Ahmed S. Al Chalabi*
| Saja M. Naeem | Raad J. Alkhafaji
© 2023 IIETA. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
The Water Quality Index (WQI), a paramount tool for appraising potable water quality, significantly influences human health and survival. It is an index that quantifies the cumulative effect of various water quality parameters, which are integral in the computation of the index. This study was undertaken to calculate the WQI of ten water treatment facilities in Basra city, for the period spanning January to December 2021, through an evaluation of the physical and chemical attributes of the raw and treated water. Regrettably, it was found that none of the treatment plants under study produced water deemed fit for human consumption. Notably, only the Al-Garmma 1 plant was classified as delivering water of poor quality, while the remaining facilities produced water of either very poor quality or, more alarmingly, unfit for human consumption. This constitutes a grave public health concern for the residents of Basra Governorate. The findings necessitate the exploration of alternative, superior treatment methodologies to those currently employed in these facilities. It is a stark reminder of the critical role played by water treatment infrastructure in safeguarding public health and underscores the urgent need for enhancements in treatment processes in the Basra region. This study serves as a stepping-stone towards reforming water treatment practices, ultimately contributing to improved public health outcomes.
Basra city, Shatt Al-Arab River, water quality parameters, water treatment plant, WQI
Water, an elemental resource crucial to sustaining life, constitutes approximately 71% of the Earth's surface and is indispensable to all known life forms [1]. Despite its relative abundance, around a third of the world's population endures a severe scarcity of drinkable water, a situation exacerbated chiefly in underdeveloped countries due to rapid population growth and concomitant large-scale agricultural and economic expansion [2]. With 90% of polluted water being discharged into rivers and streams [3], the mounting demand for fresh water has inevitably rendered water management a pressing global concern [4]. Regular monitoring of water quality is integral to the sustainable management of water resources [5]. Water quality information delineates the biological, chemical, and physical constituents of water and their interactions, thereby facilitating its appropriate use [6]. The purification process, necessary to render water fit for human consumption, requires removal of undesirable physical elements such as taste and odor, as well as chemical and microbiological contaminants [7]. Various treatment processes, inclusive of flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection, are implemented in treatment plants to ensure the provision of safe water to communities [8]. The characteristics of the raw water source and the technical and operational conditions within the treatment plant units largely determine the quality of the treated water [9]. Regular evaluation of the operation of water treatment plants, via monitoring of the quality of treated water, is crucial to ensure compliance with legal requirements [10]. Assessment of raw and treated water quality typically involves physical, chemical, and biological parameters [11].
The Water Quality Index (WQI) is a mathematical tool that synthesizes a significant volume of water data (standard parameters) into a single number [12], serving as a pivotal and widely employed technique in ascertaining water quality and requisite treatment [13]. This index enables categorization of water for various uses and provides a standard for evaluating management strategies [14]. The Weighted Arithmetic Index Method (WAWQI), employed in this study, is a popular approach yielding practical and reasonable results.
Basra, a city in southern Iraq, predominantly relies on the Shatt al-Arab River for its water supply, which also caters to agricultural, industrial, and miscellaneous uses. Most of Basra's water treatment plants, classified as classic plants treating surface water via coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, and filtration, are situated alongside the Shatt al-Arab River [15]. Numerous studies have evaluated these plants' efficacy, either by assessing the quality of water they produce or by examining the efficiency of their individual treatment units.
The primary objectives of this study include evaluating the physical and chemical properties of the river water (raw water) and the water output from the treatment plants to determine the water quality of the Shatt al-Arab River and the treated water produced by these plants, using the WQI as a benchmark.
Iraq's main resource is surface water. Iraq is dependent on the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates and their tributaries, as well as the Shatt al-Arab river, which is made up of the Tigris and Euphrates' confluence in the town of Qurna in the Basra province (see Figure 1). With a length of 192 km, the water from the Shatt al-Arab river is discharged into the Arabian Gulf. Depending on the amount of water originating from Turkey and Syria, as well as the amount of rain and snow that falls, the amount of water varies from year to year [16].
