Ph………………………………………………………………………….. 29
3.4.3 Turbidity………………………………………………………………………….. 30
3.4.4 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) …………………………………………………….. 30
3.4.5 Chloride……………………………………………………………………………. 31
3.4.6 Water Colour……………………………………………………………………….. 31
3.4.7 Electrical conductivity………………………………………………………………31
3.4.8 Total hardness……………………………………………………………………… 32
3.4.9 Water Salinity……………………………………………………………………… 32
CHAPTER FOUR…………………………………………………………………………. 34
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS…………………………………………………… 34
4.1 Biological results for S- samples(sterile) ………………………………………… 37
4.2 Analysis of biological results……………………………………………………… 38
4.3 Discussion of biological results…………………………………………………… 48
4.4 Physicochemical results for N - samples(Normal) …………………………………49
4.6 Analysis of physicochemical results……………………………………………….. 51
ix
4.7 Discussion of physicochemical results……………………………………………. 54
4.7.1 Chlorides…………………………………………………………………………. 54
4.7.2 Total alkalinity……………………………………………………………………. 55
4.7.3 Water Ph………………………………………………………………………….. 55
4.7.4 Water colour……………………………………………………………………… 55
4.7.5 Turbidity…………………………………………………………………………. 56
4.7.6 Total dissolved solids(TDS) …………………………………………………….. 56
4.7.7 Salinity…………………………………………………………………………… 56
4.7.8 Electrical conductivity…………………………………………………………… 57
4.7.9 Total hardness…………………………………………………………………… 57
4.7.10 Summary of findings……………………………………………………………… 58
4.8 Contamination of water in boreholes and dug wells……………………………… 58
4.9 Mitigation measures……………………………………………………………… 61
CHAPTER FIVE………………………………………………………………………… 63
5.1 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION………………………………………… 63
5.2 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………. 63
5.3 Recommendations……………………………………………………………….. 64
6.0 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………. 65
7.0 APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………………. 71
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Distribution of water points in Kwale County ...... 16
Figure 2. Map of Kenya showing the project area ...... 19
Figure 3. Map showing boundaries of locations in the study area ...... 20
Figure 4. Map showing distribution of sampled boreholes in study area ...... 21
Figure 5.Mienzeni borehole before renovation...... 42
Figure 6.Mienzeni borehole after renovation ...... 42
Figure 7.Nyamwezi borehole within a cowshed...... 46
Figure 8.Peniopen well ...... 47
Figure 9.Mvumoni well (failed)...... 48
Figure 10.Graphical plot of salinity against distance of water point to the ocean...... 54
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Sample locations, sources and sample identification codes...... ,.….29
Table 2. Summary of number of boreholes and wells in the project area……………….…..34
Table 3. Distribution of boreholes and wells across the project area………………….…….35
Table 4. Biological results of 14 water samples analysed………………………………… ..37
Table 5: Interpretation of bacteriological water analysis reports(Al-Tomi, 2007)………….39
Table 6: Group A category of water (Satisfactory)………………………………………… 40
Table 7: Group B category of water (Doubtful)………………………………………….... .43
Table 8: Group C category of water (Unsatisfactory)……………………………………… 44
Table 9: Physicochemical results of 14water samples………………………………………50
Table 10: Drinking water quality standards according to WHO (2004) and EPA (2002)...... 51
Table 11: Distribution of salinity levels of the sampled boreholes and wells towards the sea
...... 53
Table 12: Summary table showing comparison of water sample results obtained with
WHO guidelines and EPA standards… ...... 58
xii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AMCOW: African Ministers’ Council on Water
ASALS: Arid and Semi-Arid Lands
BH: Bore Hole
BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa
BTL: Base Titanium Limited
CDF: Constituency Development Fund
CFC: Coliform Count
DFID: Department for International Development of the United Kingdom
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency
ESRC: Economic and Social Research Council
FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization
IGRAC: International Groundwater Resources Assessment Center
JKUAT: Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology
KARI: Kenya Agricultural Research Institute
KIMAWASCO : Kilifi- Mariakani Water and Sewerage Company Limited
KISCOL: Kwale International Sugar Company Limited
KMD: Kenya Meteorological Department
KWAHO: Kenya Water for Health Organization
KWSP: Kwale Water and Sanitation Project
SCHPTP: South Coast Hand Pumps Testing
KOICA : Korea International Cooperation Agency
NERC: Natural Environment Research Council of the United Kingdom
NGO: Non-Governmental Organization
xiii
OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
RFL: Rural Focus Limited
SIDA: Swedish International Development Agency
SIWI: Stockholm International Water Institute
UNDP: United Nations Development Programme
UN: United Nations
UNESCO: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UoN: University of Nairobi
VIP: Ventilated Improved Pit latrine
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
WASREB: Water Services Regulatory Board
WHO: World Health Organization
WRMA: Water Resources Management Authority
WSBs: Water Services Boards
WSPs: Water Service Providers 1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Water is crucial for human health and dignity, as a driver for business, for food and energy security and for the ecosystems upon which our societies and continued development depend (SIWI, 2015). It is one of the abundantly available substances in nature and has been regarded as being a vital necessity of life since it forms part of every living cell. At a basic level, everyone needs access to safe water in adequate quantities for drinking, cooking, personal hygiene, and sanitation facilities that do not compromise health or dignity (UN,2015).
About 80% of all sickness and disease in the world is caused by inadequate sanitation, polluted water, or unavailability of water while approximately three out of five persons in developing countries do not have access to safe drinking water, and only about one in four has any kind of sanitary facility (WHO, 2004)
This study assess the quality of water in boreholes and dug wells found in Waa location in
Kwale County – Kenya. The performance, functionality status and sanitary conditions of all boreholes and wells are also investigated. Samples from different water points were collected and analyzed for faecal coliform ( Escherichia. coli ), total coliform count, PH, total dissolved solids, turbidity, colour, total hardness, salinity, chloride content, electrical conductivity, total alkalinity, Ca 2+ and Mg 2+ . Possible explanations for the functionality status of the water points and quality of water discharged were sought and noted. Finally, the mitigation measures and recommendations were put forward that will ensure that safe, quality drinking water is available for the community. 2
1.1 Background information
The UN-Water (2014) report on a global goal for water notes that, the difficulty of balancing water supply between multiple users and uses will become worse, unless attention is paid to the sustainable use and development of water resources and the ecosystems that provide them. Human activity and the prevailing climatic changes threaten groundwater resources. One billion people do not use a sanitation facility, and instead defecate in the open. Ethiopia as a country reduced open defecation from 92% to 37%
(WHO and UNICEF, 2014a). It is estimated that up to 90% of all wastewater in developing countries is discharged untreated directly into rivers, lakes or the oceans, causing major environmental and health risks (Corcoran et al ., 2010). This has huge social and economic impacts due to increased health care costs and lower labour productivity. Global environment is also impacted by wastewater related emissions of methane and nitrous oxide (Corcoran et al., 2010).
Seawater intrusion on coastal water resources if of concern as there is predicted sea level rise resulting from global warming (Mzunga et al ., 1995). The impact of sea water intrusion at the Kenyan Coast was reported to be increased by the highly porous nature of the underlying coral limestone formation, and reduced rates of groundwater recharge as urban centers and roads are paved (Tole, 1997).
In the study area there is lack of springs, water sheds, dams, rivers or lakes. Hence the groundwater is the main source of domestic water supply (Mzunga et al., 1995). There have been uncertainties on the availability and quality of water due to the fact that boreholes and dug wells have adequate water during rainy season but they dry out or have a lower water level than expected during dry season (Strikker et al., 2012).The scarcity of water is an old problem in the area and as a consequence, a number of boreholes have been dug, but there is scanty information on their registration at WRMA Mombasa. Bureaucratic procedures that are unfriendly to the borehole developers have greatly contributed to registry problems. The authorities accepted this condition as there are insufficient 3 boreholes; hence no drilling profiles of the boreholes are registered although this is mandatory by law (Strikker et al., 2012).
There is a correlation between the quality of some of the groundwater sources developed in
Kwale County, particularly between pit latrine waste and the groundwater system, with respect to the differing geological conditions (Mzunga et al ., 1995). Many hand pumps are non-functional and cannot be fixed due to other available water resources, lack of active water committees, unavailability of spare parts and insufficient funds (Mutua et al ., 2014).
The direct leakage of waste water to groundwater sources in areas where population is growing rapidly is probably higher than is currently known. Since there is very close linkage between ground and surface water, pollution of either source is bound to have a negative effect on the other and hence the need to protect these water sources from pollution. Furthermore, once polluted, cleaning of groundwater is a long and expensive exercise. According to Tole, (1997), the shallow nature and the location of the boreholes in the midst of dense population settlements have made these boreholes susceptible to contamination from septic tanks and pitlatrines.
In essence inadequate and irregular assessment on water quality parameters has made it not possible to document changes that could have occurred since the boreholes were commissioned. There is no single study in Waa location that has been conducted to evaluate the performance and functionality status of all boreholes and wells. Information on linkage of ground water quality with usability in the study area is unavailable from the
Ministry of Water Resources and Ministry of health.
1.2 Statement of the problem
Water generally contains microbial load, metallic chlorides, bicarbonates of calcium, magnesium, and dissolved gases in varying levels and degrees. At high concentrations, the constituents of water become pollutants either singly or collectively thereby rendering water unsafe for drinking and other uses. These pollutants result in odour, obstruction of light, and impairment of recreational and domestic uses (Gimba, 2008). Water 4 contamination with Escherichia coli is mostly attributed to low levels of hand washing with soap, with some estimates suggesting four out of five people do not wash their hands after contact with excreta (Freeman et al., 2014).
There is inadequate and irregular monitoring of water quality parameters from boreholes and wells. Periodical changes have not been documented and this jeopardizes water use interventions from the Ministry of Health, County Government and other related players, since they are not absolutely sure of the water quality at a given period of time.
Performance and functionality status of all boreholes and wells are unknown hence no meaningful planning for the water sector can be achieved in the region. The link between various waterborne diseases and the state of water quality supplied by boreholes and dug wells remains unclear to these state agencies. There exists a problem of linking ground water quality with usability. There is a likelihood of poor quality of water found in the few operational boreholes and wells around since from the observations made, the water points were becoming less as time goes by. Moreover, there was still limited understanding and knowledge on groundwater resources in many sub-regions and there existed crucial groundwater management challenges in the region. This study set out to assess the number of functional wells and boreholes in Waa location of Kwale County, and also determine the quality of water in the selected functioning wells and boreholes.
1.3 Justification of the study
The benefits to be derived from the findings are immense as the supplies of drinking water contaminated with sewage or other excreted matter from man and animals may cause diseases like typhoid, cholera and amoebiasis. In the interests of public health, corrective measures will be taken towards those boreholes and wells that recorded poor water quality, so as to restore their ability of discharging clean, quality drinking water to the inhabitants of Waa location. It is impracticable to attempt to detect directly the presence of all the different kinds of water-borne pathogens; hence there was need to carryout laboratory 5 evaluations on water samples. Since boreholes and dug wells are the main sources of water to students in schools and a considerable part of the community’s demand in the area (both for drinking and other purposes like sanitation, livestock), the research is of great importance as it seeks to guarantee safety and alleviate fear for risk of infections from water related illness. These risks decline as the local population becomes informed on which water sources are clean, of good quality and safe for drinking or cooking, and this serves to prevent illness and deaths, thus resulting in reduced health costs. This factor is informed from the observation that close to those water sources are also places for domestic uses like washing, cattle dips, cowsheds, bathrooms and pit latrines whose effects can bring dire consequences to the water users.
Documenting changes that could have occurred in these water points over a time provides a perfect opportunity for stakeholders in the health sector such as MOH to be able to monitor closely boreholes and dug wells consistently posting poor water quality results like extreme salinity levels and be able to decommission them if deemed totally irredeemable.
The research findings can be used by the County Government, the communities and private partners to come up with water management interventions. The study aimed at providing data from which future changes in groundwater quality supplied by boreholes and dug wells in the study area will be gauged and corrected in order to sustain water quality. The contamination factors can be inferred in advance and necessary measures taken to minimize the effects.
1.4 General Objective
The general objective of the study was to assess water quality and the status of boreholes and wells in Waa location in Kwale County – Kenya.
1.4.1 Specific objectives
The specific objectives were to:
1) Assess the number of boreholes and wells that are functioning in Waa location.
