DEDAN KIMATHI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

FINAL YEAR PROJECT

A STUDY OF POLLUTION OF MWANIA RIVER IN MACHAKOS COUNTY.

BY: WINNIE MARENDI E024-1333/2011 AND

MARIARI M. KELVIN EO24-1342/2011

SUPERVISED BY:

NJENGA MBURU, PhD.

“Project Report Submitted to Dedan Kimathi University of Technology in Partial Fulfilment of

the Requirement for the Award of Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering”

January, 2017.

i
DECLARATION
Declaration by Student(s)

“This report is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other
University. No part of this report may be reproduced without the prior written permission of the
author and/or Dedan Kimathi University of Technology”

1. Name...............................................................Signature...........................Date.....................

2. Name...............................................................Signature...........................Date.....................

Declaration by Supervisor(s)

This report has been submitted for examination with my/our approval as University supervisor
(s)

Name of Supervisor ...........................................................Signature...........................Date.............

Dedan Kimathi University of Technology, Nyeri, Kenya

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We wish to acknowledge the immense contribution of my supervisor Njenga Mburu, PhD for his

support and guidance throughout this project from its inception to completion. We also

appreciate the support we received from the following laboratory technicians: Madam Rose

(Civil Engineering Water Lab) for always organizing and helping in our laboratory tests, and Mr

Muli and Mr Icika (WARMA, Tana Catchment Area Laboratory) for the advice and sharing of

information, and accompanying us to our study area for the in-situ tests.

iii
ABSTRACT
Drinking water is one of the most valuable resources that one needs for their survival. Water

resources such as ocean, lakes, rivers and stream are the primary sources of water that we as

human beings depend on. However these sources at times face challenges of pollution especially

from its dependents who are the people through different human activities such as domestic,

agricultural, and industrial activities.

The quality of water at the present time is so compromised and it has become an international

concern due to its effects on a wide population. Because of this global apprehension, it has led to

the formation of organization such us United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) whose

aims are to look into the environment degradation and, thus, advice nations on the best practices

towards keeping the environment a healthy place to live in. Locally, we have empowered

institutions such as WRMA who act as the watchdog of the water resources management.

With the intention of investigating the effects of pollution of water resources, we decided to

carry out a water quality analysis of Mwania River which is located in Machakos County. It has

its origin from Konza Ranch. Mwania River is a river that passes through a dry semi-arid area

where the population largely uses its water for various purposes including domestic use,

irrigation, among myriad other uses. It traverses through the outskirts of Machakos town and

Katoloni area where it finally joins the Arthi River. The effluents from Machakos wastewater

treatment plant, and the production industries gets into the river at Katoloni. It’s at this point

where we carried out a water quality analysis and predicted the ability of the river to withstand

the pollution load from the treatment plant and its environment through self-purification. We

modelled this by using the Streeter-Phelps equation. With this equation and the extent of

iv
pollution, we managed to predict the critical distance that the river will have to gone through for

complete self-purification.

v
Table of Contents
DECLARATION.............................................................................................................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..............................................................................................................iii
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................iv
List of Figures.................................................................................................................................ix
List of Tables...................................................................................................................................x
List of Abbreviations......................................................................................................................xi
1.0 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................1
1.1 Background information........................................................................................................3
1.2 Problem statement..................................................................................................................4
1.3 Objectives...............................................................................................................................4
1.3.1 General objective.............................................................................................................4
1.3.1 Specific objectives...........................................................................................................4
1.4 Significance of study..............................................................................................................5
1.5 Scope of study........................................................................................................................5
2.0 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................6
2.1 Water quality parameters.......................................................................................................6
2.1.1 Aesthetic and physical parameters..................................................................................6
2.1.2 Drinking water perception...............................................................................................7
2.2 Pollution.................................................................................................................................7
2.2.1 Non point pollution.........................................................................................................8
2.2.2 Point pollution.................................................................................................................9
2.3 Land use Effects on Water Quality........................................................................................9
2.3.1 Agricultural Land Use.....................................................................................................9
2.3.2 Urban Land Use...............................................................................................................9
2.4 Monitoring...........................................................................................................................10
2.5 Self-purification...................................................................................................................10
2.5.1 Factors Affecting Self-Purification of a River..............................................................11
2.6 Water models.......................................................................................................................12
2.6.1 Streeter Phelps’ equation...............................................................................................12
2.7 Literature Summary.............................................................................................................13
3.0 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY..........................................................14

vi
 3.1 Sampling..............................................................................................................................14
3.1.1 Choice of sampling stations..........................................................................................14
3.1.2 Purpose of Sampling.....................................................................................................15
3.2 Field Observations...............................................................................................................15
3.3 Physical Tests.......................................................................................................................15
3.3.1 Temperature...................................................................................................................15
3.3.2 Turbidity........................................................................................................................15
3.3.3 Color..............................................................................................................................16
3.3.4 Depth of the river..........................................................................................................16
3.3.5 River velocity................................................................................................................16
3.4 Chemical Tests.....................................................................................................................16
3.4.1 pH test............................................................................................................................17
3.4.2 Total hardness test.........................................................................................................17
3.4.3 Alkalinity.......................................................................................................................17
3.4.4 Conductivity..................................................................................................................17
3.5 Biological tests.....................................................................................................................18
3.5.1 Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)..............................................................................18
3.5.2 Dissolved Oxygen.........................................................................................................18
3.6 Water Quality Modeling......................................................................................................18
4.0 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION........................................20
4.1 Physical Tests..................................................................................................................20
4.1.1 Temperature...................................................................................................................20
4.1.2 Turbidity..................................................................................................................21
4.1.3 Color........................................................................................................................23
4.2 Chemical Tests.........................................................................................................................24
4.2.1 pH..................................................................................................................................24
4.2.2 Conductivity............................................................................................................26
4.2.3 Hardness..................................................................................................................27
4.2.4 Alkalinity.................................................................................................................28
4.3 Biological Tests...............................................................................................................31
4.3.1 Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)..............................................................................31
4.3.2 Dissolved Oxygen....................................................................................................33

vii
 4.4 River Quality Analysis....................................................................................................34
4.4.1 River Velocity..........................................................................................................34
4.4.2 River Depth..............................................................................................................34
4.4.3 Determination of DE oxygenation Constant (k1)....................................................35
4.4.4 Calculation of the reaeration coefficient (K2).........................................................39
4.4.5 Determination of Critical Time and Distance...............................................................41
5.0 Chapter 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION.....................................................43
5.1 Conclusion...........................................................................................................................43
5.1.1 Water Quality Status.....................................................................................................43
5.1.2 Water Quality Modelling...............................................................................................44
5.2 Recommendations................................................................................................................44
References......................................................................................................................................45
Bibliography..................................................................................................................................47
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................48
Appendix 1.................................................................................................................................48

viii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Location map of Mwania River.......................................................................................6

