Eco-chemical Characterizations of Surface Water Bodies in and aroundSurface Water Bodies in and around

Mining Areas of Western Part of Kachchh GujaratKachchh, Gujarat

By

Sonali Pati and B. Anjan Kumar PrustyGujarat Institute of Desert Ecology,

PO Box# 83, Mundra Road, Opp.Changleswar Temple,Bhuj – 370 001, Gujarat

IntroductionIncreased Industrialization and overexploitation has lead to the deterioration in the quality of water resources.

Opencast mining• Destroys existing vegetation• Destroys existing vegetation• Destroys the genetic soil profile, • Displaces or destroys wildlife and habitat, • Degrades air quality• Degrades air quality, • Alters current land uses, • Permanently changes the general topography of the area mined• Damage surface and ground water during all phases of exploration   and use. g g g p pSource1.waste disposal,2. Storage,3.Transportation and 4.Handling of commercial materials, 5.Mining operations

Mine water may be dominated by

1. Low pH

2 Ele ated s lphate concentrations2. Elevated sulphate concentrations

3. Elevated concentrations of metals.

How it will affect Surface Water?

• Dissolution and transport of metals and heavy metals by run‐off.

• Aerial fallout from atmospheric pollutants. 

h• Leaching

In Western Part Of Kachchh,

• Mining operations are open‐castMining operations are open cast

• The resultant overburden is dumped in nearby places.

• The surface water bodies which are closed to mining sites seem to i i d i i h h freceive contaminants due to mining processes through surface run 

off or aerial fallout from atmospheric pollutants.

Objectives

1 Characterize the surface water in and1. Characterize the surface water in and around the mine sites

2 Evaluate its suitability for domestic usage2. Evaluate its suitability for domestic usage 3. Evaluate the spatial scale difference in the 

l l f i ilevel of contamination

Materials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsStudy Area1. 2nd largest district in the country g y2. Area: 45,652 km2 3. Two Ranns

S li d t f G t R f K h hh• Saline deserts of Great Rann of Kachchh (17,500 km2)

• Little Rann of Kachchh (5,180 km2)Little Rann of Kachchh (5,180 km2)

3. Present study was confined in three select l k i Abd N kh d L khtalukas i.e. Abdasa, Nakhatrana and Lakhpat

with an area of about 5000 km2. 4 The entire area is rich in Lignite Bauxite4. The entire area is rich in Lignite, Bauxite,

Limestone and Bentonite.

• Climate is semiarid with a• Climate is semiarid with a temperature variation of about 4 to 46°C46°C.

• Experiences three distinct seasons, pe e ces ee d s c seaso s,i.e. winter, summer and monsoon.

• Average rainfall is 334 mm/ annum• Average rainfall is 334 mm/ annum• Three active mines are presentp• Two thermal power plants are located

at Akrimota and Panandhroat Akrimota and Panandhro

Field SamplingField Sampling• 40 grids were selected (5x5) within 10 km g ( )

radius of three mine sites. • The grid having more than one village, the

ill hi h i d f th 66%village which comprised of more than 66% (2/3rd) of the area, was taken into considerationconsideration.

• 48 water samples were collected from 16 surface water bodies which include ponds, p ,lakes and dams.

• Study carried out during pre-monsoon (A il J )(April- June) season.

Sample processingSample processingThe SamplesThe Samples• Collected in pre-cleaned polyethylene

bottles.bottles. • Prior to sampling, the bottles were

thoroughly rinsed two to three times usingthoroughly rinsed two to three times using water to be sampled.

• The collected samples were placedThe collected samples were placed immediately in an ice-box and transferred to the laboratory for further analysis. y y

Sample analysisSample analysis• Basic Parameters: pH, EC, TA, TDS, TH,Basic Parameters: pH, EC, TA, TDS, TH,

Cl2, DO, BOD• Cations: HCO3

-, CO3--, SO4

--, NO3-Cations: HCO3 , CO3 , SO4 , NO3

• Alkali metals: Na, Ca, Mg, K & Li• Heavy Metals: Fe Mn Pb Cu Zn Co Ni• Heavy Metals: Fe, Mn, Pb, Cu, Zn, Co, Ni

and Cd. • To know the suitability for irrigation: SAR• To know the suitability for irrigation: SAR,

pNa, rCa, rHCO3 and RSC were also estimated empirically.estimated empirically.

Data AnalysesData AnalysesTo find the range, distribution and association of

different parametersdifferent parameters • Basic descriptive statistics and Two Tail test of

Correlation were performed on the analytical data using MEGASTAT 8 8using MEGASTAT 8.8.

Univariate tests were performed to assess the variation of distribution of all the physico-chemical parameters with respect to their location from theparameters with respect to their location from the mining site following the

• General Linear Model (GLM) coupled with One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test at the α = 0 05Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test at the α 0.05 level.