2) Assess the state of water quality parameters namely biological pathogens (Total 6
coliforms &Faecal coliforms) and physico-chemical parameters (total hardness,
salinity, chloride content, colour, turbidity, electrical conductivity, total dissolved
solids, total alkalinity, Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ and pH) and document the changes in boreholes &
dug wells around Waa location in Kwale County.
3) Determine the factors contributing to the state of groundwater quality in boreholes and
dug wells around Waa location in Kwale County.
4) Propose ways of mitigating against the deteriorating water quality in boreholes and dug
wells around Waa location.
1.5 Research questions
1) How many boreholes and wells are functioning in Waalocation?
2) What is the state of water quality parameters in terms of biological pathogens (Total
coliforms & Feacal coliforms) and physico-chemical parameters (total hardness,
salinity, chloride content, colour, turbidity, electrical conductivity, total dissolved
solids, total alkalinity, Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ and pH) in boreholes & dug wells around Waa
location in Kwale County?
3) What are the various factors that are responsible for the state of groundwater quality in
boreholes and dug wells around Waa location in Kwale County?
4) What are the possible solutions for the deteriorating water quality in boreholes and dug
wells around Waa location in, Kwale County? 7
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATUREREVIEW
2.0 Global overview and statistics overwater
The total area covered by water on Earth is about 71%. Of this, freshwater resources are approximately 2.5 percent by volume, while the remaining 97.5 percent is saline marine waters. Of the freshwater resources (2.5 percent of the total water resources), about 70 % is in the form of ice and permanent snow cover in mountain regions, 30% is groundwater and only 0.3% is occupied by fresh water lakes and rivers (UN, 2012). Bangladesh, China,
India, Nepal and Pakistan together account for nearly half the world’s total groundwater use (IGRAC,2010).
The OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050 (OECD, 2012a) estimates that by 2050, water demands from manufacturing industries and thermal power generation will increase dramatically, especially in developing countries and the BRICS (the five major emerging national economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). In the manufacturing industry alone, the share of total water demand by 2050 is expected to increase from 7% to
22%. The water demand increase in BRICS will be sevenfold, while in developing countries it will come close to increasing by 400%. In OECD countries, an increase is expected of some65%.
While such increased demand for water can indicate positive economic growth ahead, it also poses huge challenges of how to allocate scarce water between and within different sectors such as industry, energy, agriculture and domestic use. According to the GWP
(2012), “In South Asia, the groundwater boom has also largely been pro-poor, with marginal farmers of holdings smaller than two hectares increasing their groundwater- irrigated area by three times more proportionally than farmers with more than ten hectares of land.” Internationally, water has been a subject of discussion in many conferences which include the Stockholm water week conferences being held in the month of August
8 annually. For instance, each water week conference had a theme on water i.e. “Water and
Food Security” (2012), “Water Cooperation” (2013), “Energy and Water” (2014), “Water for development” (2015), and “Water and Sustainable Growth” in 2016 (SIWI, 2015).
Water is an essential, but easily contaminated, natural resource for human existence and it is one of the earth’s crucial life support systems. The quantities of water required for domestic uses, and especially ingestion, are generally very small compared to those for agriculture and industry: 20 litres per person per day for drinking and personal hygiene is considered to be ‘basic’ access (WHO, 2011). Ideally there is still enough water for all of us, but only so long as we keep it clean, use it more wisely and share it fairly (Planet Under
Pressure, 2012).
Globally, key targets for sustainable WASH identified by a wide stakeholder consultation include: universal access to basic water, sanitation and hygiene; elimination of open defecation and safe management of water and excreta (WHO and UNICEF, 2013).
Access to water and sanitation is recognized as a human right and has long been a central aim of international development policies and targets (UNCESCR, 2003; UNGA, 2010).
As per the Sustainable Development Goal number 6 amongst others, which originated in the Rio+20 Conference in 2012, the main aim is to ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all (SIWI, 2015). Almost one-fifth of the world's population – about 1.2 billion people – lives in areas where water is physically scarce (UN-
Water/FAO, 2007). Around the world,748million people lack access to an improved drinking water source, while billions more lack drinking water that is really safe.
In 2012, 2.5 billion people did not have access to an improved sanitation facility and water
(WHO and UNICEF, 2014a). The Millennium Development Goals sought to “halve the proportion of the population without access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation” between 1990 and 2015 (UNGA, 2001). By 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world’s population could be living under water stressed conditions (FAO, 2008). Over the last two 9 decades,
2.3 billion people are gaining access to an improved drinking water source and 1.9 billion to an improved sanitation facility (WHO and UNICEF, 2014a). Of those gaining access to drinking water, 1.6 billion now use a higher level of service: a piped water supply on premises. For example, an analysis of data from Bosnia and Herzegovina found only 32% of the poorest Roma use an improved source of drinking water compared with 94% of the general population (WHO and UNICEF, 2014a).
By 2030, 47% of world population will be living in areas of high water stress and most population growth will occur in developing countries, mainly in regions that are already experiencing water stress and in areas with limited access to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation facilities (UN, 2012). Globally, a small proportion of people, estimated at 6% were primarily relying on bottled water for drinking in 2010 (WHO and UNICEF,
2012). However there are concerns about the environmental sustainability of packaging water (especially the plastic waste) and affordability of this trend. In many lower-income countries, bottled water is a privilege of the wealthy who may resort to it due to lack of trust in the safety of municipal supplies (UN, 2015).
Quality drinking water is one of the essential requirements for good health since it is essential to sustain life when it is adequate, safe and accessible to all. Safe drinking water as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2004) is water that does not present any significant risk to health over lifetime consumption. An estimated 1.8 billion people drink water contaminated with Escherichia coli , an indicator of faecal contamination (Bain et al ., 2014). It is water that is suitable for all usual domestic purposes, including personal hygiene. Water access seems high (>80%) until affordability, reliability, quality and proximity are put into consideration (Rob et al.,2015).
Water is essential for life of man, plants and animals, and from the beginning of civilization, humans have settled close to water sources. Water is such a widespread material that its presence is accepted without question and its importance is only really 10 appreciated when there is a shortage. Water meant for food preparation and drinking must be free from contamination of disease causing organisms and from minerals and organic substances producing adverse physiological effects (David et al., 2013).
According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment on ecosystem continuous supply of water (MEA, 2005b), ecosystem services comprise of four main categories: provisioning
(e.g. clean water), regulating (e.g. flow regulation and flood control), cultural (e.g. recreation) and supporting (e.g. habitat for aquatic species).These factors clearly underscore the undisputable significance of water in the present times.
In spite of outstanding advances in water provision in the last decades, over 80% of wastewater worldwide (and 90% or more in developing countries) is not collected or treated, and urban settlements are the main source of pollution (WWAP, 2012). Effluent from industry is causing pollution to downstream surface-waters and aquifers and major health threats to people (Bahri, 2009). Small-scale industries, such as agro-processors, textile dyeing and tanneries, can release toxic pollutants into local waters (WWAP, 2012).
Deforestation results in degradation and desertification of watersheds and catchment areas, and reduces the amount of usable safe water available downstream (FAO, 2007).
Changing climate is also expected to influence water resource availability and quality, putting more pressure on already stretched resources and increasing the risk of contamination, due, in part, to more frequent and intense flooding (WHO/DFID, 2009).
Coastal cities such as Calcutta, Dhaka, Jakarta and Shanghai are experiencing saltwater intrusion in groundwater supplies due to uncontrolled groundwater abstraction as a result of the inadequacy of public water supply systems. Saltwater intrusion will be exacerbated by the rise in sea-level resulting from climate change (IPCC, 2014). Water shortages during the dry season are leading to overexploitation of groundwater, a situation seen in China
(World Bank, 2007b) and Thailand (World Bank, 2011).
2.2 Continental perspective
Approximately 75% of water supply in Africa is from groundwater (UNESCO, 2008). 11
Currently, only 5% of the Africa’s potential water resources are developed and average per capita storage is 200 m 3 compared to 6,000 m 3 in North America (Sperling and Bahri,
2014). In 2012, three years before the end of MDGs, on average about 36% of the population did not have access to improved water resources and 70% still did not have access to improved sanitation (WHO and UNICEF, 2014b). Human activities, among other factors, have impacted negatively on the status of groundwater quality. For instance, the bacterial qualities of groundwater, pipe borne water and other natural water supplies in
Nigeria have been reported to be unsatisfactory, with coliform counts far exceeding the level recommendation by WHO (Dada et al., 1990, Edema et al., 2001).
Continentally, the significance of water in human life is upheld by the African Union (AU) heads of state in various Summit Declarations such as the AU, 2004 & 2008 and AMCOW
2008. The water value led to the adoption of the African Water Vision 2025 so as to manage Africa’s water resources effectively for sustainable development (UNECA, 2000).
According to the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon (World Water Day, 2013), Water holds the key to sustainable development, and we must work together to protect and carefully manage this fragile, finite resource.
Decisions and resolutions from many international conferences on water and sanitation have been made. Key among these conferences is the African Union heads of state conference held at Sharm El-Sheikh, EGYPT (2008), which led to Sharm El-Sheikh commitments for accelerating the achievement of water and sanitation goals in Africa. In the conference, the Africa Union heads of states with their respective governments, re- affirmed their commitments to recognize the importance of water and sanitation in social, economic and environmental development of their countries and the Continent; to co- operations and collaborations between international organizations and nations to provide improved sources of water, provision of technical assistance to governments, monitoring among other services. For example there is a global WHO/UNEP network for air and water quality monitoring which is operational in more than 60 countries. Surface and 12 groundwater quality are monitored in 350 cities worldwide. The Sharm El-Sheikh
Commitments by the AU identified key water challenges related to sustainable development in Africa, among them, managing & protecting water resources; achieving water supply & sanitation Millennium Development Goals and financing water & sanitation sector (AU, 2014).
2.3 National perspective
For decades, water scarcity has been a major issue in Kenya, caused mainly by years of recurrent droughts, poor management of water supply, contamination of the available water, and a sharp increase in water demand resulting from relatively high population growth. In many areas, the shortage of water in Kenya has been amplified by the government’s inadequate investment in water, especially in rural areas (World Bank,
2010). There are about 40 million people living in Kenya, of which about 17 million (43 percent) do not have access to clean water.
In many areas, the shortage of water in Kenya has been amplified by the government’s lack of sufficient investment in water, especially in rural areas and most of the urban poor
Kenyans only have access to polluted water (Marshall, 2011). Kenya is a water-scarce country with renewable fresh water per capita at 647 m3 against the United Nations recommended minimum of 1,000 m 3 (Kenya vision 2030). Slightly less than half of the
Kenya’s rural population has access to water, as opposed to the urban population where 85 percent have access to safe and quality water. Due to continued population growth, it has been estimated that by the year 2025, Kenya’s per capita water availability will be 235 cubic meters per year, about two-thirds less than the current 650 cubic meters (World
Bank, 2010).
2.4 Local perspective (Kwale County)
Clean, quality, drinking water is remarkably inadequate in Kwale County. Given the scarcity of the natural surface freshwater sources in the County, efforts have been directed at the construction of earth dams, digging wells and maintenance of a few available 13 perennial springs (Strikker et al ., 2012). Boreholes and dug wells are used extensively by rural communities in the County for the supply of water from the ground as they have provided a considerable part of the community demand both for drinking water and for the other purposes like sanitation and agriculture (Strikker et al ., 2012). The boreholes and dug wells have been suitable in places where the groundwater is not very deep for easy extraction (Strikker et al ., 2012). The unreliable water supply in Kwale County by the state owned water companies (i.e. Kwale Water and Sewerage Company limited and WRMA), has forced private individuals and other partners to drill boreholes and hand dug wells for private and commercial purposes (Tole, 1997).
The critical stakeholders for developing water systems in Kwale County are; Water
Resource Management Authority (WRMA), Tenda Pamoja (NGO), Team and Team
International, Korea International Corporation Agency (KOICA), PLAN International, Red
Cross, Samaritan’s Purse, Bios and Water Filters, WASREB and the local communities.