Figure 2: A Graph of Temperature against Sampling Points........................................................22

Figure 3: A Graph of Total Turbidity against Sampling Points....................................................23

Figure 4: A Graph of Total Color against Sampling Points..........................................................24

Figure 5: A Graph of Total pH against Sampling Points...............................................................26

Figure 6: A Graph of Total Conductivity against Sampling Points...............................................27

Figure 7: A Graph of Total Hardness against Sampling Points.....................................................28

Figure 8: A Graph of Total Alkalinity against Sampling Points...................................................31

Figure 9: A Graph of BOD5 against Distance (Sampling Points).................................................33

Figure 10: A Graph of (t/BOD)1/3 against Time (days)...............................................................39

Figure 11: Streeter-Phelps Equation Model in Excel....................................................................41

Figure 12: Saturated Dissolved Oxygen........................................................................................48

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Temperature Values.........................................................................................................31

Table 2: Turbidity..........................................................................................................................32

Table 3: Color................................................................................................................................34

Table 4: pH....................................................................................................................................35

Table 5: Consuctivity.....................................................................................................................36

Table 6: Hardness Values..............................................................................................................38

Table 7: Alkalinity.........................................................................................................................39

Table 8: Total Alkalinity due to Methyl Red.................................................................................41

Table 9: Daily BOD values measured...........................................................................................43

Table 10: BOD5 Values.................................................................................................................43

Table 11: Dissolved Oxygen.........................................................................................................45

Table 12: A Graph of DO against Distance (Sampling Points).....................................................45

Table 13: River Velocity...............................................................................................................46

Table 14: River Depth...................................................................................................................47

Table 15: (t/BOD)1/3 values.........................................................................................................50

x
List of Abbreviations

NEMA - National Environmental Management Authority

WHO - World Health Organization

WRMA - Water Resource Management

BOD - Biochemical oxygen demand

COD - Chemical oxygen demand

DO - Dissolved oxygen

UNEP - United Nations Environment Programm

xi
1.0 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Without clean water for drinking, cooking, farming, and fishing, the human race would die.

Healthy water is also important for recreational benefits such as swimming, water skiing, and

boating. Yet, when water quality assessment first began in the United States during the early

1970s, it was found that much of the nation's surface and groundwater water was contaminated

or highly compromised. Studies showed that the three primary water pollution sources, i.e.,

industry, municipalities, and agriculture —had been frequently discharging harmful substances

into the water supplies over a number of years.

Once these toxic substances flow into streams, rivers, lakes, oceans, and all other water bodies,

they are dissolved, suspend in water or become deposited on the waterbed. This brings about

water pollution whereby its quality deteriorates, affecting aquatic ecosystems. These pollutants

can as well seep down and contaminate the groundwater sources.

There are many sources of water pollution. The most common of them being the agricultural

runoffs, municipal sewage and industrial waste allowed to flow into the rivers. The waste water

treatment facilities are not adequate in all municipalities in Kenya. Currently, only 30 percent of

the 142 gazetted municipal areas in Kenya have sewerage systems where the waste water

generated can be treated with the rest being discharged with all the pollutants into the water

bodies (Mogaka, 2006). Owing to this, pollutants go into groundwater, rivers, and other water

bodies. Such contaminated water that finally ends up in the households is time and again

contaminated and contains disease-causing microbes. Additionally, agricultural run-off from the

fields draining into rivers is another main water pollutant as it has fertilizers and pesticides.

1
Domestic sewage or sanitary sewage is the sewage discarded from households. It contains water

with suspended or dissolved impurities. Domestic sewage consists of mainly organic materials

from food and vegetable wastes. It also contains chemicals from soaps, and other detergents used

in the house. This waste may contain disease causing micro-organisms from the rotting organic

wastes. Garbage is directly dumped by people this days into streams, lakes, and other water

bodies. Various substances used in cleaning and washing together with domestic wastes end up

in these water bodies. Most detergents this days are synthetic and contain phosphates which are

used to soften water. This chemicals from washing powders and detergents can cause health

problems.

Agricultural run-off can cause pollution. Chemicals used in agriculture and the practices

followed affect the quality of groundwater. Fertilizer and pesticide chemicals seep into the

groundwater by leaching. Where irrigation is done, chemicals from pesticides and fertilizers

applied in this fields end up in the rivers and streams around due to run off.

Industrial effluents from manufacturing or chemical processes in industries if not treated well

before being released cause water pollution. Industrial waste contain specific and readily

identified chemical compounds from the processes in the industries. Since Kenya is a developing

country the number of industries has grown but not all of these industries contain treatment

facilities for their wastes. They then release the wastes into the streams and rivers without

treatment leading to water pollution.

The effects of water pollution depends on the type and the concentration of chemicals and the

source of the pollution. The location where dumping of the wastes is done also affect the effects

of pollution. Water pollution causes death of aquatic life, diseases, destruction of ecosystem and

disruption of food chains.

2
Strategies to solve the issue of water pollution have been adopted by National Environmental

Management Authority (NEMA) through legal Act No. 121, 2006. It puts emphasis on water

quality regulation so as to reduce water-borne diseases in Kenya and also provides guidelines

and standards on discharge of domestic and industrial wastes into the water bodies.

1.1 Background information

River Mwania is located along Machakos-Wote road at a distance of about three kilometers from

Machakos town in Katoloni area. Its sources are streams from Konza Ranch. The river is used

by about 300,000 local people for irrigation, washing, fishing and domestic uses.

Causes of pollution of the river are from agricultural activities along the river, domestic wastes,

industrial wastes, and municipal treated waste discharge on the lower ends. Untreated domestic

wastes are directly released into the river through streams and drains running from the town

center. The river is also polluted by the storm water which flows from Machakos town once it

has rained.

Sewerage treatment in Machakos town is done by use of naturally aerated lagoons which are not

properly managed. Some estates don’t have a proper sewerage system and the wastes are carried

by exhausters to the lagoons. The wastes are not properly treated before being released into the

river.

Industries around, e.g., leather processing industry, East Kenya Bottlers, and East Africa

Breweries, don’t have a proper waste treatment system. The wastes released from this industries

find their way into the river leading to pollution of the water.