Figure 1. Locations of water treatment plants in Basra city
Table 1. Details of water treatment plants
|
Water Treatment Plant Name |
Location |
Water Treatment Plant Type |
|
|
Longitude |
Latitude |
||
|
Mihejran |
47°51'14.49"E |
30°26'58.30"N |
Multiple package units |
|
Al Garmma 1 |
47°44'45.44"E |
30°34'20.64"N |
Multiple package units |
|
Al Jubila 1 |
47°48'46.42"E |
30°33'1.11"N |
Conventional |
|
Al Bradiah 1 |
47°51'20.00"E |
30°30'9.18"N |
Conventional |
|
Shatt Al Arab |
47°52'24.15"E |
30°32'49.95"N |
Multiple package units |
|
Al Zubair |
47°46'32.25"E |
30°13'14.34"N |
Conventional |
|
Al Fao |
48°26'53.33"E |
29°59'24.62"N |
Conventional |
|
Al Nashwa |
47°39'27.03"E |
30°45'22.20"N |
Conventional |
|
Al Qurna |
47°20'17.68"E |
30°58'27.00"N |
Conventional |
|
Al Ribat |
47°49'51.60"E |
30°32'9.60"N |
Multiple package units |
All water treatment plants in Basra were constructed along the banks of the Shatt al-Arab river because it is the city's primary source of fresh water. To determine the quality of the water produced by these plants and its appropriateness for drinking [17]. The city center and all of its associated districts were represented by the ten largest water treatment plants in Basra Governorate (Table 1), which were chosen for analysis of the water's chemical and physical properties and calculation of the water quality index for each of these plants.
To analyze the water provided to Basra for the time period from January 2021 to December 2021, ten water treatment plants in the governorate's center and its environs were chosen, and samples of the water leaving these plants were taken. Every month (Certain days of the month), water samples were collected for each of the stations listed in Table 1 in plastic bottles, which were then put in a cooler box and delivered to the lab.
Each sample was examined to determine 12 parameters, including pH, turbidity, Total Hardness (TH), electrical conductivity (EC), alkalinity, calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), chloride (Cl), sulfate (SO4), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), sodium (Na) and potassium (K) using guidelines from Examination of Water and Wastewater [18].
3.1 Water Quality Index (WQI)
One of the most common methods for expressing water quality is the WQI. We can determine the water quality and the necessary treatment procedures by knowing the value of the WQI [12]. A water quality index is a mathematical technique for expressing water quality by combining a lot of measurable water data into a single value. The WQI is a tool that may be used to compare the quality of water from various sources and to provide a rough understanding of any potential water issues in a given location [19].
Several national and international organizations have developed various water quality indexes [20]. In this study, the weighted arithmetic index approach of the parameter was implemented from numerous publications [21]. The most frequently measured water quality variables are used in the Weighted Arithmetic Water Quality Index Method, which categorizes the water quality according to the level of purity [22]. Twelve physicochemical factors (pH, EC, TDS, K, Na, Mg, Ca, TH, Cl, turbidity, alkalinity, and SO4) were taken into account in a four-stage method to calculate the WQI for the suggested case study.
Step 1: Calculating the inverse of the standardized maximum concentration (Cn) to obtain the proportionality constant "K" in Eq. (1). The number of parameters used in the investigation affects the value of k [23].
$K=\frac{1}{\sum_{n=1}^m \frac{1}{C_n}}$ (1)
Step 2: Using Eq. (2), the relative weight (Wn) was then calculated.
$W_n=\frac{K}{C_n}$ (2)
Step 3: The third step was utilizing Eq. (3) to generate the quality rating scale (Qn) for each parameter.
$Q_n=\left[\frac{S_n-S_0}{C_n-S_0}\right] * 100$ (3)
where,
Sn is the measured concentration of each parameter.
S0 is the ideal value of each parameter in pure water.
S0=0 (except pH =7.0 and Dissolved Oxygen = 14.6 mg/l).
Step 4: Lastly, the water quality index (WQI) was calculated using the Eq. (4).
$W Q I=\frac{\sum W_n * Q_n}{\sum W_n}$ (4)
A comparison is made between the value of the water quality index and Table 2, which is separated into stages based on water quality, from excellent to non-potable [24].