For instance, Tenda Pamoja, a Dutch foundation together with other international foundations such as the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) and Kenya Water for Health Organization (KWAHO) have invested in the water system of
Kwale County for some time. The SIDA project concentrated on protection of springs, water harvesting systems, dam construction and borehole drilling between 1977 and 1989
(Strikker et al ., 2012). The project drilled 577 boreholes mainly in the coastal strip due to unavailability of water, but out of the 577 boreholes, only 230 are still working although only 60 (10.40%)are in good working condition (Strikker et al ., 2012). The SIDA project was named “KWALE DISTRICT WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION PROJECT”. 14
The Kwale Water and Sanitation Project (KWSP) was started in 1985 as an extension of the South Coast Hand Pumps Testing Programme (SCHPTP), with the aim of drilling boreholes and installing hand pumps which would be operated by the recipient communities. These pumps would also help in protecting perennial springs. Other aims were to provide assistance to self-help groups on piped water supply schemes; constructing ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrines and conducting health education campaigns (Tole,
1997).
Other minor actors in the water sector in Kwale County include; the Ministry of Planning and National Development, the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, schools, the Children Department and the Social Services Department of the Ministry of Home
Affairs (Strikker et al ., 2012). These stakeholders have a common interest in the proper management of water resources in the County although they are not visible on the ground.
Otherwise, they have the state authority, investment capabilities, technical knowledge as well as the will and power to keep the system functioning well for a long period if they decide to execute their mandate effectively.
Funding institutions and partners in groundwater research program in Kwale County are
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) of the UK, the UK Economic and Social
Research Council (ESRC), Department for International Development (DFID) of the UK,
Oxford University, Base Titanium Limited (BTL), Kwale International Sugar Company
Limited (KISCOL), Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT),
University of Nairobi (UON), Rural Focus Limited (RFL), Kenya Agricultural Research
Institute (KARI), Kenya Meteorological Department (KMD) and Kwale County (Mutua et al., 2014).
The major groundwater users in the County include the thriving tourism industry (Hotels),
Kenya's largest mine (Kwale Mineral Sands Project) undertaken by Base Titanium company with a peak groundwater abstraction of 5400m 3 per day, the Kwale County 15 which serves a large portion of Kwale County and thousands of hand pump users (Mutua et al., 2014). According to Mutua, 2014, a research titled "Groundwater risks and institutional responses in Kwale County, Kenya in 2013”, large scale commercial agriculture being undertaken by Kwale International Sugar Company Limited (KISCOL) is among the topmost groundwater users in the county. The projection given by KISCOL is 5,000ha of sugarcane to be irrigated in the County at an average demand of 70,000m 3 per day from the projected 26 - 52 boreholes (Mutua et al., 2014).
Alternative drinking water sources in Kwale County comprise of public taps, wells, boreholes, unprotected springs, rain water, tank track, cart/bicycle with jerricans and surface water among others. A complete register of the boreholes does not exist but according to Kwale water point mapping preliminary results 2014, a research done by
Mutua et al., 2014, Kwale County has a considerable number of functioning and nonfunctioning boreholes as shown on the map, Figure1. 16
Figure 1. Distribution of Afridevs (water points) by functionality status in Kwale County . Source: Kwale water point mapping preliminary results, Sept ember 2013(research sponsored by ESRC & DFID)
Areas underlain by coral limestone show contamination at greater distances (up to 150 metres away) compared to areas underlain by sandstones (up to 120 metres away). Over pumping of groundwater has also resulted in encroachment of sea water into the coastal aquifers, and the rise of sea level is expected to compound this problem (Tole, 1997). 17
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS ANDMETHODS
This chapter discusses the research methodology used in this study and provides a general framework for the research. The chapter presents details of the research design, target population, sample size, sampling procedures, description of data collection instruments, data collection procedures and data analysis.
3.0 Research design
The data for this study were obtained from two different sources that is, primary and secondary sources. The primary sources of data used include the following;
1) Survey study: A reconnaissance survey was undertaken by the researcher to determine the number and actual locations of the various boreholes and dug wells in Waa location through the use of hand held GPS. A survey was conducted to ascertain the sanitary conditions and status (working or not working) of all the boreholes and dug wells found in the study area.
2) Oral interview: The local administration, village chairmen/women and members of the community were orally interviewed on how they fetch water and perceptions of boreholes and wells. This was to establish the locations of water point names, status and the management measures in place.
3) Experimental design. The samples collected were analyzed in the laboratory to establish the level of contamination by each parameter. The results were used to determine the compliance of different samples with WHO guidelines and EPA standards.
4) Secondary data sources. Secondary data relevant in the study such as WHO guidelines and EPA standards for drinking water were collected through journals, textbooks, magazines, gazettes and internet materials.
5). Sampling technique. A six-man research team was constituted with the researcher as the 18 head of the team: one degree holder in water related issues, one advanced level certificate
Holder working in the laboratory, two senior primary school certificate holder and two locals who doubled up as our drivers using their motorbikes throughout the study period.
The research assistants had two days training to enable them assist in introducing, explaining study objective to the concerned communities and inspecting wells to assess their sanitary conditions.
A purposive and simple random sampling technique were used to select water points to be sampled as there were 48 operational boreholes and dug wells in the study area out of 71 initially identified. Purposive random sampling was used as it provided a better opportunity for the researcher to ensure that key concerns pertaining to sanitation and contamination in boreholes and dug wells from the study area are addressed. Simple random sampling was used to minimize the biasness in borehole and dug well selection, as it gave fairly equal chance for each water point to be sampled.
3.1 Description of the Project Area and scope of study
This research was carried out in Waa location between Magandia Kwale eye clinic center and Map River, before Tiwi market. The area is located in Kwale County, Coastal zone of
Kenya as shown below in figure 2. The study area is approximately bounded by longitudes+39°22'E and +39°36'E and latitudes -4°9'S and -4°30'S. The characteristic vegetation of the area is that of trees and natural grass, and the area is yet to be fully developed.
19
KM 0 100 200 300
Waa Location
Figure 2: Map of Kenya showing the project area - Waa location Source: Google maps
20
Kilometer s
Figure 3: map showing location boundaries of the study area (Source: Authors construct (2016): Admin layers from IEBC, topolayers from ESRI’s Arcgis service online)
21
KM
Figure 4: Map showing distribution of selected sampled boreholes in the study area ( Source ; Author) 22
Waa location has been further subdivided to three sub locations namely;-
1) Kitivo sub location.
The sub location comprise of the following 9 villages.
Key : - Cancellation ( e.g. Nyamwezi ) signify Nonfunctional Borehole/Well
• Kitivovillage.The Waa girls, Kenya calcium, Waa primary, Nyamwezi, Waa
stage mosque, Mwarapayo, Chiembedodo, MaendeleoMvumoni , Osiepe/Mkunazini
petrolstation are functional except Nyamwerzi, Maendeleo Mvumoni wells. B/holes -
Kadhangani/Nyanya, Nyamwezi, Maendeleo Mvumoni) and
• Mwagonga (wells -0, B/holes -Waaboys, Ganzoni, Kumbo/Mwagonga, Gogolo )
• Mwamshipi (wells -Gulandze, B/holes -Gulandze,kwa Mwakibwende/mwakweli,
Mwamshipi/swazuri, Wakati ).
• Maganyakulo (wells - Maganyakulo mosque, Kitauro, B/holes-0)
• Gwirani (wells- 0, B/holes- Gwirani mosque, Magundo/Mwanondo )
• Mkokoni (wells - kwa Chiguruguru, Mwaruwa , Mungai, Mutio,fatumagirigi ,
Munge mosque, Peni, White , B/holes-Busara/Mwadzowa,
Vibambani )
• Kathangani (wells - Kadhangani, Ngapa , Chidzekwa Ismael Zecha, B/holes- 0 )
• Kaya Waa (wells- Gami , Kaya Waa mosque, Kaya Waa comm., Kaya Waa beach,
B/hole – Kaya Waa comm.
• Bowa (wells- Gafa, Mbeto, Madarassa Qadiriya, HaliMwinyi, Roy, Gakurya, Mzee
Hamisi, B/holes- Mshindo/Kidze
The presence of the following institutions (schools and dispensaries) served as physical guides in
accessing the water points found in this sub location are;-
• Waa boys’ secondary school.
23
• Waa girls’ secondary school.
• Waa primary school.
• Mkokoni primary school.
• Kenya calcium primary school.
• Swafa primary junior academy (1 –6).
• Irishad integrated primary school (1 –7).
• Bridge international primary school (1 –7).
• Hamjan integrated school –Maganyakulo.
• Taw heed Islamic center – Maganyakulo mosque complex.
2) Kombani sub location.
The sub location comprise of the following 5 villages.
• Matopeni (wells- Kombani joint bar, B/holes-Bowa primary, Bowa
mosque,)
• Majengo mapya (wells- KwaMeja, B/holes- Tiwi bhMafimbo , Tiwi bh
Gasembi,
• Chidzumu (wells- 0, B/holes - Tiwi bh Mapu River, Kidzumumosque )
• Chigongoni (wells - 0, B/holes - , Kitsanze , Mwawasaa )
• Mtsangatifu (wells - Tiwi bh emirates, B/holes -0)
The presence of the following institutions (schools and dispensaries) served as physical guides in accessing the study area;
• Kombani secondary school.
• Kombani primary school.
• Bowa primary school.
• Gagale primary academy
• Mama Amina primary academy.
24
3) Matuga sub location.
This is the largest sub location of the three, and it comprise of the following 11
Villages;
• Mbweka (wells- Mwachileta , B/holes- old Mbweka , New Mbweka , Mwaivu ,
Magombani )
• Tumbula (wells- 0, B/holes-0)
• Makondeni (wells- 0, B/holes-0)
• Kigato (wells- 0, B/holes-0)
• Voroni (wells- Abubakar , B/holes-Mng`ongoni/Bethany )
• Tsunguni (wells - 0, B/holes-0)
• Mwauchi (wells- 0, B/holes-0)
• Ganze (wells- 0, B/holes-0)
• Mwatate (wells- 0, B/holes-0)
• Mienzeni (wells- Magundo/Mwakuwania, B/holes-Mienzeni/Yeje)
• Mabatani (wells- 0, B/holes-0)
Institutions: schools and dispensaries ( 13 in number) found in this sub location are;-
• Matuga girls’ secondary school.
• Matuga primary school.
• Voroni primary school.
• Yeje primary school.
• Mbweka primary school.
• Ganze primary school.
• Matuga polytechnic.
• Vision of hope primary academy.
• Bethany primary academy.
• Abubakar primary school. 25
• Tumbula nursery school.
• Kenya school of government
3.2 Sample size
During the study, a total of 71 boreholes and dug wells in Waa location were identified.
The total target number of water points in the entire study area was made up of 48 working water points (21 boreholes and 27 hand dug wells) distributed across the three sub locations. A Sample size of 14 water points (5 boreholes and 9 hand dug wells) which constituted 30% of the total number of boreholes and hand dug wells in Kombani, Kitivo and Matuga sub locations were selected for the study. This sample was proportionally distributed to each of the three sub locations using the formula below
(Mugenda&Mugenda, 2003).
= ×
Where;- p represents the sample size picked upon.
- N represents the total number of boreholes and hand dug wells in each sub location.
- represent 30% of the total number of boreholes and hand dug wells in the entire Waa location.
N represents the total number of operational boreholes and hand dug wells in the entire
Waa location.
• Kombani Sub location
07 = × 14 = ℎ 48
• Kitivo sub location
38 = × 14 = 11 ℎ 48
09 were sampled instead of 11 due to their close proximity
26
• Matuga sub location
04 = × 14 = 01 ℎ 48
03 were sampled instead of 01 as the area is so wide and with differing geology.
The sample size was therefore 14 (5 boreholes and 9 hand dug wells) from the three sub
locations constituting Waa location.
3.3 Materials and instruments for Data Collection and laboratory testing
The data collection and analysis materials and instruments used in the study included the
sterile glass bottles, cool box, alcohol, cotton wool, polyethylene bottles pH meter, HACH
digital titrator, Total dissolved solids/Conductivity meter, and DR 2000 (HACH)
spectrophotometer and apparatus in KIMAWASCO water, and sanitary engineering water
laboratory found in Pwani University.
Sterilized glass bottles used for water bacteriological sampling (at least 200 ml capacity)
were fitted with screw caps. The cap and neck of the bottle had been protected from
contamination by a suitable cover either of thin aluminum foil while within the screw, were
Silicon rubber liners.
3.4 Data Collection procedures and laboratory testing/analysis
Prior to the commencement of data collection, the researcher obtained all the necessary
documents, including an introduction letter from the University. Audience with the
sampled local authorities in the region was also sought to clarify the purpose of the study.