3
1.2 Problem statement

Human activities have impacted negatively on the quality of water in River Mwania. Industrial

and domestic wastes are being released into the river leading to pollution of the water. Pollution

results in diseases transmitting medium which is a health hazard to the residents of Machakos

town. Oxygen deprivation and chemicals makes the water unhealthy for drinking and death of

aquatic life. Pollution also causes lack of water for domestic use since the climatic condition in

Machakos is semi-arid.

Water pollution assessment of this river is justified since the survival of majority residents in

Machakos depends on it. There were quarrels within civic bodies and demonstrations of the

locals concerning the level of pollution of the river. The incident has brought about a major

conflict amongst the Environment concerned parties.

1.3 Objectives

1.3.1 General objective

 To identify the extent of pollution of Mwania River brought about by the agricultural,

industrial, and municipal pollutants.

1.3.1 Specific objectives

 To determine if the flow of the River is able to dilute the chemicals present from

pollution.

 To identify ways that can be adopted to minimize the degree on pollution of the river.

4
1.4 Significance of study

 To investigate the various causes of pollution in River Mwania

 To investigate the impact and extent of pollution of the River

 To provide information concerning pollution of River Mwania caused by Municipal and

industrial discharge.

1.5 Scope of study

The research will be confined to River Mwania. It captured our interest due to the industrial

wastes by the industries within the river, Machakos Sewerage plant discharge and agricultural

runoff which end up into the river. This pollutes and affects the water quality. The section to be

selected for sampling will be at the sections where the wastes are discharged in to the river.

Figure 1: Location map of Mwania River

5
2.0 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Water quality parameters

According to WHO(2004) potable or drinking water refers to water that is safe for human

consumption with regards to water parameters such as bacteria, physical and chemical so that it

can be acceptable for use in cooking and drinking.

2.1.1 Aesthetic and physical parameters

The water taste has an effect on human perception on the quality of drinking water. Water color,

smell, and taste are some of the aesthetic parameters that influence the consumers’ ability to

accept water as drinking water. The studies done by both Sheat (1992) and Doria (2010) clearly

explain the influence of aesthetic and physical characteristics on perception of water by the

consumers.

Different consumers have different perception on the water based on these physical parameters.

According to WHO (2004), water which is aesthetically accepted and be not safe for drinking

and turbid water because of its aesthetic characteristic can be disregarded though it is safe for

drinking. Water acceptance for drinking is drinking by the true color and odor and turbidity.

The water PH is also a parameter that has influence on water quality. According to WHO (2004),

low PH results in corrosion of water pipes and change in color and odor of the water. It also

states that the high PH causes deposition of calcium carbonate in water systems. Turbidity is the

main parameter used to classify water based on aesthetic parameters, as turbidity is an indication

6
of pollution. This, therefore, makes PH a paramount parameter to be considered to ensure water

quality is enhanced.

2.1.2 Drinking water perception

The perception on water quality is an important factor to consider as far as drinking water is

concerned. Perception has relationship to quality of water. Studies done by both Sheat (1992)

and Doria (2010) clearly elaborate that the user perception is based on the quality of water. The

perception of water quality is primarily affected by the following factors.

1. The information concerning a given water source. This information could either be

positive or negative depending on the quality of water from that source.

2. Human mental judgement on water aesthetic characteristics like color, odor and taste.

The change in color, odor is an indication of contamination of water.

2.2 Pollution

Kenya’s surface waters are subject to a great risk because of pollution due to rapid population

growth and the changing patterns of land use. Sources of pollution include industrial, residential

and municipal discharge into water bodies.

Various types of pollutants reach water bodies through surface or ground water flow into these

bodies. According to Chittleborough et al.(1994), the major contribution of sediments, both

organic and inorganic, and other nutrients is the surface run off. Hubbard et al.(1982) found out

that that surface run off is the major storm water that serves in transportation of organic

7
pollutants in form of nitrogen. Surface run off can also serve as a major transport medium for

soluble pollutants.

Presence of nutrients and sediments in water bodies can also be attributed to erosion of River

banks and fluvial erosion. Relatively high stream flow in rivers results in bank and fluvial

erosion. Louis (1964), Birot (1968) and Tricart (1972) found out from their research that most of

the rivers in humid tropical areas do not undergo erosion into the overlaying material in vertical

direction. Webb and Walling (1985) also found out that bed load contributes towards the erosion

process.

Precipitation also serves as a contribution of pollution of water bodies. Approximately 20-40%

of phosphorous load is deposited by the rain in western countries. Others factors that serve as a

major contribution of pollutants are agricultural activities and other human activities which

include industrialization. Also changing land use patterns and rise in population are part of

reasons for water pollution. Faster changes in population have an increasing concern on the level

of water pollution in developing countries. Therefore for the process of sustainable management

of water bodies, it is prudent to carry out regular assessment of water quality of water resource.

2.2.1 Non point pollution

Non point water pollution is a type of pollution that cannot be traced to one source. The

contaminants are usually transferred to the water bodies by surface run offs. Due to their various

sources, it is difficult to control and have a huge impact on water quality, poor wastes disposal,

farming activities and other soil disturbance on sly areas are some of the sources of non-point

sources of contaminants.

8
2.2.2 Point pollution

Point pollution is the pollution that can be traced to a specific origin or source, e.g., pipe or ditch.

It includes discharges from industries and waste water treatment plants.

This kind of pollution can be easily controlled since the discharge can be regulated before

reaching the water body. This pollution results in high level f nutrients and organic matter and

reduces dissolved oxygen levels.

2.3 Land use Effects on Water Quality

Human activities have negative impact on water quality. Due to the varying land use patterns

around a water body, the pollutants into a water body varies in relation to the changes in land

use.

2.3.1 Agricultural Land Use

According to the studies done by Basnyat et al.(1999), agricultural land use have an effect on the

surface water; he establishes that the nearness of agricultural practices are the major contributors

to water quality degradation in most parts of the world.

2.3.2 Urban Land Use

Urban areas are characterized by the impervious pavements and residential areas as well as the

industrial land use pattern. This impervious pavement affects the rate of infiltration of water.

9
According to Mallin et al.(2001), the changing of natural land into impervious paved surface

reduces the permeability hence low rate of infiltration.