These statistical tests were performed using SPSS11.0

ResultspH

8.0

9.0

10.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

pH V

alue

pH

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

GD GWB GVP PVP PML GP

VN DP

MMLMVP

LD

NS MP

SLM ASLM B

JWB

EC

Wetlands

12000 014000.016000.018000.020000.0

cm

2000.04000.06000.08000.0

10000.012000.0

mic

roS/

c

Series1

0.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

Wetlands

TA, CO3 & HCO3

200 0

250.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

mg/

l TACO3HCO3

0.0

GD GW

B

GVP

PVP

PML

GP VN

DP

MM

L

MVP

LD

NS

MP

SLM

A

SLM

B

JWB

Wetlands

TH and Ca ( CaCO3)

7000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

mg/

l Series1Series2

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

GD GW

B

GVP

PVP

PML

GP VN

DP

MM

L

MVP

LD

NS

MP

SLM

ASL

M B

JWB

WetlandsWetlands

TDS & Chloride

16000.018000.0

6000.08000.0

10000.012000.014000.0

mg/

l Series1Series2

0.02000.04000.0

GD GW

B GVP PVP

PML

GP

VN

DP MML MVP LD

NS

MP SLM

ASLM

B

JWB

DO & BOD

G S S

Wetlands

80 0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

mg/

l DO

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

GD

WB VP

VP

ML

GP VN

DP

ML

VP

LD

NS

MP

MA

MB

WB

m BOD

GD

GWB

GVP PVP

PM GP VN DP MM

L

MVP LD NS M

PSL

M A

SLM

B

JWB

Wetlands

Sulphate

7.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

mg/

l

Sulphate

0.0

1.0

GD GW

B

GVP

PVP

PML

GP VN

DP

MM

L

MVP

LD

NS

MP

SLM

A

SLM

B

JWB

Wetlands

Nitrate

0 01600.0180

0.00600.00800.01000.01200.01400.0160

mg/

l

Nitrate

0.00000.00200.0040

GD GW

B

GVP

PVP

PML

GP

VN

DP M

ML

MVP LD

NS

MP

SLM A

SLM B

JWB

Wetlands

Na & Ca

3000.0

3500.0

Mg

800.0900.0

1000.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

mg/

l Na Ca

200.0300.0400.0500.0600.0700.0

mg/

l

Mg

0.0

500.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

Wetlands

0.0100.0200.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

WetlandsWetlands

Pottasium

90.0

Li

4.0

50.060.070.080.0

g/l

K 2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

g/l

Li

0.010.020.030.040.0m

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5m

0.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

Wetlands

0.0

GDGWB GVP PVP PM L GP VN DPM M LM VP LD NS M P

SLM AS LM B JWB

Wetlands

Copper

7.0

8.0

Zinc

90.0100.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

mic

rogr

am/l

Series1

30 040.050.060.070.080.0

Mic

rogr

am/l

Zn

0.0

1.0

2.0

GDGWB GVP

PVPPM L GP VN DPMM LMVP LD NS M PLM ALM B JWB

m

0.010.020.030.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

GW G P P M M SLM SLM JW

Wetlands

Lead IronG SL SL

Wetlands

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

m/l

40 0

50.0

60.0

70.0

m/l

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

Mic

rogr

a

Pb

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

Mic

rogr

a

Fe

0.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

Wetlands

0.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

Wetlands

Nickel

120.0

140.0

Cadmium

30.0

35.0

40 0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Mic

rogr

am/l

Ni

10 0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Mic

rogr

am/l

Cd

0.0

20.0

40.0

GDGWB GVP PVP PML GP VN DPMM LMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

0.0

5.0

10.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

S S

Wetlands

G S S

Wetlands

CobaltManganese

50 060.070.080.090.0

am/l

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

am/l

0 010.020.030.040.050.0

Mic

rogr

a

Co

0 0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

Mic

rogr

a

Mn

0.0

GDGWB

GVPPVPPML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS MP

SLM ASLM B JWB

Wetlands

0.0

GDGWB GVP PVP PML GP VN DPMMLMVP LD NS M P

SLM ASLM B JWB

Wetlands

• All the water bodies varied significantly in theAll the water bodies varied significantly in the case of all the parameters analyzed in the present case(GLM, ANOVA, P < 0.05).

• Among the heavy metals studied, most of them are positively correlated among each other.

• Most of the heavy metals were found to be negatively correlated with anions such as CO3

d HCO d l h d fand HCO3, and total hardness of water. • Mn was positively correlated with CO3.

DiscussionDiscussionIn all the wetlands, the pH of water exceeded >7.0

which might due to;g ;1. Being rain fed, most of the wetlands receive runoff

from their respective watershed, and as observed during present study the soil in the area are highlyduring present study the soil in the area are highly alkaline with pH ranging between 8.6 and 9.5.