Upon getting clearance, the researcher in person sought the assistance from the local
authorities and community so as to have access to the boreholes and dug wells that were
available in the study area. The procedures for data collection were as follows.
3.4.1 Faecal coliform and Total coliform
Total Coliform (TC)
The presence of any member of Total Coliform bacteria may indicate that the water supply 27 is contaminated while its absence is usually interpreted as evidence of safe drinking water which has a low risk of waterborne infectious disease. The test for total Coliforms determines the presence or absence of these bacteria in 100 milliliters of sample.
Escherichia coli (EC)
E. coli is a specific indicator for the presence of fecal contamination and its presence in water indicates the presence of material of fecal origin and thus a potentially dangerous situation, the nature of which should be determined by immediate investigation.
By determining this, we can determine whether or not the water supply, from which the sample was collected, is safe to drink.
For bacteriological analysis of borehole and dug well water, samples were collected aseptically in 200 ml heat-sterilized bottles containing a sufficient volume of sodium thiosulphate that was meant to neutralize the bactericidal effect of any chlorine in the water. Leaky taps were neglected since water flowing over the surface of the tap would have contaminated the samples. Just before collection of the sample, each container was rinsed three times with the water about to be sampled. The outside and inside of the tap nozzle was thoroughly cleaned with alcohol moistened cotton wool, after which the outside was flushed for one minute to remove any possible stagnant water from the line and to assure that a representative sample was obtained. Borehole water samples were allowed to flow freely for at least 5 minutes while the pumps were in operation to remove all the water contained in the casing, then fresh water samples from the aquifer was run into the bottles
(David etal., 2013).Sample bottles were immediately stoppered, labeled using a water-proof marker with full details, and quickly delivered in cool box to KIMAWASCO laboratory within 12 hours. Cool box ensured protection of samples from light and any other changes that could have occurred in the bacterial content of water on storage. Laboratory examination of the samples was done within 24 hours of sampling. Total coliform and
E.coli were assessed in all water samples collected from boreholes and dug wells. Total 28 coliform is a standard indicator organism used to show general bacterial contamination in water. E.coli is also used to test drinking water, it points more directly to fecal contamination (Fewtrell, et al. 2001).
Petrifilm™ Testing
There are several standard methods such as membrane filtration, MPN, or chromogenic media methods that are used to test for total Coliform and E.coli (Dufour et al., 2003). For this study, 3 M Petrifilm™ method was used as it was simple, cheap, not requiring additional equipment and ease of transport.
A 1 milliliter sample of water was placed on the count plate culture medium and left to incubate at 35° C for 24 hours in KIMAWASCO laboratory, Kilifi, after which the film was read by direct count. Any total Coliform or E.coli colony forming units (CFUs) that appeared as red or blue dots were and recorded as per sample.
Physico-chemical parameters
The borehole and dug well water samples were collected aseptically in one litre polyethylene bottles. The polyethylene bottles were prewashed with a detergent, diluted nitric acid and deionized water respectively. Just before collection of the sample, each container was rinsed three times with the water about to be sampled. The outside and inside too of the pump nozzle was thoroughly cleaned with cotton wool soaked in alcohol then flushed for one minute. Eventually pumping was stopped and using an alcohol burner, the outlet was flamed with sufficient heat for at least one minute and allowed to cool, then pumping once more to give a moderate flow before aseptically filling the polyethylene bottles. Well water samples were also collected using the bottles by tying a rope below their necks and 500g stone under it. The cover of the bottles was aseptically removed, bottle lowered into wells to the depth of about 1 metre beneath the water and raised out of the well. Finally, their covers were carefully replaced, bottles labeled with full details, put into a cool box containing ice packs and transported immediately to the laboratory for analysis. Sample labeling was done as illustrated in Table 1 below with details of sample 29
locations, sources and sample identification code on the same day.
Table 1: Sample locations, sources and sample identification code
NO. Sample location Source of supply Sample identification code 1. Kitivo (Waa Girls secondary) Well K1 (N & S) 2. Kitivo (Nyamwezi). Borehole K2 (N & S) 3. Kitivo (Kenya calcium) Well K3 (N & S) 4. Mkokoni (Busara) Borehole K4 (N & S) 5. Mkokoni (KwaPeni) Well K5 (N & S) 6. Kaya Waa (Beach) Well K6 (N & S) 7. Bowa (Kwa Roy) Well K7 (N & S) 8. Mwagonga (Kumbo) Borehole K8 (N & S) 9. Maganyakulo(Maganyamosq) Well K9 (N & S) 10. Voroni (Abubakar pry) Well M1 (N & S) 11. Mbweka (Mwachileta) Well M2 (N & S) 12. Mienzeni (Mienzeni/Yeje) Borehole M3 (N & S) 13. Matopeni (Bowa primary) Borehole KO1 (N & S) 14. Matopeni (Joint Bar) Well KO2 (N & S)
KEY:
K - represents- samples collected from Kitivo sub location
KO - represents- samples collected from Kombani sub location
M - represents samples collected from Matuga sub location
N – Normal sample collected for physicochemical tests
S – Sterile sample collected for biological analysis
3.4.2 Water pH
pH measures H ion concentration in any liquid.
A digital pH meter was used to obtain the pH of the collected water samples.
Standardization of the instrument was done using buffer solutions: starting with acidic,
neutral and lastly alkaline before the sample was poured into a test tube. Finally, the test 30 tube containing each sample at a time was put into a pH meter and values read and recorded immediately. pH was assessed because it is one of the basic parameters for evaluation of the water quality and usually it can indicate the biological availability of chemical constituents such as nutrients and heavy metals. Acceptable range for drinking purposes is from 6.5 to 8.5. Levels below 6.5 may be corrosive, while levels above 8.5 may create scaling problems and a bitter taste.
3.4.3 Turbidity
Testing for turbidity in water samples is significant because it provides a good picture of the amount of solids present. Solids can be a good vector for bacteria to enter a water source, and the more the solids present, the more disinfectant required to treat a given amount of water (Davis and Lambert2002).
Turbidity was measured using DR 2000(HACH) spectrophotometer. For determination of turbidity in water samples, freshly prepared distilled water was filled into 25ml sample cell and another containing sampled water to be analyzed. The DR 2000(HACH) spectrometer instrument was used where its knob was turned to a programmed number of turbidity which was 750 and wavelength 450nm.The distilled water was inserted first into the cell holder and the lid closed, then the knob for zero was pressed to standardize the instrument.
After that, the sample was inserted into the cell holder and the “Read” button pressed and the result was displayed on the display screen where it was noted and recorded.
3.4.4 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
In determination of TDS, 200mls of distilled water and 200mls of water sample were poured into two separate beakers. The TDS / Conductivity meter was switched on, and its sensor rod dipped into the beaker containing distilled water which gave a Reading of 0.00 mg/litre TDS. Later on, the sensor rod was dipped into the second beaker containing the water sample, where the TDS / Conductivity values were then displayed in mg/litre.
The total dissolved solid is an indicator of potential concerns and further investigation has 31 to be conducted. Often, high levels of TDS are caused by the presence of Nitrates or pesticides.
3.4.5 Chloride
In determination of chloride content in water samples, the following materials were used;
Spectrophotometer DR 2000 (HACH) freshly prepared distilled water, mercury thiocyanate and freshly prepared iron (II) sulphate solution. A sample cell was filled with 25ml of freshly prepared distilled water and the second cell with sample water. The spectrophotometer was set at a programme number 70 and dialed to wavelength 455 then
2ml of mercury thiocyanate was added into each sample cell and swirled to mix.
In addition, 1ml of iron (II) sulphate solution was pipetted into each sample and swirled to mix and let to stand for 2 minutes reaction time. Then the first solution (distilled water) was inserted first into the cell holder and lid closed, then the knob for the instrument was pressed to give 0.00mg/litre reading. Later on, the second solution was inserted into the cell holder and the “Read” button pressed to give chloride value in mg/litre that was then recorded.
3.4.6 Water Colour
The DR 2000 (HACH) Spectrophotometer was also used to determine the colour of the water samples using the same procedure as in turbidity measurement, only that the instrument was programmed at number 120 and wavelength 450nm. The units in Hazen of colour were observed and recorded.
3.4.7 Electrical conductivity
It is a measure of the ability of the water to conduct an electric current. It is related to the amount of dissolved substances or ions in water but does not give an indication of which minerals are present. In most cases conductivity is about twice the total hardness in uncontaminated water, changes in electrical conductivity may indicate changes in the overall water quality; hence this is the overall test for water quality. If electrical conductivity is much greater than two times the hardness, it may indicate the presence of 32
2- other ions such as Cl -, NO 3-, SO 4 which may be either human influenced or naturally occurring.
3.4.8 Total hardness
It is of the amount of Ca 2+ and Mg 2+ ion in the water sample. It is primarily caused by water slowly dissolving rocks that contain calcium and magnesium. The most desirable range of hardness is between 80 and 100 mg/L as less than 80 mg/L may result in corrosive water. Hardness values exceeding 500 mg/L are generally unsuitable for domestic purposes without treatment. No health concerns are associated with drinking hard water but more often it appear undesirable as it builds up (scaling) in pipes and water heaters.
Hard water also wastes soap as it reduces the ability of the cleansing agent by reacting with it first before forming lather. Hard water also forms scum and causes graying on white pieces of fabrics over a long period of time, while in some cases hard water causes dry skin when people uses it frequently for showering.
Ca 2+ and Mg 2+ ions are essential nutrients in the bodies of living organisms. However, drinking hard water directly cannot be a significant source of dietary needs.
The recommended limit for Calcium is 75 mg/L (WHO, 2004), as when it is in excess, it may contribute to the formation of kidney or bladder stones.
The recommended limit for magnesium is 50 mg/Las excessive magnesium may give water a bitter taste, but is normally not a health hazard.
3.4.9 Water Salinity
Salinity in sea water is as a result of a complex solution made up of many things including mineral salts and decayed biological matter from marine organisms. Most of the ocean's salts are derived from gradual processes, such as weathering and erosion of the earths' crust and mountains by the dissolving action of rains and streams. Salts become concentrated in the sea because the Sun's heat evaporates almost pure water from the surface of the ocean, leaving the salts behind. These cations and anions dissolved in sea water, gives it a “salty” 33 taste at levels greater than 180mg/l. Salinity can have adverse effect on irrigation, soil structure, water quality and infrastructure. Salinity was measured as total dissolved salts that the sample contained. 34
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The summary of the number of boreholes and hand dug wells found in the project area is as
shown in the table 2.
Table 2: Summary of number of boreholes and wells in the project area
All Working Failed
Total number of boreholes present 33 21 12
Total number of hand dug wells present 38 27 11
Grand total (boreholes + hand dug wells) 71 48 23
Note : Well and borehole functionality status.
Table 2 above shows that 28.95% of wells and 36.36% of the boreholes are not functioning.
Higher percentage of boreholes has failed in the study area as compared to wells due to
technical and financial implications involved in Afridevs management. Commissioning and
operating a well require less funds and little technological knowhow as compared to the
construction of a borehole, installation of pumps and management among other expenses.
Distribution of boreholes and hand dug wells across the 3 sub locations in the project area is as
shown in Table 3.
35
Table 3: Distribution of boreholes and wells across the project area
Sub location Total no. of wells andWorking Failed Sampled
B/holes
KITIVO 52 (Wells=33, 37 (Wells = 15 22, (Wells=11, 09 (Wells=06,
B/holes =19) B/holes = 16) B/holes =04) B/holes =03)
MATUGA 08 (Wells = 03, B/holes04 (Wells=03, 04 (Wells = 03 00, (Wells=02,
= 05) B/holes=01) B/holes = 04) B/holes =01)
KOMBANI 11 (Wells = 02, B/holes07 (Wells=02, 04 (Wells = 00,02 (Wells =01,
= 09) B/holes =05) B/holes = 04) B/holes =01)
1) KITIVO sub location has got the highest number of boreholes and dug wells (74.65%) in
Waa location as compared to the other two sub locations. The high number of these water
points has been attributed to several factors such as:
(a) Favourable geological and hydro-geological formations made of corals, hence rare cases
of collapsing and caving in of boreholes and wells
(b) Rapid growth of human & livestock population density that have resulted to increase in
water demand hence need of more water points.
(c) Enlightened population that has formed village water committees through which funding
for drilling boreholes by NGOs and other players is done.
(d) Sufficient political support as many elected representatives appeared to concentrate
projects in this sub location.