2.4 Monitoring

Monitoring involves the process of characterizing water over a period of time. It also covers the

prevention of pollution and maintenance of integrity of water bodies. During the past, monitoring

was only based on ensuring that certain standards for water quality pertaining a given water body

are met. The formation of clean water act and safe drinking water act under the new amendments

to the current legislation has resulted in evolution of monitoring programs to satisfy national

monitoring requirements. Whole water bodies and a number of quality indicators are considered

in these new methods.

2.5 Self-purification
The self-purification of natural water systems is a complex process that often involves physical,

chemical, and biological processes working simultaneously. The amount of Dissolved Oxygen

(DO) in water is one of the most commonly used indicators of a river health. As DO drops below

4 or 5 mg/L the forms of life that can survive begin to reduce. A minimum of about 2.0 mg/L of

dissolved oxygen is required to maintain higher life forms (Hakanson, 1999).

A number of factors affect the amount of DO available in a river. Oxygen demanding wastes

remove DO; plants add DO during day but remove it at night; respiration of organisms removes

oxygen. In summer, rising temperature reduces solubility of oxygen, while lower flows reduce

the rate at which oxygen enters the water from atmosphere

10
2.5.1 Factors Affecting Self-Purification of a River
Numerous factors affect the ability of a river to purify itself as discussed in the following section.

2.5.1.1 Dilution
When sufficient dilution water is available in the receiving water body, where the wastewater is

discharged; the DO level in the receiving stream may not reach to zero or critical DO due to

availability of sufficient DO initially in the river water before receiving discharge of wastewater.

2.5.1.2 Current
When strong water current is available, the discharged wastewater will be thoroughly mixed with

stream water preventing deposition of solids. In small current, the solid matter from the

wastewater will get deposited at the bed following decomposition and reduction in DO.

2.5.1.3 Temperature
The quantity of DO available in stream water is more in cold temperature than in hot

temperature. Also, as the activity of microorganisms is more at the higher temperature, hence,

the self-purification will take less time at hot temperature than in winter.

2.5.1.4 Sunlight
Algae produces oxygen in presence of sunlight due to photosynthesis. Therefore, sunlight helps

in purification of stream by adding oxygen through photosynthesis.

2.5.1.5 Rate of Oxidation

Due to oxidation of organic matter discharged in the river DO depletion occurs. This rate is

faster at higher temperature and low at lower temperature. The rate of oxidation of organic

matter depends on the chemical composition of organic matter.

11
2.6 Water models

2.6.1 Streeter Phelps’ equation

Water models are most powerful tools used in analyzing data obtained. The two employed water

models are Streeter Phelps’ equation which helps in obtaining the Deoxygenation constant K1,

and the reparation constant K2, of the river. These models used to show the behaviour of BOD

with time and distance in river. According to McGhee (1991), the BOD exerted is considered a

first-order reaction.

2.6.1.1 Deoxygenation constant K1

(t/BOD)1/3=(K1L)-1/3+K12/3/6L1/3t Equation 1
By plotting (t/BOD)1/3 versus t, it gives a straight line with the intercept of (K1L)-1/3 at t=0 and

slope of K12/3/6L1/3. From the values of K1 and the ultimate BOD (L) are obtained (Yen, 2007).

2.6.1.2 Reaeration constant K2

Rearation constant has been found to be a function of stream turbulence. According to McGhee

(1991), K2 is determined as given in the equation:

K2=(Dm U/H3)1/2 - Equation 2

Where U= average stream velocity

H= average depth

Dm= Molecular diffusion coefficient =2.037 x 10-5 cm2/s at 200C

K2 varies with temperature in accord to:

K2(T) =K2(200C)(1.025)T-20 -Equation 3

12
2.7 Literature Summary

Kenya’s water act advocates for proper management, conservation, use and control of water

bodies. There is need to avert various kinds of pollution that impact on water quality. These

sources of pollution include land uses, point sources, and surface run off. The WHO act of 2004

gives the guideline on the amount of a parameter should be discharged in the water body as well

as the amount of each water parameter require in drinking water. Water Resource Management

Authority (WRMA) performs the task of national monitoring of and information on the resources

management.

In this research, water quality parameters of River Mwania will be measured, and the stream

flow will also be determined at selected points. Water models will be used in determining the

river capacity to receive point source of pollution. The river rate of dissolving trace metals will

also be carried out.

13
3.0 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This section entails the process in which information necessary for the research that was carried

out. It provides the tests and procedures that were used to conduct the tests and how sampling

was done in the field for the stated objectives to be achieved. It details the locations from which

the samples for data collection was collected from and the physical and laboratory tests that

were conducted in order to acquire the data analyzed in the chapter to follow.

3.1 Sampling

A total of four stations was be selected for sampling of the river water since the main objective

of the research is to determine the extent of pollution of the river water in relation to waste

disposal systems. These stations were basically be at the one kilometer upstream, at the point of

discharge, one kilometer downstream and two kilometer downstream to allow for comparison of

the level of pollution at different points of the river.

3.1.1 Choice of sampling stations

This choice of sampling stations was based on the following:

i. The assumption that the upstream of the river is less polluted before the water reaches the

point of discharge of the stream with the disposed wastes.

ii. At the point of discharge of the waste disposals to determine whether the water meets the

set standards of waste water discharge requirements.

iii. Downstream of the river to determine if the river will attain self-purification so as the

water doesn’t pose any danger to the consumers and the aquatic life.

14
3.1.2 Purpose of Sampling

The main purpose of collecting the samples in a very appropriate way was to enable detailed

laboratory tests to be carried out so as to determine the extents of pollution of River Mwania and

the water quality of the river, which may have a severe risk to the residents living along the river

especially downstream.

3.2 Field Observations

Field observations was made so as to assess the facts on the ground and the variations of the

physical characteristics of the river water and their locations in regards to the location of the

sampling point along the river.

Field observations was also to allow for appropriate selection of the sampling stations by

comparing the different physical characteristics of the water at different points along the river.

3.3 Physical Tests

The physical tests that were carried out include:

3.3.1 Temperature
This was carried out in the field to determine the temperature of the river water at different

sampling points using a mercury thermometer.

3.3.2 Turbidity
Turbidity is an optical determination of water clarity. Turbid water will appear cloudy, murky, or

otherwise colored, affecting the physical look of the water. Suspended solids and dissolved

colored material reduce water clarity by creating an opaque, hazy or muddy appearance.

Turbidity measurements are often used as an indicator of water quality based on clarity and

estimated total suspended solids in water.

15
A colorimeter was used to conduct the turbidity of the water. A standard formazin solution as per

the reference was for calibration. The samples were filled up to 10ml mark in the clean tubes.