Table 2. Types of WQI [24]
|
Type of Water |
WQI Range |
Grinding |
Possible Usage |
|
Excellent water |
0 - 25 |
A |
Drinking, Irrigation and Industrial |
|
Good water |
26 - 50 |
B |
Domestic, Irrigation and Industrial |
|
Poor water |
51 - 75 |
C |
Irrigation and Industrial |
|
Very poor water |
76 - 100 |
D |
Irrigation |
|
Unfit for consumption |
˃ 100 |
E |
Restricted use for Irrigation |
In this study, Appendixes 1 and 2 display the statistical analysis of physical and chemical parameters of treated water from 10 Basra water treatment plants for the time period of January 2021 to December 2021. The parameters measured at these stations' maximum, minimum, mean, and standard deviation are displayed in Appendixes 1 and 2, along with a comparison to the WHO's [25] and Iraqi standards' [26] upper and lower bounds (Table 3).
Table 3. The classification of water based on Iraqi and WHO standards [25, 26]
|
Parameter |
Iraq Standard |
WHO Standard |
Unit |
|
pH |
6.5 - 8.5 |
6.5 - 8.6 |
|
|
Electrical Conductivity (EC) |
400 |
400 |
µs/cm |
|
Turbidity |
5 |
|
NTU |
|
Alkalinity |
20 |
50 - 150 |
mg/l |
|
Total Hardness (TH) |
500 |
500 |
mg/l |
|
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) |
1000 |
1000 |
mg/l |
|
Calcium (Ca) |
100 |
75 |
mg/l |
|
Sodium (Na) |
200 |
200 |
mg/l |
|
Potassium (K) |
12 |
12 |
mg/l |
|
Chloride (Cl) |
250 |
250 |
mg/l |
|
Magnesium (Mg) |
50 |
50 |
mg/l |
|
Sulfate (SO4) |
250 |
250 |
mg/l |
Figure 2 illustrates the pH range of the water leaving the water treatment plants used in this study. The Mihejran plant had the lowest pH levels, at 6.9, while the Al-Nashwa plant had the highest pH levels, at 8.2. All pH measurements fall within the acceptable levels established by the World Health Organization and Iraqi guidelines (see Table 3).
Electrical conductivity (EC) is a measure of positive ions (cations), which greatly affect the taste and thus the acceptability and palatability of water by the consumer [27]. EC is a metric that is assessed for an indirect indication of water salinity in the water and agriculture sectors [28]. This number represents the total amount of dissolved salts [29]. EC is influenced by temperature, ionic concertation, and the types of ions that are present in water. Therefore, EC offers a qualitative evaluation of the water quality [30]. Figure 3 illustrates the EC of treated water from all water treatment plants, which is greater than the permitted limits of the Iraqi standard and the WHO (see Table 3).
Colloidal and ultra-fine dispersions in water bodies are the main cause of turbidity. Drinking water quality in the distribution network is likely to deteriorate as a result of rising microbial counts, raised iron concentrations, or rising turbidity, all of which have an impact on the taste, odor, and color of water. Pathogens and opportunistic microorganisms can find refuge in turbidity [27]. In Figure 4, the results showed a variance in the amount of turbidity in the treated water from the treatment plants in this study, with the biggest amounts coming from the Al-Fao plant (24.9 NTU) and the Al-Qurna plant (24 NTU), and the lowest amounts from the Al-Nashwa plant 1 NTU (see Appendixes 1).
Alkalinity is a sign of a water's capacity to neutralize acids that have been added to it. This parameter therefore represents the buffering capacity of waters. The three most significant substances that can influence the alkalinity of water are dissolved hydroxides, carbonates, and bicarbonates [31]. Drinking water guidelines state that a water supply should have moderate amounts of alkalinity to reduce the corrosive effects of acidity [32]. Figure 5 demonstrates that, save from the Al-Ribat plant for Dec. 2021 and the Al-Zubair plant for Sep. 2021, all of the treated water from the treatment plants has an alkalinity concentration that is higher than what is permitted by WHO and Iraqi standards (see Table 3). Since the pH did not exceed 8.3, this means that the cause of the alkalinity of the treated water from these stations are bicarbonate ions [17].