(e) Presence of individuals who are somehow well off as they constructed private wells and
boreholes which also ended serving the local community.
(f) Existence of good infrastructure ranging from road networks for accessibility and
electricity for pumping of water in wells and boreholes as seen in Waa boys and Waa
girls secondary schools. 36
(g) Favourable proximity of the sub location as it boarders the Indian Ocean, Tourist hotels
and above all along the Likoni–Ukunda–Lunga Lunga highway. This factor gives it an
advantage to be noticed for investment as compared to the other sub locations.
(h) Lack of surface water e.g. streams, rivers, swamps, constructed water pans, subsurface
dams among others.
2) MATUGA sub location being the largest of the three entities (almost half) constituting Waa
location has got the lowest number of boreholes and dug wells (11.27%). Key reasons for
the low number of water points in this expansive sub location are;-
(a) Unfavourable geological & hydro-geological formations characterized by loose soils
found in the region as very few wells dug and constructed can be fully functional unless
reinforced by blocks from inside. Many wells have collapsed and caved in even before
completion.
(b) Availability of extensive network of piped water operated by few wealthy and influential
persons in the community who collect some money from locals in exchange for water,
hence they have made it difficult for the formation of village committees which could
have requested for borehole drilling from sponsors.
(c) Political negligence of this sub location as the elected representatives have not shown
much commitment to commission water projects in this area.
37
4.1 Biological results for S- samples(sterile)
Table 4: Biological results of the 14 water samples analysed
Source Date sampledTotal Feacal Residual Remarks Action to be Of coliforms coliforms chlorine taken sample MPN/100 MPN/100/ml ppm
1 K1 6/9/2015 ml 0 0 NIL Safe Monitoring
2 K2 6/9/2015 15 4 NIL contaminated To be treated
3 K3 6/9/2015 23 4 NIL Contaminated To be treated
4 K4 6/9/2015 0 0 NIL Safe Monitoring
5 K5 6/9/2015 210 15 NIL Contaminated To be treated
6 K6 6/9/2015 7 0 NIL Contaminated To be treated
7 K7 6/9/2015 460 20 NIL Contaminated To be treated 38
Source Date Total Feacal Residual Remarks Action to be of sampled coliforms coliforms chlorine taken sample MPN/100 MPN/100/ml ppm
8 K8 6/9/2015 150 11 NIL Contaminated To be treated
9 K9 6/9/2015 15 4 NIL Contaminated To be treated
10 M1 6/9/2015 11 0 NIL Contaminated To be treated
11 M2 6/9/2015 0 0 NIL Safe Monitoring
12 M3 6/9/2015 0 0 NIL Safe Monitoring
13 K01 6/9/2015 0 0 NIL safe Monitoring
14 K02 6/9/2015 21 4 NIL contaminated To be treated
(Source: KIMAWASCO Laboratory)
4.2 Analysis of biological results
The results obtained from biological analysis of the 14 water points (5 boreholes and 9 dug wells) within Waa location are as shown in Table 4 above. In water bacteriological testing, it is conventional practice to express the results obtained in terms of bacterial colonies recovered per 100ml of the water sample. The data obtained from the biological water analysiswascategorizedintothreegroups,thatof1a,1b,and1cdependingonthedegreeof contamination with reference to “interpretation of bacteriological water analysis reports”(Al-
Tomi, 2007)
Based on the analysis, water samples are categorized into three groups:
A. Satisfactory water.
B. Doubtful water.
C. Unsatisfactory water. 39
The categorization of these water samples is for water meant for human consumption as water is a formidable vehicle in disease transmission no matter from which source it is obtained. It is worth noting that contaminated waters should not be used for drinking purposes whenever there are available treated supplies. Their use in general cleaning and perhaps cooking can be justified with proper care and precaution to limit the chances of infection.
Table 5: Interpretation of bacteriological water analysis reports (Al-Tomi, 2007)
TTC/100ml FCC/100ML( E.coli ) Category Type of
0 0 A Satisfactory
Present 0 B Doubtful
Present Present C Unsatisfactory
SATISFACTORY WATER (A)
This comprises of water samples with both Total Coliforms and Faecal Coliforms ( E. coli ) being “Absent”. This implies that the water is safe for human consumption.
DOUBTFUL WATER (B)
This category of water is not safe for drinking by human beings unless proper treatment is done, as it registers the presence of total coliforms although no faecal Coliforms are present.
For such water to be fit for human consumption, shock chlorinating of the well or boiling water before using is highly recommended to ensure safety.
UNSATISFACTORY (C)
This type of water represents grossly polluted source and an alternative water supply has to be sought. Both total coliforms and faecal coliforms (E. coli ) are “Present”. The water should
NOT be used for human consumption, unless boiled or disinfected prior to consumption.
Steps should be taken to identify possible sources of contamination, and corrective measures implemented to protect the water supply from contamination. Once the source of contamination is traced and removed, then the water supply returns to satisfactory quality. 40
Table 6: Group A category of water (satisfactory)
Group 1a
No. Source of sample Total coliforms Feacal coliforms
count TCC/100ml count FCC/100ml
1 Kitivo (Waa Girls secondary)0 0
2 Mkokoni (Busara) 0 0
3 Mbweka (Mwachileta) 0 0
4 Mienzeni (Mienzeni) 0 0
5 Matopeni (Bowa primary) 0 0
According to the water specifications, recovery of any colony of faecal Coliform bacteria
or typical Escherichia coli per 100ml of water samples analyzed qualifies that water to be
unfit for human consumption. Presence of any of these forms of bacteria provides enough
proof for contamination; hence from the biological results obtained on the 14 collected
water samples, it is evident as shown in Table 5 that only wells of Waa girls secondary
school, Mwachileta, and boreholes of Busara, Mienzeni and Bowa primary have safe
drinking water (Mean count for E.Coli= 0). These five water points recorded zero mean
count for E.Coliowing to the fact that great care, chlorination and commitment have been
put into place.
Waa girls secondary school well was in good condition (0 TTC/100ml) as the
management has secured it from external contamination by fully covering it with
metallic casing and clearing bushes around it. The school had established a routine
chlorination of the well twice per year, this exercise contributed very much to the total 41 reduction of the microbial count in the water samples.
Bowa primary school borehole from Kombani sub location recorded zero presence of faecal Coliforms and total Coliform count. This state was attributed to the fact that the water point was in a good working condition with tightly fitted casing made of steel and properly maintained hand pump. Moreover, at Bowa primary school, the distance between the borehole and the septic tanks was way beyond 200 meters, unlikely to be contaminated with the faecal matter and the school management too had fenced the school compound hence securing it from vandalism and destruction .
Busara borehole recorded zero presence of total Coliform and faecal Coliform count. It is found constructed in a residential home and had a chain with a padlock on it. One can only access water after getting permission from the care taker who had been chosen by the village committee. The care taker ensured that fetching water is only allowed within specified hours of the day and promptly reported any cases of damages that could have occurred during the exercise.
These stringent measures coupled with safe distance between Busara borehole and pit latrines around it ensured good water quality that recorded zero presence of bacteriological components. Mwachileta well produced fresh uncontaminated well water despite the fact that it remained open with broken hand pump since the timeof inception as shown appendix (II). The bacteriological water sample results obtained from this well were unexpected as fetching of water from the ever open water point was done by plastic containers tied to old sisal ropes that are potential sources of contamination. However, the well is more of a private water point, as it serves majorly about three home steads and a nearby mosque. Mwachileta well is chlorinated once a year. As for Mienzeni borehole, the area MP through the village committee allocated considerable amount of money (CDF) for renovation, and management. The village had formed an active committee that collects Kshs.2 for every 20 liter of water jerricans fetched, and the money is used to pay the care takers and for maintenance. 42
This gave a new face lift to a borehole that was almost breaking down as shown in
Figure 5 and Figure 6 below.
Figure 5: Mienzeni borehole before renovation (Photo source; Author) Figure 5 above shows a person washing clothes next to the borehole
Figure 6: Mienzeni borehole after cdf renovation
43
Table 7: Group B category of water (Doubtful)
Group 1b
No. Source of sample Total Coliforms Feacal Coliforms
count count
TCC/100ml FCC/100ml( E,coli)
1 Kaya Waa (Beach) 7 0
2 Voroni (Abubakar pry) 11 0
Table 7 represented water samples of group 1b i.e. from wells of Kaya Waa beach and
Abubakar primary that represent those supplies whose waters are doubtful (Al-Tomi, 2007)
for human consumption (Mean count for E.Coli = 0 but TCC present) since they show trace
contaminations due to the nature of their sources and lack of treatment. Their use in
households can be recommended if the water is thoroughly disinfected since they pose
serious health hazards to the users if not treated.
Abubakar primary school well showed water contamination level of 11 TCC/100ml and 0
FCC/100ml. There was no presence of faecal Coliforms count as the well was constructed
on the upper side of the slope within the school compound where as the pit latrines are
established on the lower side, hence the unlikelihood of upward sewage flow. However, the
well remained open throughout its operation allowing surface runoffs during rainy season
to flow in with contaminated water full of dead organic matter and disease causing micro-
organisms.
The Kaya Waa well, posted bacteriological results of 7 TCC/100ml and zero presence of
faecal Coliforms count. The well appeared isolated as it was very close to the ocean
(approximately 40 meters) with no septic tanks and pit latrines in the vicinity, hence
minimal chances of contamination from human excreta. On the other hand, traces of total 44
Coliforms count came as a result of surface runoffs into the water point too, bringing in decomposing plant and animal remains since the well was left open since commissioning.
Table 8: Group C category of water (Unsatisfactory)
Group 1c
No. Source of sample Total C oliforms countFeacal C oliforms count
TCC/100ml FCC/100ml ( E.coli )
1 Kitivo (Nyamwezi). 15 4
2 Maganyakulo (Maganyakulo15 4
mosque) 3 Kitivo (Kenya calcium) 23 4
4 Matopeni (Kombani Joint Bar)21 4
5 Mkokoni (KwaPeni) 210 15
6 Bowa (Kwa Roy) 460 20
7 Mwagonga (Kumbo) 150 11
Table 8 presents water samples of group 1c i.e. from borehole of Nyamwezi and
Mwagonga, wells of Maganyakulo mosque, Kenya Calcium, Kombani Joint Bar, Pen and
Roy which represent those supplies whose waters are unsatisfactory since they show contamination with faecal Coliforms. There is both total Coliforms and faecal Coliform presence in the analyzed samples due to the nature of their sources and lack of treatment.
Their use in households can only be recommended if the water is thoroughly disinfected, since they pose serious health hazards to the users if not treated. 45
They indicate the fact of faecal pollution most probably from improper disposal of sewage and waste water as seen in the sample obtained from Kenya Calcium Company well that has a confined population of more than 600 workers plus their families within a small piece of land. By virtue of the bushes and a forest characterizing the said population, there is a high likely hood of improper disposal of human waste, especially from children below their first decade, both from the factory community and pupils attending the primary school that is located within the factory premises.
Kombani Joint bar well is found in the midst of both residential and commercial houses within the largest market center in the region. The distance of the well in respect to the surrounding septic tanks and pit latrines is approximately 50 meters thus making it susceptible to contaminations from faecal matter. The well is constructed in a plot size of approximately 110 × 80 meters, yet the septic tanks for the bar and guest houses are also found within the same plot. The recorded 21TCC/100ml and 4FCC/100ml certainly suggests that the source of contamination may be from septic tanks and leaky sewage drainage system.
Maganyakulo well is found within the largest mosque in Kwale County and serves the entire mosque population of approximately 250 people daily plus the community around.
Moreover, within the mosque there are learning institutions for Islamic education that comprise of pre unit classes, primary section, secondary and tertiary sections. After form six, students graduate and proceed for further studies in Egypt and other Islamic states that have partnered with the stakeholders. This description paints a clear picture of how this well is very significant in providing drinking water to this huge population yet its proximity to the septic tanks and pit latrines is of great concern (less than 20 meters).The well recorded 15TCC/100ml and 4FCC/100ml of water sample despite being fully covered, hence an indication of seepage of the faecal matter that contained bacteria, protozoa and cysts from the intestines of warm blooded animals (human beings). 46
A typical scenario of environmental contamination is seen on Nyamwezi borehole that is found in the midst of the cowshed composed of more than 50 cows as shown in Figure 7 below. The borehole water sample results were 15TCC/100ml and 4FCC/100ml, an indication of microbial contamination from animal excreta.