A blank sample containing distilled water was scanned before each sample was scanned so as to

obtain the values.

3.3.3 Color
It was tested by use of a colorimeter where the samples were filled in colorless up to 10ml line

tubes. A blank sample of color-free distilled water was scanned before each of the samples were

scanned and the reading obtained were recorded.

3.3.4 Depth of the river

The depth of the river at the different sampling points were obtained from the records provided

by Machakos Water and Sewerage Company.

3.3.5 River velocity

A propeller velocity meter is used. The probe was mounted by the connector to the digital

indicator by use of support clips such that the rotor head was immersed in to the river at a depth

of 15mm with the engraved arrow on the connector pointing to the direction of water flow. The

digital indicator indicated the frequency of the probe pulses averaged over the set time.

Turbidity and color tests were conducted in the laboratory while river velocity and temperature

were done in the field.

3.4 Chemical Tests

The chemical that were conducted in the university laboratory include:

16
3.4.1 pH test
A pH meter was used to test the pH of the samples collected from the site. The buffer solutions

were used to calibrate the pH meter after which the sample was placed in beaker where the

electrode was inserted and reading were taken [ CITATION Epe02 \l 1033 ].

3.4.2 Total hardness test

Total hardness test kit method was used. The sample was filed p to 12.9ml line in the test tube, 5

drops of hardness reagent 4483 were added followed by one hardness reagent 4484 table which

turned the solution once it had dissolved. The direct reading titrator was filled with hardness

reagent 4487 and titrated against the red solution in the test tube until the color changed to blue.

The result was read from the on the titrator.

3.4.3 Alkalinity

Titration method was used to conduct this test. A sample of 0.02N of sulphuric acid was

prepared, this solution was used to fill the burette. 100ml of the sample was pipetted into the

conical flask were four drops of phenolphthalein indicator was added and if the color changed to

pink, titration was to be conducted until it turns colorless and the volume recorded. Four drops of

methyl orange indicator was added to the solution and the solution turned to yellow [ CITATION

Alk02 \l 1033 ]. Titration was done until the color changed to orange and the total volume

recorded.

3.4.4 Conductivity
This test was carried out by use of conductivity meter. A solution of 0.1N of potassium chloride

was prepared to be used for calibration [ CITATION Exp02 \l 1033 ]. The samples were placed in

beakers were the electrode was inserted and the readings were taken.

17
3.5 Biological tests

The biological tests that were to be carried in Nyeri Water and Sewerage Company include:

i. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)

ii. Dissolved oxygen (DO).

3.5.1 Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)

BOD is the measure of the amount of oxygen used by organisms to oxidize organic matter. It is

used to evaluate the impact of the biodegradable materials in water and waste water. The test is

quite simple with improved controllability and is non-toxic. In this research, the oxitop method

of determining BOD will be utilized since it used pressure measurements in a closed system in

which the microorganism in the collected samples consume the oxygen (O2) producing carbon

dioxide (CO2).

3.5.2 Dissolved Oxygen

This test is used to determine the presence of free oxygen in water, which is a very important

parameter when assessing the quality of water based on the organisms in water.

3.6 Water Quality Modeling

Water quality in rivers is increasingly threatened by the ongoing human activities such as

pollution from both point and diffuse sources, change in land use, physical changes within the

watershed area, poor water treatment, substandard operation of the regulation systems, and

leisure activities.

18
Microsoft Excel software will be used to simulate the water quality variation along the river

water.

19
4.0 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION.
This chapter entails the results that were obtained from the field tests and from the laboratory

tests and also discussion of the results as per the required standards.

The in-situ tests (temperature, velocity, river depth, and dissolved oxygen) were conducted

between 9.00 am and 11.00am.

4.1 Physical Tests

4.1.1 Temperature
Sample Temperature
Upstream 200C
Point of discharge 200C
Downstream 1 200C
Downstream 2 200C
Table 1: Temperature Values

The color and amount of suspended solids affect the water temperature by disperson of the

sunlight energy by these particles, the depth of river also affects the temperature.

From the temperature values measured in the different sampling points, the average temperature

of the water in the river within the time of testing is:

∑(20+20+ 20+20)
Average temperature =
4

=200C

20
 25

20

15
Temperature

10

0
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2
Sampling Points

Figure 2: A Graph of Temperature against Sampling Points

4.1.2 Turbidity
Sample Turbidity
Upstream 13.98FAU
Point of discharge 52.64FAU
Downstream 1 30.10FAU
Downstream 2 20.59FAU
Table 2: Turbidity

These measures the relative clarity of water, the amount of light scattered by suspended

particles in water. From the samples we collected, it was found to be varying at different places

with the highest value obtained at the point of discharge.

The standard for drinking water is 0.5 NTU to 1.0 NTU. In the conversions of units, 1NTU =

1FAU.

The variation of turbidity downstream due to the wastewater stream joining the river is well

recorded with the value upstream being the lowest. The turbidity level in the wastewater is very

21
high indicating the presence of large amounts of impurities. It then reduces downstream as the

river flows, which is an indication of the self-purification of the river.

The average turbidity of the river was determined to be:

(13.98+52.64+ 30.10+20.59)
Average Turbidity =
4

=29.33 FAU

60

50

40
Turbidity (FAU)

30

20

10

0
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2
Sampling Points

Figure 3: A Graph of Total Turbidity against Sampling Points

4.1.3 Color
Sample Color

22
 Upstream 357ppm
Point of discharge 584ppm
Downstream 1 227ppm
Downstream 2 245ppm
Table 3: Color

From visual observation, at the point of discharge the water is greenish hence not fit for domestic

use. The color becomes clearer downstream, showing the self-purification of the river.

The average color of the water of Mwania River was determined to be

357+584+227 +245
Average color =
4

=353.25ppm

The graph below shows the variations of color at the different sampling points along the river.

The wastewater streams has the highest value showing that it’s highly polluted as it joins the

river. It further shows the self-purification of the river as it flows downstream.

700

600

500
Color (ppm)

400

300

200

100

0
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2
Sampling Points

Figure 4: A Graph of Total Color against Sampling Points

23
4.2 Chemical Tests
4.2.1 pH
Sample PH
Upstream 8.62
Point of Discharge 9.08
Downstream 1 8.62
Downstream 2 8.86
Table 4: pH

8.62+8.62+8.86
The average pH of the river was determined to be =
3

=8.7

The PH value for drinking water is within the range of 6.5 to 8.5 with the value we obtained

being slightly higher due to the discharge from machakos wastewater treatment plant. This is due

to higher alkalinity content of the effluents.

