4.7 Article

Evaluation of arsenic and other physico-chemical parameters of surface and ground water of Jamshoro, Pakistan

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 166, 期 2-3, 页码 662-669

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.11.069

关键词

Arsenic; Cluster analysis; Ground water; Physico-chemical parameters; Surface water

资金

  1. Higher Education Commission Islamabad, Government of Pakistan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Arsenic contamination in water has caused severe health problems around the world. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the geological and anthropogenic aspects of As pollution in surface and groundwater resources of Jamshoro Sindh, Pakistan. Hydride generator atomic absorption spectro photometry (HG-AAS) is employed for the determination of arsenic in water samples, with detection limit of 0.02 mu g l(-1). Arsenic concentrations in surface and underground water range from 3.0 to 50.0, and 13 to 106 mu g l(-1), respectively. In most of the water samples As levels exceeded the WHO provisional guideline values 10 mu g l(-1). The high level of As in under study area may be due to widespread water logging from Indus river irrigation system which causes high saturation of salts in this semi-arid region and lead to enrichment of As in shallow groundwater. Among the physico-chemical parameters, electrical conductivity, Na+, K+, and SO42- were found to be higher in surface and ground water, while elevated levels of Ca2+ and Cl- were detected only in ground water than WHO permissible limit. The high level of iron was observed in ground water, which is a possible source of As enrichment in the study area. The multivariate technique (cluster analysis) was used for the elucidation of high, medium and low As contaminated areas. It may be concluded that As originate from coal combustion at brick factories and power generation plants, and it was mobilized promotionally by the alkaline nature of the understudy groundwater samples. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据