Figure 7: Nyamwezi borehole within a cowshed
Figure 7 shows bore holes which serve both domestic and animal use.
The high total heterotrophic co unt is indicative of the presence of high organic and dissolved salts in the water. Other sources of bacterial contamination may include surface runoff, seepage or discharge from septic tanks, sewage treatment facilities and natural soil
/plant bacteria ( EPA, 2002). These contaminants are reflected in the highest bacterial load obtained in this study for the Roy well (460MPN/100ml), Peni well (210MPN/100ml) and
Mwagonga borehole (150 MPN/100ml) water samples.
From field observation, the microbial count was higher in water samples from open wells where there is runoff and presence of organic matter, as compared to water samples from covered wells and boreholes.
Mwagonga borehole despite being placed under lock and key posted equally poor results in terms of microbial assessment (150TCC/100ml and 11FCC/100ml). The close proximity
(approximately 35 meters) of this borehole to pit latrine in the same plot and open 47 defaecation points around it have contributed largely to microbial presence in the water samples. The two wells (Peni and Roy) have remained open from the time of their inception and this has left them susceptible to all manner of external contamination as seen in Figure 8 and Figure 9 below. From the information gathered from the community, on many occasions domestic animals (cows, sheep and goats) have fallen into the Peni well and died, unleashing all manner of contaminations despite being removed later. Wild animals such as rodents and small mammals like bush babies have been left to rot inside the wells.
Figure 8: Peni open well (Source; Author)
Figure 8 shows the author and his project supervisor during water sample collection. 48
Figure 9: Failed Mvumoni well
Figure 9 shows a well overgrown with shrubs
4.3 Discussion of biological results
Generally, ground water is believed to be the purest known source of water (Gordan and
John, 1996; Prescott et al, 2002) because of the purification properties of the soil. However,
groundwater is sometimes found to be contaminated due to improper construction of
wells/boreholes, animal wastes, proximity to toilet facilities, sewage, refuse dump sites, and
various human activities around the well (Bitton, 1994). The presumed reason for
contamination of well water accounts for why the microbial load of well water close to
refuse disposal sites have higher microbial counts than the ones far away from refuse
disposal sites. Total Coliform bacteria are used as indicators of the presence of biofilm in
the water and to assess the cleanliness and the probity of the distribution network. The
presence of Coliforms is linked with various diseases such as diarrhoea, cramps, nausea and
possible jaundice.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishes heterotrophic plate count as a primary 49 standard, which are based on health considerations. Accordingly, for the total Coliform count, only 5 water samples (35.71%) recorded zero number of Coliforms, otherwise results for the remaining 9 water samples (64.29%) recorded Coliform numbers that were exceedingly higher than the EPA maximum allowable contamination level (MCL) for
Coliform bacteria in drinking water of zero total Coliform per 100ml of water (EPA, 2003).
The high Coliform count obtained in the samples may be an indication that the water sources are faecally contaminated (EPA, 2003; Osuinde and Enuezie, 1999). Nine (64.29%) out of the fourteen water samples do not comply with EPA standard for Coliform inwater.
It is further observed that the contamination rate in wells is higher (77.77%) than in boreholes (40 %). However, these trends are based on a limited number of analyses for both wells and boreholes. The occurrences of bacteria in water supplies show recent contamination or pollution owing to the fact that these bacteria do not live in water for a long period of time.
4.4 Physicochemical results for N - samples(Normal)
Physicochemical results of 5 boreholes and 9 hand dug wells (14 in total) collected from
Waa location in September 2015 are as shown in the Table 9 below.
50
Table 9: Physicochemical results of 14 water samples
PH Color E.C TDS Chloride Salinity T. T. Ca 2+ Mg 2+ Turbidity
units Alkalinity Hardness
6.5-8.5 15 1500 500 250 250 500 500 65 50 0-5 Sample 6.5 6 1500 500 200 250 500 500 75 50 6 source K1 7.33 2.5 1239 621 170 280.5 346 110 18.63 15.616 0.52
K2 7.27 2.5 1023 508 208 343.2 536 228 64.8 16.592 0.63
K3 7.67 2.5 1505 751 350 577.5 448 268 55.08 32.208 0.87
K4 7.28 2.5 1127 563 220 363 364 192 63.18 8.784 0.82
K5 7.52 2.5 1813 907 380 627 630 348 121.5 11.712 1.06
K6 7.32 2.3 3999 691 1635 2697.8 384 292 85.86 19.52 1.22
K7 7.9 2.5 610 400 30 49.5 296 240 61.56 21.472 3.09 K8 7.67 2.5 498 248 100 165 308 344 100.44 23.424 4.29 K9 7.84 2.5 736 368 70 115.5 274 332 53.46 48.8 0.99
M1 7.36 2.5 278 139 154 254.1 220 84 32.4 0.976 2.03 M2 7.61 2.5 598 297 80 132 440 184 59.94 8.784 1.09
M3 6.98 2.5 180 90 56 92.2 80 0 0 0 0.75 K01 7.35 2.5 1382 691 294 485.1 560 560 162.81 38.552 0.62 K02 7.42 2.5 598 298 200 330 256 248 74.52 15.616 0.73
51
4.6 Analysis of physicochemical results
According to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2004) and EPA (2002) on the health based guidelines, the acceptable levels for the investigated parameters for drinking water are summarized in table 3below.
Table 10: Drinking Water quality standards according to WHO (2004) & EPA (2002)
Parameters Units WHO Guidelines EPA standard
1. pH PH Scale 6.5 6.5 – 8.5
2. Turbidity NTU Max 6 0 - 5
3. Conductivity @25 0 µs/cm Max 1500 1500 4. Total Hardness mg/l Max 500 500
5. Total Alkalinity mg/l Max 500 500
6. Chlorides mg/l Max 200 250
7. Salinity mg/l Max 250 250
8. Total Dissolved Solids mg/l Max 500 500
9. Iron mg/l Max 0.3 0.3
10. Magnesium mg/l Max 50 50
11. Calcium Hardness mg/l Max 75 65
12. Colour Hazen Max 6 15
13. Others Smell Non objectionable Non objectionable
For statistical physicochemical data analysis the data were grouped into three: those for
Kitivo sub location, those for Kombani sub location, and those for Matuga sub location.
Such grouping shows that the Matuga sub location area had the best quality of fresh water
(registering the lowest salinity mean of 170.5 mg/l), followed by Kombani (salinity mean of 407.55 mg/l), while Kitivo sub location next to the sea had the worst quality water
(registering the highest salinity mean of 576.22 mg/l). The mean TDS in the Kitivoarea 52 was 567.38 mg/l (349.22 mg/l Cl); that in Kombani 494.5 mg/l (247 mg/l Cl); and in
Matuga 159 mg/l (103.33 mg/lCl).
Comparison of initial borehole data with those obtained in this study indicated that most of the boreholes have had an increase in salinity in the period from 1987 to 1993.
However in some isolated cases such as the case of Waa Girls secondary school, the salinity level dropped from 333.3 mg/l to 280 mg/l (WRMA report, March 2012), shown in appendix (I).
Hydrological connection between some of the boreholes & wells and the sea was evident as seen from the results obtained. It can be clearly seen from Figure 4:- (Map showing distribution of sampled boreholes in study area), that the Kitivo area whose water are closer to the sea , a distance of at least 1- 2 km from the shoreline. The effect is greater in the case of Kaya Waa well which recorded the highest salinity level of 2697.8 mg/l more than ten times WHO/EPA recommended limit of 250 mg/l.
Table 11 below shows trends in salinity level as per the 14 sampled boreholes/dug wells, ranging from the most saline to the least. 53
Table 11: Distribution of salinity level of the sampled boreholes and wells towards the
sea
Position/rank Sample source Salinity level mg/lApproximate distance from
the sea (Km)
1 Kaya Waa (K6) 2697.8 0.100
2 KwaPeni (K5) 627 0.950
3 Kenya calcium (K3) 577.5 1.200
4 Bowa primary (KO1) 485.1 1.125
5 Busara (K4) 363 1.350
6 Nyamwezi (K2) 343.2 1.600
7 Kombani joint bar (KO2) 330 1.650
8 Waa girls sec. (K1) 280.5 1.466
9 Abubakar primary (M1) 254.1 3.825
10 Mwagonga (K8) 165 1.825
11 Mwachileta (M2) 132 2.675
12 Maganyakulomosq(K9) 115.5 1.575
13 Mienzeni (M3) 92.4 1.800
14 Kwa Roy (K7) 49.5 1.050
(Source: Author)
Samples from Kitivo sub location (from Waa Girls secondary, Nyamwezi, Kenya Calcium,
Busara, Peni, Kaya Waa beach, Roy, Mwagonga and Maganyakulo mosque) posted very high salinity levels compared to those from other sub locations. According to WHO/EPA guidelines of 250 mg/l as the maximum allowable salinity levels, only Roy (49.5 mg/l),
Maganyakulo mosque (115.5 mg/l and Mwagonga (165 mg/l) water points are fit for human consumption. This represents 33.33% of the water points in Kitivo sub location that are recommendable for drinking. 54
Kombani sub location samples, from Bowa primary school (485.1 mg/l) and Kombani Joint
Bar (330 mg/l) did not comply with the WHO/EPA guidelines in terms of salinity levels.
Matuga sub location samples, from Abubakar primary school (254.1 mg/l), Mienzeni (92.4 mg/l) and Mwachileta (132 mg/l) recorded results that were within the acceptable limits set by WHO/EPA guidelines.
Figure 10: Graphical plot of salinity against distance of water points to the ocean
(Source: Author)
According to Figure 10, the salinity levels of water in the boreholes and dug wells near
the sea shore is comparatively high because of sea water intrusion. For instance K1
samples had 2697.8 mg/l which is near the shoreline (0.1 km) compared to M3(92.4
mg/l) which is1.8 km from the sea shore.
4.7 Discussion of physicochemical results
4.7.1 Chlorides
The chlorides in water are known to come from rainwater, rocks, or sea water intrusion.
Higher chloride concentrations usually indicate contamination from septic systems, road salt, fertilizer, animal waste or other wastes. The accepted values are between 200 and 250 55 mg/l. In this study of borehole and well waters, Kaya Waa beach well water samples showed an extreme high value of 1635 mg/l which exceeded by far the WHO and EPA guidelines for drinking water. This water has high chlorides and is thus not good quality for drinking with respect to chlorides. Water with high chloride content is not toxic but may cause salty taste, corrosion of some metals or be of concern to individuals whose physicians have prescribed "no salt diets". Water samples collected from Peni well (380 mg/l), Kenya calcium well (350 mg/l) and Bowa primary borehole are also unfit for human consumption as their chloride level exceeds the 200 – 250 mg/l range. Otherwise, the other ten water points (71.43%) were found to be fit for drinking as their chloride concentration was within the acceptable range.
4.7.2 Total alkalinity
Total alkalinity is the sum of carbonates and bicarbonates as it results primarily from dissolving limestone or dolomite minerals in the aquifer. It is a measure of waters ability to neutralize acids. Alkalinity and total hardness are usually nearly equal in concentration
(when expressed in mg/l CaCO3) because they are formed from the same mineral. Reduced alkalinity means more acidic medium/water (Cl -, NO 3-, SO 42-), hence corrosive.
All samples showed acceptable (little) presence of carbonates (below 500 mg/l) in the water except for samples from Peni well and Bowa primary school borehole. Water of strong alkalinity has a bad taste and is hence unfit for human consumption.
4.7.3 Water pH
All the water samples were in agreement with pH assigned by EPA (EPA, 2002) standard and WHO guidelines. The pH values of all the 14 water sources were alkaline and ranged from 6.98 – 7.8, hence within the acceptable levels and safe for human consumption. The pH of water can be changed by air and temperature as most of bio-chemical and chemical reactions are influenced by the pH.
4.7.4 Water colour
The fourteen water samples taken were within the standard limit for colour of drinking 56 water recommended by EPA (2002) and WHO (2004). The maximum standard colour limit recommended is 15 Hazen units. All water samples recorded values within the acceptable limits which is fit for human consumption and recreation purposes.