9.2

9.1

8.9

8.8
pH Values

8.7

8.6

8.5

8.4

8.3
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2

Sampling Points

Figure 5: A Graph of Total pH against Sampling Points

24
The variation of the values along the river is shown in the graph. The pH value of the wastewater

draining into Mwania River is as high as 9.08 which indicates presence of high alkalinity in the

wastewater. At Downstream 2, the value rises above that at Downstream 1 due to the stagnation

of water due to the dam constructed downstream. This is an indication of the accumulation of the

pollutants.

4.2.2 Conductivity
Sample Conductivity
Upstream 944µs
Point of Discharge 4200µs
Downstream 1 1182µs
Downstream 2 1519µs
Table 5: Consuctivity

Electrical conductivity of water is a component that shows the total dissolved salt. The value

obtained represents the total concentration of soluble salt in water. The presence of high

conductivity in water more than the prescribed by WHO indicate the presence of high

amount of dissolved organic substance in ions state. The value of conductivity at the

discharge point was found to be higher than 2500 which accepted by WHO. However at a stretch

downstream the river managed to lower that value to the require standard. These shows the

river had the capacity to withstand the higher level of conductivity from the treatment

plant.

944+ 4200+1182+1519
The average conductivity was determined by¿
4

=1961.25

25
The variation in conductivity is highest at the wastewater stream as shown in the graph below

due to the high presence of pollutants.

A Graph of Total Conductivity against Sampling Points

4500
4000
3500
3000
Conductivity

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2
Sampling Point

Figure 6: A Graph of Total Conductivity against Sampling Points

4.2.3 Hardness
Sample Hardness
Upstream 76ppm
Point of Discharge 376ppm
Downstream 1 116ppm
Downstream 2 152ppm
Table 6: Hardness Values

Hardness is caused by compounds of calcium and magnesium, and by variety of other metals.

Hardness is removed from water systems by precipitation or iron exchange. Water hardness

contributes to use of more detergents and soap for home laundry and washing, and contributes to

scaling in boilers and industrial equipment.

76+376+116 +152
The average hardness was determined by=
4

26
 =180ppm

400

350

300
Hardness (ppm)

250

200

150

100

50

0
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2
Sampling Points

Figure 7: A Graph of Total Hardness against Sampling Points

4.2.4 Alkalinity
Sample Alkalinity due to Total Alkalinity using

Phenolphthalein Methyl Orange

Upstream 0.00 7.10
Point of Discharge 0.00 53.70
Downstream 1 0.00 10.80
Downstream 2 0.00 18.30
Table 7: Alkalinity

Presence of high amount of alkalinity more than the prescribed by WHO has effect in the taste to

water. Presence of carbonates, hydroxide, bicarbonate and organic acids in water contribute to

its alkalinity. Alkalinity of the point of discharge is highest than other sampling points showing

that the effluent from Machakos wastewater treatment plant has high alkalinity levels.

Phenolphthalein alkalinity is determined by titration to a pH of 8.3 (the phenolphthalein end

point) and registers the total hydroxide and one half the carbonate present. In the samples

collected, titration indicated absence of phenolphthalein alkalinity.

27
So as to compute the total alkalinity at every sampling point, parameters such as the volume of

Sulphuric Acid used, normality of the acid, volume of the sample, and the equivalent weight of

CaCO3 are needed.

Normality of the acid =0.02N

Volume of the sample =20mL

Equivalent weight of CaCO3 =1000

(Volume of H 2 SO 4 ( v 1 )∗Normality∗Volume of sample∗1000)

Total Alkalinity = - Equation
Volume of sample taken
4: Alkalinity
 For Upstream;

7.10∗0.02∗20∗1000
Total Alkalinity =
100

=28.4 mg/L as CaCO3 equivalent

 For the Point of Discharge;

53.70∗0.02∗20∗1000
Total Alkalinity =
100

=214.8 mg/L as CaCO3 equivalent

 For Downstream 1;

10.80∗0.02∗20∗1000
Total Alkalinity =
100

=43.2 mg/L as CaCO3 equivalent

 For Downstream 2;

28
 18.30∗0.02∗20∗1000
Total Alkalinity =
100

=73.2 mg/L as CaCO3 equivalent

Sample Total Alkalinity due

to Methyl Red (mg/L

as CaCO3 equivalent)
Upstream 28.4
Point of Discharge 214.8
Downstream 1 43.2
Downstream 2 73.2
Table 8: Total Alkalinity due to Methyl Red

250

200
Total Alkalinity

150

100

50

0
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2
Sampling Points

Figure 8: A Graph of Total Alkalinity against Sampling Points

4.3 Biological Tests

4.3.1 Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)
The BOD values varied according to the level of pollution along the river. The upstream BOD

level was within the limit prescribed by WHO. At the point of discharge and downstream

sampling points, the BOD levels were beyond the required value by WHO. This was so because

29
of bacteriological reaction in water that was taking place due to the presence of nutrients from

the wastewater discharged into the river. However the value of BOD downstream showed some

level of reduction which confirmed the process of self-purification had started.

The data presented below is the daily BOD levels for the different sampling points as determined

from the Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA), Tana Catchment Area laboratory.

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

Upstream 1 2 4 6 6

Point of Discharge 2 3 4 16 18

Downstream 1 2 2 4 7 8

Downstream 2 11 23 34 41 40

Table 9: Daily BOD values measured

The final BOD, BOD5, was determined by summing the daily BOD values and they are

represented below.

Sampling Point BOD5 (mg/L)

Upstream 19

Point of Discharge 43

30
 Downstream 1 23

Downstream 2 149

Table 10: BOD5 Values

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Upstream Point of Discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2

Figure 9: A Graph of BOD5 against Distance (Sampling Points)

The transition of the graph from the upstream to downstream 1 sampling points shows that the

self-purification process of the river is taking place. For the downstream 2 sampling point

however, there is an increase in the BOD5 value which is due to the dam that is retaining the

water for a long time. This brings about accumulation of the nutrients at this point, hence, the

variation.

4.3.2 Dissolved Oxygen

At the upstream level the value of dissolved oxygen was within the range prescribed by WHO, a

minimum of 4mg/L. At the point of discharge from the wastewater stream, the value of dissolved

31
oxygen was below the recommended one. Down the river, however, the process of self-

purification had started and thus the value of DO had started increasing.