Results for the treated water in the water treatment plants in this study during the period of Jan. 2021 to Dec. 2021 showed variations in the concentrations of parameters TH, TDS, Ca, Na, K, Cl, Mg, and SO4 (see Tables 2 and 3). The data showed that the Mihejran plant had the highest concentration of TH (1880 mg/l), while the Shatt Al-Arab plant had the lowest concentration 303 mg/l (Figure 6). In addition, the Mihejran plant's treated water had the highest concentration of TDS (7158 mg/l), while the Shatt Al-Arab plant had the lowest concentration 546 mg/l (Figure 7). In Figure 8, the Mihejran plant has the highest Ca concentration (380 mg/l), while the Shatt Al Arab and Al Ribat plants have the lowest calcium concentrations (62 mg/l). In Figure 9, the Mihejran plant has the highest Na concentration (1880 mg/l) and the Shatt Al Arab plant has the lowest sodium concentration (74 mg/l) in the treated water.
Figure 2. pH value of treated water from WTPs
Figure 3. EC concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 4. Turbidity concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 5. Alkalinity concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 6. Total hardness concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 7. Total dissolved solids concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 8. Ca concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 9. Na concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 10. Cl concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 11. K concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 10 illustrates the difference in Cl concentrations in the treated water, with the Mihejran plant having the greatest concentration (2860 mg/l) and the Al-Ribat plant having the lowest concentration (136 mg/l). Additionally, Figure 11 demonstrates that the Al-Garmma 1 plant records the lowest K concentration (3 mg/l) and the Mihejran plant records the highest K concentration (14.6 mg/l). The treated water in the Mihejran plant has the highest level of Mg (227 mg/l), while the Mg concentration in the Shatt Al-Arab plant is the lowest (36 mg/l), according to Figure 12. The concentration of SO4 in the water from the Al-Jubaila 1 plant has the lowest concentration (971 mg/l), while the Mihejran plant has the greatest concentration (1175 mg/l), this is demonstrated in Figure 13.
4.1 WQI analysis
As shown in Tables 2 and 3, the weighted arithmetic index method was used to calculate the water quality index by measuring a few physical and chemical characteristics of raw water (incoming water) and treated water (outgoing water) at ten water treatment plants in Basra Governorate from January 2021 to December 2021. Figure 14 depicts the value of the water quality of the treatment plants used in this study, and it reveals that none of them provide water that is potable or of high quality (excellent or good). Figure 14 demonstrates the poor water quality of the Al-Garmma 1 station's treated water. very Poor water quality is provided by the Al-Jubila 1, Al-Buradiah 1, Shatt Al-Arab, Al-Zubair, Al-Nashwa, and Al-Ribat plants. The plants in Mihejran, Al-Fao, and Al-Qurna provide water that is unfit for human consumption.