4.7.5 Turbidity
The results for turbidity observed in the boreholes and well water samples agreed with
WHO and EPA standards (maximum of 6 NTU) as the values ranged from 0.52 to 4.29
NTU. High turbidity is often associated with higher levels of disease causing microorganism such as bacteria and other parasites. Fewer number of disease causing microorganisms may be an indication of lower turbidity value experienced with well samples. At no time should turbidity (cloudiness of water) go above 5 nephelometric units
(NTU) (EPA, 2002) and as per the levels of turbidity of all water samples, the water is indicated to be fit for domestic use.
4.7.6 Total dissolved solids(TDS)
The samples from seven water points; Mwagonga (248 mg/l), Kwa Roy(400 mg/l),
Abubakar pry(139 mg/l), Mwachileta (297 mg), Mienzeni (90 mg/l), Joint bar (298 mg/l),
Maganyakulo (368 mg/l) had TDS levels in agreement with the WHO and EPA guidelines
(500mg/l). The other seven water points Peni (907 mg/l), Kenya calcium (750 mg/l), Kaya
Waa (691 mg/l), Waa girls (621 mg/l); boreholes of Bowa (691 mg/l), Busara (563 mg/l) and Nyamwezi (508 mg/l) did not comply with the acceptable levels, hence are not fit for drinking. Total dissolved solids in the samples were attributed to erosion and weathering of earth’s crust and sewage flow (EPA, 2002).
4.7.7 Salinity
The water salinity in boreholes and dug wells in Kitivo (66.66% samples in the sub location were unfit) sub-location was higher compared to Matuga (100% of all samples fit).
This is attributed to proximity of the sub location to the sea shore. It is evident from the 57 results obtained that the Kitivo area is totally intruded by sea water for a distance of at least
1 km from the shoreline, and less severely for more than 2 km. For instance, there is high salinity levels in Kaya Waa (2697.8 mg/l) well which is just next to the shoreline (<0.01
Km). The water table in Kitivo area is possibly within sea water level making it easy for water intrusion from the sea to occur hence increasing the salinity level.
The Salinity can have adverse effect on irrigation, soil structure, water quality and infrastructure. The recommended maximum concentration of dissolved salts for human consumption is 500 mg/l (WHO, 2004).
4.7.8 Electrical conductivity
Most of the samples collected complied with WHO and EPA guidelines of 1500 µs/cm except two samples from Peni well (1813 µs/cm) and Kaya Waa (3999 µs/cm) which constituted 14.9 % of samples taken, and had electrical conductivity beyond the acceptable limits. This was related to the amount of dissolved substances or ions in water though it does not give an indication of which minerals were present. It is therefore an indication that Kaya Waa whose conductivity is more than twice its water hardness has presence of other ions such ions Cl -, NO 3-, SO4 2- which may be either human influenced or naturally occurring.
4.7.9 Total hardness
The water samples from all the sources complied except Bowa primary school borehole,
560 mg/l, against the recommended standards of WHO and EPA (500 mg/l). Bowa primary school borehole is alkaline because of presence of rocks which contain calcium and magnesium elements. Though there are no health concerns associated with drinking hard water, water is often undesirable as it leads to the use of a lot of soap when washing, and also builds up (scaling) in pipes and water heaters. Similarly Ca 2+ ions in Bowa primary school (162.81mg/l) is extremely high compared to EPA (65 mg/l) and 75 mg/l (WHO).
The nutrient is essential for calcium build up in the bodies of living organisms. 58
4.7.10 Summary of findings
Table 12: Summary table showing comparison of water sample results obtained with
W.H.O guidelines and EPA standards
Sample source Compliance status to WHO & EPA standards
Biological parameters Physicochemical parameters
K1 √ (YES) X (NO) K2 X (NO) X (NO) K3 X (NO) X (NO) K4 √ (YES) X (NO) K5 X (NO) √ (YES) K6 X (NO) √ (YES) K7 X (NO) √ (YES) K8 X (NO) √ (YES) K9 X (NO) √ (YES) M1 X (NO) √ (YES) M2 √ (YES) √ (YES) M3 √ (YES) √ (YES) K01 √ (YES) X (NO) K02 X (NO) √ (YES)
Key:
√ (YES) - represents water sample compliance to WHO and EPA guidelines/standards X
(NO) - represents non-compliance to WHO and EPA guidelines/standards.
4.8 Contamination of water in boreholes and dug wells
The study established several factors ranging from bacteriological and physiochemical aspects that were responsible for unacceptable water quality in boreholes and wells.
1) Poor waste water management. Most drainage systems are found out to be faulty and
leaky. The liquid waste oozing due to leakage from pipes and septic tanks flows into
the water sources and this is aggravated during rainy season as in the case of K3 59
samples recorded 23TCC/100ml.
2) Sea water intrusion. The high salinity levels in the water sources that went far beyond
the WHO standards near the sea shore was attributed to sea water intrusion into the
study area aquifers due to the close proximity to the ocean.
3) Low sanitation coverage (classified as sanitation level 4). This is as per the Water
service board on community project cycle(CPS). Existence of open defaecation points
where during the rainy seasons, the human and animal wastes (Cows, Goats and Poultry) are
swept down to the watering points as is the case in Kwa Peni, Nyamwezi, Kenya Calcium and
Roy. Bacteria, viruses, protozoa and cysts are among the various types of pathogens found in
polluted water and originate from the intestines of warm blooded animals. It should be noted
that since sewage contains the pooled excreta from both the sick and the well, possibilities of
contaminating water sources by pathogenic organisms from the feaces are very high especially
in circumstances of indiscriminate disposal of human excreta, and unhygienic living
conditions.
4) Inability to cover wells.
Wells that have remained open yet have been put into use to provide water as for the case of
Kwa Peni, Roy, Kaya Waa beach, Abubakar primary are vulnerable for both bacterial and
physicochemical contamination. This implies that non-living matter such leaves and living
organism ranging from insects, rodents amongst others are likely to fall into the well and
decompose from, hence compromising water quality. This is more evident from the results
obtained from water samples of open wells of Peni (TCC/100ml = 210) and Roy (TCC/100ml
= 460) that are not covered, yet they are along the highway away from homesteads.
Practically, all waters under natural condition contain a variety of micro-organisms, mostly
consisting of natural fauna and organisms from the soil and air among other sources. In normal
circumstances, the natural aquatic organisms and other commensals found in the ground water
do not pose a risk of causing diseases in humans. Diseases causing micro-organisms found in
water are mostly due to contamination or pollution of the water supply by human and/or
animal excreta and other contaminated materials. All these contaminants are washed to open
dug wells. 60
5) Negligence from the relevant authorities.
Water resource management and Kwale Water and Sewerage Company amongst other players
have not shown sufficient effort to address issues to do with water contamination and scarcity
in the study area. From the field observation and oral interview done by the researcher during
the study, it came out clearly that the majority of the rural community did not remember the
last time they witnessed borehole and dug wells being inspected or treated by the public health
officials. This scenario points out a clear picture that monitoring and evaluation to this vital
water points is still a big challenge. Many of the wells and boreholes were developed by
private developers dating back in 1930s such as Nyamwezi, Mutio, white, Peni, Kaya Waa
beach and since then they have been abandoned, or ignored by relevant authorities but
surprisingly the local communities still rely on then heavily for domestic purposes. This
situation puts the water points at risk of contamination as builds up from time to time unless
interventions are taken. Several borehole have broken down and no effort has been shown to
renovate then as seen in appendix (III): Non-functional boreholes at Gulanze, Kitsanze (next
Kombani secondary school) and Vibambani (next to Mkokoni primary school).
6). Illiteracy and lack of water quality awareness and training
Majority of the inhabitants in Waa location have little or no understanding of the safety of
the borehole and dug well water as per the informal interview I conducted to them. The
locals have put water into different uses ranging from washing, cooking and drinking as
they are of the cultural view that, God (Mlungu) the almighty is the one who has
guaranteed them water safety all along since they came on earth. There are cases where the
community undertakes activities oblivious of their effects on water quality such as washing
and bathing around water points or throwing objects into wells.
6) Lack of commitment from the key stakeholders such as WRMA, WSBs, WSPs,
NGOs, CBOs amongst other bodies. This is attributed to fact that they lack the full
register of all the bore holes and dug wells found in Waa location both privately
owned and communal. There is no any single map that has been developed that can
guide one to access let us say the abandoned wells of Mutio, Peni, White and
Mwachileta, hence making it difficult for one to offer any technical or logistical 61
assistance. This could have been occasioned by lack of enough funds and personnel to
execute the above mentioned activities.
7) Low level of community involvement in the development of these water projects right
from inception stage to completion, hence no sense of ownership. Majority of the
locals feel that incase of breakdown of the hand pumps or contamination of the wells,
it is upon the initiators of the project or NGOs that developed those water points to
look for funds and technical experts for repair. Locals including the local
administration can’t even report vandalism or theft of hand pumps parts to the relevant
authorities for action. This clearly explains how difficult it is to ensure sustainability
of clean quality drinking water in the project area.
4.9 Mitigation measures
Finally, the mitigation measures of ensuring that good quality water is accessed by the
community in Waa location from bore holes and wells were as follows:
• Slope and drainage.
Consideration should done when locating and constructing a borehole or dug well as
this will ensure that faecal matter from septic tanks do not flow towards the water
points, but instead away. The well should be located in a high area, up- slope from any
potential contamination sources such as septic systems and surface water bodies. For
those boreholes and wells that were sited in areas that frequently experiences surface
runoff, diversion terraces or ditches (Peni, Roy, Mwagonga and Kenya calcium)
should be constructed at least 15 m (50 feet) up-slope from the well to intercept and
divert surface runoff around the well site. In the case of boreholes and wells located
on a flood plain, the casing should be made to extend above flood levels. This ensures
that the ground surrounding the well is sloped away from the well to prevent any
surface runoff from collecting around the well. The measure would be prudent as most
contaminants enter the well either around the outside of the well casing, or from the 62
top.
• Covering of all open dug wells. This exercise will curb well contamination arising as a
result of surface runoffs that carrying soils and litters full of coliform & mineral ions.
Cases of animals and plant materials falling into the wells and decomposing there after
compromising water quality will reduce significantly.
• Establishment of a water resource users association (WRUA) in the local area for the
water catchment protection and management. This will ensure responsibility sharing
and accountability as members will discuss in depth how best they run a sustainable water
project. The WRUA will be in a good capacity to source for funds to construct communal
toilets/pit latrines among other activities.
• In densely populated areas such as Kombani market, Maganyakulo and Kenya calcium,
it may be better to pipe in water from elsewhere if deep aquifers cannot be tapped, even
though this runs counter to the aims of sourcing waters that can be extracted by the
people themselves. Alternatively, other water sources such as roof catchment may
provide cleaner water than groundwater sources since in the study area, there are no air-
polluting industries. 63
CHAPTER FIVE
5.1 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION
5.2 Conclusion
Performance assessment of the functionality of boreholes and dug wells within Waa
location Waa revealed that about 32.39% of these water points have failed to discharge
quality water for drinking due to Negligence from the relevant authorities and agencies in
terms of water quality monitoring and low level of community involvement in the
development of these water projects.
About 50% of borehole and well water samples did not comply with either of the following
investigated parameters of total dissolved solids, total hardness, Ca 2+ , chloride, electrical
conductivity and salinity. Salinity and alkalinity was extremely high in the water samples
due to sea water intrusion and dissolved carbonate minerals respectively.
About 64.29% of the analysed samples recorded poor water quality based on WHO (2004)
and EPA (2000) guidelines on bacteriological assessment. The factors responsible for
deterioration of water quality include existence of open defaecation points, inability to
cover wells, faulty and leaky sewage systems and close proximity of wells and boreholes to
the septic tanks.
For an intervention to achieve water quality in the county will include locating of water
sources away from waste disposal sites, proper waste drainage system, establishment of a
water resource users association (WRUA), covering of wells to avoid open contamination
and construction of communal toilets and pit latrines in Waa location and its environs.
Further research to be carried out in other locations in the county for drinking water
analyses is required as levels of contaminants may vary due to different soil types, water
chemistry and different human activities.
64
5.3 Recommendations
It is clear from the discussion of the results in chapter 4 that the quality of ground water
found in wells and bore holes around Waa location is of concern. Several factors that might
have led to this poor water status have been highlighted; hence recommendations on the
way forward to this situation are as follows;-
• Capacity build community on community participation and water project management.
• Supply of piped water, protection and proper management of water boreholes.
• Proper refuse disposal and construction of communal toilets/pit latrines. The proximity
of water points should be within the recommended distance to the septic tanks.