Sampling Point DO (mg/L)

Upstream 5.2
Point of Discharge 2.8
Downstream 1 4.1
Downstream 2 4.9
Table 11: Dissolved Oxygen

4
DO (mg/L)

0
Upstream Point of discharge Downstream 1 Downstream 2
Sampling Points

Table 12: A Graph of DO against Distance (Sampling Points)

4.4 River Quality Analysis

4.4.1 River Velocity
River velocity is a very important factor in the analysis of the stream ability to absorb the

pollutant using the Streeter Phelps equation. The equation of reaeration depends on factors such

as temperature, velocity and depth of the river. With this requirement the velocity of the river

was determined at the four sampling points as shown in the table below.

32
 Sample Propeller Velocity Velocity

Meter reading
Upstream 3.5Hz 5.4 cm/sec
Point of discharge 1.8Hz 4.2 cm/sec
Downstream 1 4.9Hz 6.5 cm/sec
Downstream 2 1.9Hz 4.4 cm/sec
Table 13: River Velocity

The values read using the Propeller Velocity Meter were in Hertz. Using the Streamflo Probe

Calibration Chart provided along with the user manual, the values of the velocity can be

determined in centimeters per second (cm/sec).

5.4+ 4.2+ 6.5+4.4

The average river velocity = 4

=5.125 cm/sec

4.4.2 River Depth

This parameter was necessitated because of the use of Streeter Phelps equation that we were to

use to model the assimilative capacity of the river.

Sample Depth of river

Upstream 0.6m
Point of discharge 0.4m
Downstream 1 0.8m
Downstream 2 4m
Table 14: River Depth

The average depth of the river at the point of testing was determined to be 1m. The low river

depth was due to the dry season during which the sampling was done.

The depth of the river at the last sampling point (Downstream 2) was as deep as 4m due to a dam

that is constructed about 200m downstream.

33
So as to determine the average depth of the river at the period of sampling, values for Upstream

and Downstream 1 are averages. The value of Downstream 2 was not used because it was near

the reservoir which doesn’t indicate the true depth of the river respectively.

0.6+0.4 +0.8
Average river depth =
3

= 0.6 m

4.4.3 Determination of DE oxygenation Constant (k1)

DE oxygenation constant was determined using the equation below given by McGhee (1991).

This method of determining the DE oxygenation constant was used by plotting the values of

(t/BOD)1/3 against time (in days).

In this plotting, the determined intercept provides the value of (K1L)-1/3 and its slope giving the

value (K12/3/6L1/3). Solving the two equations simultaneously, the values of K1 and L were

determined.

Since the BOD values for the upstream and wastewater stream are determined, first, the BOD

mix value should be determined. BOD mix at the point the wastewater mixes with the river water

is determined using the formula below for the time recorded:

BOD mix= - Equation 5: BOD mix

Qr∗BODr +Qww∗BODww
Qr+ Qww

Where;

Qr - River flow at the upstream

Qww - Wastewater stream flow

BODr - Biological Oxygen Demand of the river at the upstream

34
BODww - Biological Oxygen Demand of the wastewater stream

Flow, Q = Area (A)*Velocity (v)

For the upstream point;

Velocity, v = 5.4 cm/s

Depth, d = 1m

River width = 3m

1
Cross Sectional Area, A = *0.6*3 m2
2

A =0.9 m2

Qr = A*v - Equation 6: Flow

5.4
=0.9 m2 * m/s
100

=0.0486 m3/s

For the point of discharge (wastewater stream);

Velocity, v = 4.2 cm/s

Depth, d = 0.4 m

Stream width = 1m

1
Cross Sectional Area, A = *0.4*1 m2
2

A = 0.2 m2

35
Qww = A*v

4.2
= 0.2 m2 * m/s
100

= 0.0084 m3/s

Therefore,

0.0486∗BODr +0.0084∗BODww
BOD mix =
0.0486+ 0.0084

For day 1;
0.0486∗1+ 0.0084∗2
BOD mix = =1.15 mg/L
0.0486+ 0.0084

For day 2;

0.0486∗3+ 0.0084∗5
BOD mix = =3.29 mg/L
0.0486+ 0.0084

For day 3;

0.0486∗7 +0.0084∗9
BOD mix = = 7.29 mg/L
0.0486+0.0084

For day 4;

0.0486∗13+ 0.0084∗25
BOD mix = = 14.77 mg/L
0.0486+ 0.0084

For day 5;
0.0486∗19+ 0.0084∗43
BOD mix = = 22.54 mg/L
0.0486+0.0084

Time (days) 1 2 3 4 5
BOD mix 1.15 3.29 7.29 14.77 22.54
(mg/L)
(t/BOD)1/3 0.95 0.85 0.74 0.65 0.61
Table 15: (t/BOD)1/3 values

36
 (t/BOD)1/3
1

0.9 f(x) = − 0.09 x + 1.02

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
1 2 3 4 5
Figure 10: A Graph of (t/BOD)1/3 against Time (days)

Drawing the line of best fit in the graph, we have the equation

y = -0.088x + 1.042 - Equation 7: Gradient equation

which provides the gradient and y-intercept values.

2
Dy K 13
Gradient, Dx = 1 = -0.088
3
(6 L)

Y-intercept, (K1L)-1/3 =1.042

Solving the two simultaneous equations, we determined that:

K1 = 0.16/day
L =7.07 mg/L

4.4.4 Calculation of the reaeration coefficient (K2)

The estimation of reaeration constant was done from the equation below:
K2 = KvaHb - Equation 8: Reaeration Constant (K2)
Where;

37
K - Constant, 2.148
v -Flow velocity
H -Depth
a and b -Constants, 0.878 and -1.48 respectively.
From the fieldwork,
v = 5.125 cm/s
H = 1m
Substituting the known values into the equation
K2 = 2.148*(5.125/100)0.878*0.6-1.48
= 0.38/day
From the Excel software, the water quality modeling of the Streeter-Phelps equation was
implemented and presented below.