2. Although mine pit lakes are highly acidic, pH of 3 6 as observed during the reconnaissance3.6, as observed during the reconnaissance survey, implementation of specific treatments methods by mining authorities, such as addition of calcite to neutralize the pH of water in such lakescalcite to neutralize the pH of water in such lakes had increased the pH up to near neutral level

• The BOD level is high observed in VNP wetland d i ti f hi h t i ti d tand is suggestive of high contamination due to

organic wastes of animal origin as it is used for livestock purposeslivestock purposes

• The TDS level in GD, GWP, GVP, GP, VNP, MVP and NS water bodies were < 1000mg/l andMVP and NS water bodies were < 1000mg/l and indicative of fresh water type.

• Higher levels of TDS might be due to the gradualHigher levels of TDS might be due to the gradual release of ions and salts from the bottom sediment during the post monsoon season.

• Cl2 content was also high which was not found suitable for domestic use.

• The hardness was up to a level of 6400 mg/l in p gmine lake and gradually decreased in distance off mining. This could be associated with pumping out of ground water during mining ofpumping out of ground water during mining of lignite at both the mine sites.

• The coal mine water is characterized by theThe coal mine water is characterized by the dominance of SO4. But the level in the present case was very low and might be associated with l it f ti d l b d t iblless pyrite formation and also be due to possible bacterial action.

• Na Ca and Mg were high in most of the waterNa, Ca and Mg were high in most of the water bodies and exceeded the permissible limit of stipulated standards.

GD and LD wetlands were used for irrigation purposes In these 2 wetlandspurposes. In these 2 wetlands

1. SAR values as 1.84 meq/l and 1.82 meq/l respectively and are suggestive of low sodiumrespectively and are suggestive of low sodium hazard of water from irrigation point of view.

2 On the basis of TDS both the water body was2. On the basis of TDS, both the water body was within permissible limit of irrigation water quality standards (175 - 1400 mg/l)( g )

3. The RSC values in GD and LD water bodies were -2.54 and -2.37 meq/l (<1.24) respectively and are safe for agricultural usage.

Of all the heavy metals Cu was found least yconcentrate and this might be due to

1. The dominating presence of Ca, Mg and1. The dominating presence of Ca, Mg and HCO3 ions.

2 As there is possible input of organic and2. As there is possible input of organic and animal waste in many of the water bodies and the resulting higher formationbodies and the resulting higher formation of colloidal forms of Fe and Mn may be an important reason for the reportedan important reason for the reported concentrations.

• Water bodies constitute a multimetal-ltili d t i t th t lmultiligand system owing to the natural

pathways of metals in such systems.C b i bl f f i t• Cu being capable of forming strong complexes with organics would associate itself with organic films covering the Feitself with organic films covering the Fe and Mn colloids becoming itself unavailable to the water column andunavailable to the water column and organic extractants as used in this exercise, i.e. APDC-MIBK.

• Fe con. Is found low due to less % of pyrites in lignite.py g

• Ni, Cd and Co were found in higher concentrations; with the concentration of Cdconcentrations; with the concentration of Cd exceeding the permissible limit for both domestic and agricultural usage.Cd was found in the level of 23 15 µg/l in GD• Cd was found in the level of 23.15 µg/l in GD wetland,this metal is likely to pose the problem of bioaccumulation i.e. being carried over th h diff t t i l l i th tthrough different tropic levels in the ecosystem and cause potential health risks to humans and animals.

• Ni in GWB was recorded to be 110.9µg/l and owing to the usage of this water body for domestic purposes might also affect humandomestic purposes, might also affect human health. According to Taylor et al animal faeces contribute Ni into the wetlands.

• The higher level of Co might be due to the g ginput of allochthonous substances into these aquatic systems.y

• GP wetland was reported to have the highest concentration of Pb among all thehighest concentration of Pb among all the water bodies. Owing to its proximity to a major highway, this could be due themajor highway, this could be due the vehicular exhausts.

• Pb might also be associated with SPM• Pb might also be associated with SPM arising from various sources including automobiles in the atmosphereautomobiles in the atmosphere.

ConclusionConclusion• All the mine lakes were rich in Ca, Mg and , g

hardness with lignite mines having the maximum level for the cations. Th t b di dj t t th j d• The water bodies adjacent to the major roads were concentrating Pb.

• Both the dams i e Godhathad and Lifri• Both the dams, i.e. Godhathad and Lifri, mostly constructed for irrigation purposes, were reported to have higher values of Cd

• The limestone mines contained higher levels of Ni and Co

Study revealed that 1. some heavy metals exceeded the maximum1. some heavy metals exceeded the maximum

permissible limits for irrigation purposes, hence remedial measures should be undertaken owing to serious health implicationsserious health implications.

2. Since many of the water bodies have reported lower levels of hardness and bicarbonates, further ,examination of possible complexation of heavy metals with these anions and cations would contribute in containing the problem of heavy metals contaminationcontaining the problem of heavy metals contamination due to mining activities.

3. Study of seasonal gradient in the availability of these contaminants in the water bodies would also add on to existing knowledge base on the behavior of the heavy metals in these systems, although the same is poorlymetals in these systems, although the same is poorly understood.

Thank YouThank You