Three water quality readings were taken for each research plant, and Figure 15 illustrates the considerable variation between those values over the course of a complete year from January 2021 to December 2021. The first value shows the minimum value for the quality of treated water, the second value shows the average values (mean) for the quality of treated water, and the third value displays the maximum values for the year's treatment. If the minimum value for the quality of the treated water at these stations is used, it has been shown that the majority of the plants provide good water quality, but when the maximum value is used, we discover that all of the plants are unfit for human consumption.
Figure 12. Mg concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 13. SO4 concentration of treated water from WTPs
Figure 14. WQI for the raw and treated water for WTPs
Figure 15. Variation of WQI for the treated water for WTPs
The current study was carried out on the primary source of raw water (Shatt Al-Arab River) and treated water for ten treatment plants in the Basra Governorate during the time period of January 2021 to December 2021. By assessing some of the raw water's and treated water's physical and chemical properties, as well as the WQI for each of these plants. The results showed that:
|
Cn |
Standard maximum concentration typically provided by WHO (Table 3). |
|
m |
number of computed variables. |
|
K Sn |
The proportionality constant. The measured concentration of each parameter. |
|
S0 |
The ideal value of each parameter in pure water. S0=0 (except pH =7.0 and Dissolved Oxygen = 14.6 mg/l). |
Appendix 1. Physical and chemical parameters (Minimum–Maximum) of water from WTPs
|
Parameter |
Mihejran |
Al-Garmma 1 |
Al-Jubila 1 |
Al-Buradiah 1 |
Shatt Al-Arab |
Al-Zubair |
Al-Fao |
Al-Nashwa |
Al-Qurna |
Al-Ribat |
|
Raw Water |
||||||||||
|
pH |
7.21-7.35 |
7.38-7.75 |
7.41-7.85 |
7.32-7.89 |
7.34-8.26 |
7.29-8.09 |
7.12-8.04 |
7.29-8.29 |
7.09-8.04 |
7.35-8.04 |
|
EC (µs/cm) |
3379-10970 |
1300-5446 |
1356-4315 |
1836-5199 |
908-6692 |
1337-5030 |
1947-5509 |
1551-5808 |
1181-5756 |
871-4718 |
|
Turb.(NTU) |
4.2-22.2 |
3-27.3 |
5.8-20.7 |
5.2-17.8 |
4.5-90 |
5.8-37.2 |
5-95 |
2.1-35.5 |
2.7-88 |
10-23 |
|
Alka. (mg/l) |
148-200 |
128-160 |
130-160 |
124-156 |
120-168 |
120-156 |
142-190 |
122-160 |
126-174 |
120-160 |
|
TH (mg/l) |
968-1880 |
414-1379 |
440-1170 |
576-1307 |
303-1288 |
432-1232 |
528-1332 |
472-1464 |
382-1392 |
296-1239 |
|
TDS (mg/l) |
2138-7158 |
796-3516 |
818-2704 |
1100-3248 |
564-4318 |
822-3200 |
1172-3456 |
932-3696 |
726-3682 |
526-2964 |
|
Ca (mg/l) |
198-380 |
86-277 |
86-237 |
122-263 |
62-269 |
88-250 |
112-269 |
96-298 |
78-281 |
59-240 |
|
Na (mg/l) |
363-1880 |
107-701 |
104-488 |
152-616 |
81-1056 |
99-655 |
208-840 |
140-728 |
107-703 |
75-542 |
|
K (mg/l) |
9.7-14.6 |
5.2-11.8 |
5-10 |
6-10.6 |
3.5-12.4 |
4.2-11 |
5-13.6 |
3.7-13.3 |
5-12.4 |
3-12 |
|
Cl (mg/l) |
540-2860 |
168-1065 |
180-760 |
234-930 |
146-1610 |
150-1015 |
320-1275 |
226-1125 |
162-1075 |
136-825 |
|
Mg (mg/l) |
115-227 |
49-168 |
53-141 |
60-158 |
36-150 |
51-148 |
61-161 |
57-175 |
46-168 |
36-150 |
|
SO4 (mg/l) |
803-1723 |
247-1200 |
272-981 |
412-1128 |
141-1108 |
265-1033 |
358-1151 |
302-1251 |
216-1228 |
134-1074 |
|
Treated Water |
||||||||||
|
pH |