38
Figure 11: Streeter-Phelps Equation Model in Excel

39
4.4.5 Determination of Critical Time and Distance

The flow rates for the river and wastewater stream were determined earlier to be 0.0486 m3/s
and 0.0084 m3/s. The flow was low owing to the dry season within the area of study at the time
of sampling.
From the recorded values of BOD and DO, the values of both BOD mix and DO mix were
determined as illustrated below:
Qr∗BODr +Qww∗BODww
BOD mix =
Qr+ Qww
0.0486∗19+ 0.0084∗43
BOD mix = 0.0486+0.0084
= 22.54 mg/L

Qr∗DOr +Qww∗DOww
DO mix = - Equation 9: DO mix
Qr+Qww

0.0486∗5.2+ 0.0084∗2.8
=
0.0486+ 0.0084

= 4.85 mg/L
Temperature of the mix was 200c
The initial dissolved oxygen DO is thus calculated from the equation;
DO = DOsat – DOmix -Equation 10: Initial Dissolved Oxygen
At 200c, the saturated amount of dissolved oxygen according to the table provided in the
Appendix is 9.2 mg/L
Therefore,
DO = 9.2 – 4.85 mg/L
= 4.35 mg/L
Ultimate BOD is then expressed as below:
BOD mix
Lo = -Equation 11: Ultimate BOD
1−e−k 1 t

40
 22.54
= 1−e−0.16∗5

= 40.93 mg/L

Assimilation of the critical time and distance to which the river will completely depletes the
dissolved was modelled by the Streeter-Phelps equation (Mines & Lackey, 2009), and is
determined as shown by the equation below:
1 K2 DO∗K 2−K 1
tc = K 2−K 1
ln ⁡[
K1
(1−
K 1 LO
)] - Equation 12: Critical Time
1 0.34 4.35∗0.34−0.16
= 0.34−0.16
ln ⁡[
0.16
(1−
0.16∗40.93
)]

= 3.48 days
Critical distance is calculated as shown in the expression that follows (Rowe & ʻAbd al-Majīd,
1995);

Xc = v*tc -Equation 13: Critical Distance

= 0.05125 m/s * 3.48days *(24*60*60) s/day

= 15.41 km.

41
5.0 Chapter 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion
5.1.1 Water Quality Status
From both the field and laboratory tests and results, it was found that the river is polluted for

domestic use. This is so because some of the parameters were found to be way beyond the

recommended standards set by WHO. The upstream section was found to be less polluted as

compared to the point of discharge and downstream sections. However, the river showed to have

the ability to absorb the pollutants downstream. Further, the wastewater discharged into the river

was found to have different pollution levels. This is justified by our two visits to the site and the

variations of the field and laboratory results that we found.

At the discharge point, low levels of dissolved oxygen were measured. This signifies the

presence of carbon compounds and other nutrients which help bacteria to blossom, thus,

consuming the dissolved oxygen.

At the downstream, the river looked greenish in color and the presence of algae was visible at a

stretch of 100 meters downstream. This justifies the use of oxygen and, thus, limiting the ability

of the river to undertake self-purification.

Surface runoff from the adjacent land also has a far reaching effect on the addition of sediment

loads into the river and thus affecting the physical parameters of the river. This is justified by the

farming activities (tilling) that is carried adjacent to the river.

It was also noticed that much of the depletion of the oxygen at the discharge and downstream

was due to the wastewater from the treatment plant and the chemicals used by the farmers which

are drained to the river through surface run off.

42
5.1.2 Water Quality Modelling
According to the modelling carried out using the Streeter-Phelps equation, it was found that the

river would achieve full self-purification after flowing over15.41km downstream from the point

of discharge of the wastewater stream into the river. This is located past the Katoloni area which

is past our area of interest. Therefore, the self-purification process does not help the local people

of the Katoloni area.

5.2 Recommendations
From the study, findings and the conclusions deduced, recommendation that will help in the

restoration of the river to meet the standard set by the WHO were reached at. This is necessitated

by virtue of many rivers in Kenya being one of the major sources of domestic water and more so

to the community of Machakos who depend on that water for their wellbeing.

The Machakos wastewater treatment plant and production industries should improve on the

quality of their treatment of wastewater released to the environment so as to meet the required

standards before releasing it into a water body.

According to the NEMA, a standard safe distance of 30 meters should be upheld so as to protect

the adjacent land from farming activities and quarry which lead to the increase in sediment load

in the river.

The farming activities within the region should be done in such a way that the irrigation water

used are not allowed to drain back into the river.

The river utilization should be recorded by the authorities such as WRMA so as during dry

season it is minimized to meet the minimum water requirement for self-cleansing and use by the

aquatic life.

43
References
Basnyat P, Teeter L., Flynn K., and Lockaby B. (1999), “Relationship between landscape

characteristics and nonpoint source pollution inputs to coastal estuaries.” Environmental

Management. 23 (4): 539-549

Doria M.D.F. (2010), “Factors Influencing Public Perception of Drinking Water Quality.” Water

Polity 12: 1-19

Hezron Mogaka. (2006). Climate Variability and Water Resources Degradation in Kenya:

Improving Water Resources Development and Management. World Bank Publications.

Mallin M., Williams K., Esham E., and Lowe R. (2000), “Effects of Human Development on

bacteriological Water Quality on Coastal Watersheds.” Ecological Applications. 10 (4):

1047-1056.

McGhee TJ. 1991. Water supply and sewerage. McGraw-Hill International Editions, 6th ed.

Mines, R. & Lackey, L. (2009). Introduction to environmental engineering (1st ed., p. 90). New

York: Prentice Hall.

Rowe, D. & ʻAbd al-Majīd, ʻ. (1995). Handbook of wastewater reclamation and reuse (1st ed.,

pp. 240-256). Boca Raton, Fla.: Lewis Publishers.

Sheat A. (1992), “Public Perception of Drinking Water Quality.” Paper presented at the New

Zealand Water Supply and Disposal Association Annual Conference.

WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. (2004). Retrieved May 31, 2016, from

http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/guidelines/en/

44
Yen, T. (2007). Chemical processes for environmental engineering. London: Imperial College.

(2002). Alkalinity Test. IS: 3015 (Part 11).

(2002). Eperiment on Determination of pH. IS: 3025 (Part 11).

(2003). Experiment on Determination of Chlorides. IS: 3025 (Part 32).

(2002). Experiment on Determination of Conductivity. IS: 3025 (Part 14).

45
Bibliography.
"Water Pollution." West's Encyclopedia of American Law. 2005. Retrieved May 31, 2016 from

Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3437704663.html

Harvey, J., K. (n.d.). Water Encyclopedia. Retrieved May 31, 2016, from

http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Po-Re/Pollution-Sources-Point-and-Nonpoint.html

Hammer, M. J., & Hammer, M. J., Jr. (2008). Water and wastewater technology (6th ed.).

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

46
APPENDICES.
Appendix 1

Figure 12: Saturated Dissolved Oxygen

47
Appendix 2

Figure 13: DO Measurement (In-situ)

48