• The county government of Kwale and other water providers to introduce desalinization
and cheap water treatment plants to treat saline water so as to provide safe drinking
piped water to the inhabitants of Waa location and its environs.
• Further research to be conducted on un assessed parameters; heavy metals presence
(Lead, Mercury, Arsenic), Iron & Fluorides. Dissolved Oxygen and dissolved Carbon
(IV) oxide in water sample were not addressed as the contamination from industrial and
agricultural chemicals are expected to be minimal except for areas around Kenya
calcium that deals with the production of limestone.
65
REFERENCES
Al-Tomi, S. 2007.Manual for Bacteriological Examination of Drinking Water.Tripoli. Pp 4-15
AU (African Union), 2014.Decision on the Report on the Implementation of Sharm El-Sheikh
Commitments on Accelerating Water and Sanitation Goals in Africa.Assembly of the
African Union, Twenty-second Ordinary Session, 30-31 January 2014. Addis Ababa, AU.
AU (African Union), 2008.Sharm El-Sheikh Commitments for Accelerating the Achievement
of Water and Sanitation Goals in Africa. Assembly of the African Union, Eleventh
Ordinary Session, 1 July 2008. Addis Ababa, AU.
Bain, R., Cronk, R., Hossain, R., Bonjour, S., Onda, K., Wright, J., Yang, H., Slaymaker, T.,
Hunter, P., Prüss-Ustün, A. and Bartram, J. 2014. Global assessment of exposure to faecal
contamination through drinking water based on a systematic review. Tropical Medicine
and International Health, 19(8): 917-927.
Bahri, A. 2009.Managing the Other Side of the Water Cycle: Making Wastewater an Asset.
GWP-TEC Background Paper No. 13. Stockholm, Global Water Partnership (GWP).
Bezuidenhout, C., Mthembu, N., Puckree, T., and Lin, J. 2002.Microbiological evaluation of
the Mhlathuze River, Kwazulu-Natal (RSA). Water SA 28:281-286.
Bitton, G. 1994. Waste Water Microbiology.Grainesville, New york Wiley - Liss. 118p
Byrons, S., Mechenich, C. and Peterson, J. 2008.I interpreting water quality results.
Corcoran, E., Nellemann, C., Baker, E., Bos, R., Osborn, D. and Savelli, H. ( eds ). 2010. Sick
Water? The central role of wastewater management in sustainable development.A Rapid
Response Assessment. Nairobi/Arendal, Kenya/Norway, United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP)/United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat)/GRID-
Arendal.
Dada, O., Okuofu, C., &Obele, E. 1990.Fecal Pollution of Well Water in Zaria City, Nigeria.
Savanna, 10: 1 – 5.
David, E., Supraja, N. &Saranya, R. 2013.A Study on Chemical and Bacteriological Analysis
of Bore Water from Some Communities in Tirupathi Rural Areas of Chittoor District, 66
Andhra Pradesh, India. International Journal of Pharmaceuticals and Biological Archives,
4(4): 659 – 662.
Davis, J. and Lambert, R. 2002. Engineering in emergencies: a practical guide for relief
workers, Publisher London; ITDG.
Dufour, A., Snozzi, M., et al. 2003. Assessing microbial safety of drinking water: Improving
approaches and methods. London, IWA Publishing.C.I.A (2009)."The World Factbook
2009."
Edema, O., Omemu, M. &Fapetu, M. 2001.Microbiological and Physicochemical Analysis of
Different Sources of Drinking Water. Nigeria Journal of Microbiology, 15: 57 – 61.
EPA, 2002.US Environment Protection Agency, Safe Drinking Water Act Amendment. EPA
– USA.
EPA, 2003. US Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Act.
EPA 816 – F – 03 –016.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2008.Coping with Water
Scarcity: An Action Framework for Agriculture and Food Security. Rome: FAO.38; Pp 5-
11
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2007.Towards a New
Understanding of Forests and Water.Unasylva, 58: 229. Rome, FAO .
Fewtrell, L., Bartram, J., et al. 2001. Water quality: guidelines, standards, and health :
assessment of risk and risk management for water-related infectious disease, IWA Pub.
Freeman, C., Stocks, E., Cumming, O., Jeandron, A., Higgins, P., Wolf, J., Prüss-Ustün, A.,
Bonjour, S., Hunter, R., Fewtrell, L. and Curtis, V. 2014. Hygiene and health: Systematic
review of handwashing practices worldwide and update of health effects. Tropical
Medicine and International Health, 19(8):906-916.
Gimba, B. 2011. Assessment of quality of drinking water in Bosso town. A thesis submitted to postgraduate school, ahmadu bello university, zaria, nigeria.
Gordan, M. and John, G. 1996. Water Supply and Waste Removal in : Waste engineering Vol. 67
John Wiley and sons pp 220 - 236.
GWP (Global Water Partnership), 2012. Groundwater Resources and Irrigated Agriculture:
Making a Beneficial Relation More Sustainable. Stockholm, GWP.
IGRAC (International Groundwater Resources Assessment Center), 2010. Global
Groundwater Information System (GGIS). Delft, The Netherlands, IGRAC.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2014. Climate Change 2014: Impacts,
Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge/New York,
Cambridge University Press.
Marshall, S. 2011. The water crisis in Kenya: Causes, Effects and Solutions Global Majority
E- Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1 pp. 31-45.
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment), 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being:
Wetlands and Water Synthesis. Washington, DC, World Resources Institute (WRI).
Mugenda, M. &Mugenda, G. 2003.Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative
approaches. Nairobi: International Journal of Education and Research. Vol. 2 No. 4 April
2014 Pp 77-78
3M, 2008. "Petrifilm™ E.coli/Coliform Count Plate Interpretatin Guide."
3M (2011). "3M™ Petrifilm™ E.coli/Coliform Count Plates."
Mutua, J., Thomas, M. and Hope, R. 2014.Groundwater risks and institutional responses,
Kwale County, Kenya.Poster – IAH Marrakech.
Mzunga, M., Tole, P.&Ucakuwun, K. 1995. Contamination of ground water resources by pit
latrines in kwale District, Kenya.Discovery and Innovation Journal. Vol 13 No. ¾ Dec.
2001. Pp 203-212
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2012. Environmental
Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction. Paris, OECD.
Osuinde, I. and Eneuzie, R. 1999. “Bacteriological analysis of ground water.” Nigeria Journal
of Microbiology vol. 13:47-54 68
Planet Under Pressure. 2012. Water Security for a Planet Under Pressure: Transition to
sustainability: Interconnected challenges and solutions. Rio+20 Policy Brief No.1. London,
Planet Under Pressure.
Republic of Kenya. 2011. Kenya Vision 2030 Final. Est. by Government printer. Nairobi
Seif, T., Amy, C. and Manyalshal A. 2012.Water Supply and Sanitation in Amhara Region.
Learning and Communication research Report, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
SIWI (Stockholm International Water Institute), 2015. Water for Development: Charting a
Water Wise Path. Stockholm, SIWI.
Sperling, F. and Bahri, A. 2014.Powering Africa’s Green Growth: The importance of Water-
Energy Nexus.Presentation at the 5th Africa Water Week, Dakar, Senegal.
Strikker, C., Livaniou, I., Xynogalou, M. &Panaitescu, R. (2012).Kenya Project 2012; Final
Report.Delft University of Technology. PP 22 – 46, 92 – 99.
Tole, P. 1997. Pollution of Ground Water in Coastal Kwale District, Kenya. Sustainability of
Water Resources under Increasing Uncertainty, IAHS Publ. no.240: pp287 – 297.
UNECA (United Nations Economic Commission for Africa), 2000. The Africa Water Vision
for 2025: Equitable and Sustainable Use of Water for Socioeconomic Development.
Produced jointly with UN-Water/Africa, African Development Bank, African Union.
Addis Ababa, UNECA.
UNGA (United Nations General Assembly). 2001. Road map towards the implementation of
the United Nations Millennium Declaration. Report of the Secretary General. Fifty-sixth
session. 6 September 2001. New York, UN.
UNGA (United Nations General Assembly). 2010. The human right to water and sanitation.
Sixty-fourth session, 3 August 2010. 2A/RES/64/292. New York, UN.
UN (2015). United Nations World Water Development Report 2015 on Water for a
Sustainable world : Water, sanitation and hygiene,5: 36-41
UN-Water. 2014. A Post-2015 Global Goal for Water: Synthesis of key findings and
recommendations from UN-Water. New York, UN-Water. 69
UN-Water/FAO . 2007. 2007 World Water Day: Coping with Water Scarcity: Challenge of
the twenty-first century. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/docs/escarcity.pdf
UN (2012). World Water Development Report 4: Managing Water under Uncertainty and
Risk. Geneva: UN. Vol 1. Pp 77-94
UNCESCR (United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights). 2003.
General Comment No. 15: The Right to Water (Arts. 11 and 12 of the Covenant), 20
January 2003.
UNESCO (2008). Indicative Roadmap for Africa Ground Water Commission: Outcome of the
First African Water Week. Geneva: UNESCO . Pp 18-38
WHO and UNICEF (World Health Organization/United Nations Children's Fund). 2014.
Progress on drinking water and sanitation: 2014 Update. New York, WHO/UNICEF Joint
Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation.
WHO and UNICEF (World Health Organization/United Nations Children's Fund). 2013.
Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation: 2013 Update. New York.
WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation.
WHO and UNICEF (World Health Organization/United Nations Children's Fund).2014b.
Data and estimates. New York, WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water
Supply and Sanitation.
WHO/DFID (World Health Organization/Department for Internal Development). 2009.
Vision 2030: The resilience of water supply and sanitation in the face of climate change.
Geneva, Switzerland, WHO.
WHO (1984).Drinking water standards.WHO, Geneva.Vol. 1 Pp 210-220
WHO (2004).Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality.Third Edition Volume 1. Geneva:
WHO.Vol 1. Pp 22-35, 210-220
WHO (World Health Organization). 2011. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality: Fourth
edition. Geneva, Switzerland, WHO.
World Bank (2010).World Development Indicators. The World Bank, Washington DC. 70
20433. USA, Pp 144-148.
World Bank. 2007. Cost of pollution in China: Economic estimates of physical damages.
Washington, DC, The World Bank.
World Bank. 2011. Thailand environment monitor: Integrated water resources management -
A way forward. Washington, DC, The World Bank. Improving approaches and
methods.London, IWA Publishing.
WWAP (World Water Assessment Programme). 2006. The United Nations World Water
Development Report 2: Water: A Shared Responsibility. Paris/New York,
UNESCO/Berghahn Books. 71
7.0 APPENDICES
Appendix (i).WRMA Physicochemical Lab result analysis -March, 2012
Parameter PH Col or FieldE. C Lab E.C TDS Chloride s Salinity Turbidity T. alkalinit y T. hardness Ca 2+ unit s
WHO 6.5-9 15 2000 2000 1000 600 250 25 500 500 250 guidelines Sample source Date sampled 1.BH-ukunda 10/3/12 Lab Reg No.7.2 2.5 N/A 733 366.5 40 66 1.62 368 264 67.23 youth poly 110 2.BH - 10/3/12 111 7.6 2.5 2410 2400 1200 596 783.4 0.25 220 368 38.07 Swahili beach hotel.Direct 3.BH G-Tiwi 10/3/1 112 7.0 2.5 585 547 273. 76 125. 0.4 194 202 48.
4.BH 1-Tiwi 10/3/12 113 6.8 2.5 590 544 272 82 135.3 0.5 194 192 46.17
5.BH-Swahili beach 10/3/12 114 7.4 2.5 N/A 2220 1110 601 991.65 0.42 324 290 53.46 hotel.Tap 6.BH- 10/3/12 115 7.4 2.3 1326 1197 598.5 174 287.1 0.25 436 268 80.19 Markazmosq.Diani 7.BH- 10/3/12 116 7.4 2.5 1293 1268 634 204 336.6 0.46 356 242 9.72 Ngombeni sec. sch 8.BH-Waa 10/3/12 117 7.4 2.5 811 742 371 84 138.6 0.24 342 210 22.68 Boys sec.Tap Kitarulikoni 16.BH.Tahweedislamic. 10/3/12 125 7.2 2.5 885 884 432 69 113.85 center 73
Appendix ii. Unregulated well in Mwachileta and Mkokoni (Kitivo sub-location)
Appendix (iii). Nonfunctional BHs: Gulanze, Kitsanze (Kombani sec) and Vibambani
(mkokonipri)