6.92-7.35 |
7.11-7.55 |
7.1-7.8 |
7.19-7.86 |
7.19-8.1 |
7.12-7.66 |
7.03-8 |
7.09-8.24 |
7.03-8 |
7.31-7.78 |
|
EC (µs/cm) |
3360-10970 |
1273-4908 |
1270-4290 |
1824-5022 |
887-6680 |
1325-5003 |
1904-5916 |
1538-5794 |
1178-5748 |
923-4383 |
|
Turb.(NTU) |
3-22.2 |
1.5-10.4 |
3.5-16.6 |
4.2-10.1 |
3-18.2 |
1.5-15 |
1.1-24.9 |
43101 |
1.2-24 |
2.9-12.8 |
|
Alka. (mg/l) |
128-200 |
120-150 |
120-150 |
122-150 |
120-160 |
112-152 |
140-190 |
122-152 |
120-170 |
118-158 |
|
TH (mg/l) |
952-1880 |
407-1194 |
440-1162 |
576-1263 |
303-1288 |
440-1216 |
520-1384 |
472-1456 |
382-1392 |
311-1178 |
|
TDS (mg/l) |
2122-7158 |
778-3084 |
782-2690 |
1094-3132 |
546-4286 |
804-3170 |
1148-3682 |
924-3682 |
718-3640 |
568-2782 |
|
Ca (mg/l) |
192-380 |
83-242 |
86-234 |
122-254 |
62-269 |
88-246 |
109-278 |
96-294 |
78-281 |
62-240 |
|
Na(mg/l) |
358-1880 |
100-622 |
101-478 |
146-607 |
74-1043 |
96-644 |
204-889 |
137-725 |
104-696 |
82-510 |
|
K (mg/l) |
9.5-14.6 |
3-13 |
4.7-9.6 |
5.7-11 |
3.2-12 |
4.2-10 |
5-14.4 |
3.5-13 |
5-12 |
3.3-11.4 |
|
Cl (mg/l) |
536-2860 |
160-950 |
172-750 |
230-920 |
140-1600 |
146-1000 |
316-1375 |
222-1120 |
159-1065 |
136-790 |
|
Mg (mg/l) |
115-227 |
47-144 |
51-141 |
60-153 |
36-150 |
51-147 |
60-168 |
57-176 |
46-168 |
38-177 |
|
SO4 (mg/l) |
798-1723 |
242-1011 |
265-971 |
410-1087 |
138-1105 |
272-1018 |
351-1200 |
300-1247 |
214-1225 |
149-995 |
Appendix 2. Physical and chemical parameters (mean ± standard deviation) of water from WTPs
|
Parameter |
Mihejran |
Al-Garmma 1 |
Al-Jubila 1 |
Al-Bradiah 1 |
Shatt Al-Arab |
Al-Zubair |
Al-Fao |
Al-Nashwa |
Al-Qurna |
Al-Ribat |
|
Raw Water |
||||||||||
|
pH |
7.4±0.1 |
7.5±0.1 |
7.6±0.1 |
7.5±0.2 |
7.7±0.2 |
7.7±0.2 |
7.6±0.3 |
7.7±0.3 |
7.7±0.3 |
7.7±0.2 |
|
EC (µs/cm) |
6404±2402 |
3204±1444 |
2647±868 |
3669±836 |
3103±1682 |
2543±1228 |
3440±1297 |
3467±1302 |
3282±1482 |
2383±1366 |
|
Turb. (NTU) |
10.7±6.3 |
10.5±6.4 |
12.7±4.4 |
9.7±3.6 |
22.7±22.1 |
15.8±9.7 |
24.7±25.2 |
13.8±11.2 |
25.6±24.2 |
13.5±3.7 |
|
Alka. (mg/l) |
175±21 |
141±8 |
142±10 |
143±9 |
142±13 |
137±11 |
156±13 |
143±11 |
148±14 |
138±11 |
|
TH (mg/l) |
1380±309 |
881±328 |
774±220 |
1000±183 |
825±336 |
721±265 |
826±266 |
936±316 |
874±332 |
691±322 |
|
TDS (mg/l) |
4120±1610 |
2003±939 |
1640±552 |
2303±530 |
1948±1085 |
1592±789 |
2140±853 |
2193±862 |
2046±952 |
1477±871 |
|
Ca (mg/l) |
280±61 |
180±65 |
157±44 |
204±35 |
169±68 |
146±54 |
169±53 |
191±63 |
178±66 |
140±63 |
|
Na (mg/l) |
929±489 |
351±203 |
265±110 |
406±136 |
357±272 |
271±181 |
435±206 |
394±181 |
371±200 |
242±173 |
|
K (mg/l) |
12.7±1.6 |
8.2±2.4 |
7.4±1.5 |
9.1±1.3 |
8.1±3.1 |
6.8±2.3 |
8.3±2.8 |
8.4±2.8 |
8.6±2.5 |
7±3.3 |
|
Cl (mg/l) |
1400±733 |
540±307 |
410±169 |
618±211 |
548±409 |
416±276 |
658±313 |
608±280 |
570±303 |
380±260 |
|
Mg (mg/l) |
166±38 |
106±40 |
93±27 |
119±25 |
98±40 |
87±32 |
98±33 |
112±38 |
105±41 |
83±39 |
|
SO4 (mg/l) |
1197±310 |
710±323 |
603±216 |
832±182 |
656±336 |
555±259 |
660±254 |
756±302 |
697±337 |
520±317 |
|
Treated Water |
||||||||||
|
pH |
7.1±0.1 |
7.3±0.1 |
7.5±0.2 |
7.4±0.2 |
7.6±0.3 |
7.4±0.2 |
7.5±0.4 |
7.6±0.4 |
7.5±0.2 |
7.5±0.2 |
|
EC (µs/cm) |
6309±2365 |
2861±1376 |
2562±849 |
3631±813 |
3092±1678 |
2450±1177 |
3475±1448 |
3456±1299 |
3258±1488 |
2325±1174 |
|
Turb. (NTU) |
7.4±5.6 |
4.2±2.9 |
7.4±3.8 |
5.5±1.7 |
7.1±4.5 |
7.2±3.9 |
9.3±6.4 |
6.1±4.9 |
9.4±7.6 |
6.6±2.8 |
|
Alka. (mg/l) |
162±23 |
134±9 |
137±9 |
140±8 |
140±12 |
134±12 |
152±14 |
141±10 |
144±16 |
135±11 |
|
TH (mg/l) |
1355±309 |
809±306 |
746±211 |
993±176 |
821±335 |
695±259 |
833±289 |
934±313 |
864±333 |
678±275 |
|
TDS (mg/l) |
4038±1579 |
1833±835 |
1576±536 |
2269±519 |
1937±1083 |
1527±757 |
2158±941 |
2166±850 |
2020±951 |
1438±747 |
|
Ca (mg/l) |
274±62 |
167±59 |
152±42 |
202±33 |
168±69 |
142±53 |
170±58 |
190±62 |
176±66 |
138±56 |
|
Na (mg/l) |
911±475 |
304±190 |
253±107 |
399±139 |
354±270 |
260±172 |
440±229 |
390±180 |
365±199 |
235±154 |
|
K (mg/l) |
12.3±1.6 |
7.5±3 |
6.9±1.4 |
8.8±1.4 |
7.8±3 |
6.3±2 |
8.4±3.3 |
8.2±2.8 |
8.3±2.4 |
6.8±2.6 |
|
Cl (mg/l) |
1380±714 |
500±274 |
393±164 |
612±215 |
546±407 |
402±265 |
668±351 |
603±278 |
564±302 |
373±234 |
|
Mg (mg/l) |
163±38 |
98±37 |
89±26 |
119±24 |
98±40 |
83±31 |
99±35 |
112±38 |
103±41 |
86±42 |
|
SO4 (mg/l) |
1175±310 |
683±293 |
577±209 |
823±176 |
652±333 |
529±251 |
665±278 |
752±299 |
687±338 |
506±267 |
[1] Tyagi, S., Sharma, B., Singh, P., Dobhal, R. (2013). Water quality assessment in terms of water quality index. American Journal of Water Resources, 1(3): 34-38. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajwr-1-3-3
[2] Lateef, Z.Q., Al-Madhhachi, A.S.T., Sachit, D.E. (2020). Evaluation of water quality parameters in Shatt Al-Arab, Southern Iraq, using spatial analysis. Hydrology, 7(4): 79. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology7040079
[3] Rahi, K.A., Al-Madhhachi, A.S.T., Al-Hussaini, S.N. (2019). Assessment of surface water resources of eastern Iraq. Hydrology, 6(3): 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology6030057
[4] Mansor, M., Kamel, B.T., Jomaa’h, M.M. (2022). Quality assessment of water quality in Iraqi cities. Journal of Applied Engineering Science, 20(1): 186-194. https://doi.org/10.5937/jaes0-31719
[5] Esengül, K.Ö.S.E., Çiçek, A., Uysal, K., Tokatli, C., Arslan, N., Emiroğlu, Ö. (2016). Evaluation of surface water quality in Porsuk Stream. Anadolu University Journal of Science and Technology C-Life Sciences and Biotechnology, 4(2): 81-93.
[6] Taner, M.Ü., Üstün, B., Erdinçler, A. (2011). A simple tool for the assessment of water quality in polluted lagoon systems: A case study for Küçükçekmece Lagoon, Turkey. Ecological Indicators, 11(2): 749-756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.08.003
[7] Mohammed, A.A., Shakir, A.A. (2012). Evaluation the performance of Al-wahdaa project drinking water treatment plant: A case study in Iraq. International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences, 1(3): 130-138.
[8] Alobaidy, A.H.M.J., Maulood, B.K., Kadhem, A.J. (2010). Evaluating raw and treated water quality of Tigris River within Baghdad by index analysis. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 2(7): 2235. https://doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.2010.27072
[9] Zhang, K., Achari, G., Sadiq, R., Langford, C.H., Dore, M.H. (2012). An integrated performance assessment framework for water treatment plants. Water Research, 46(6): 1673-1683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.12.006
[10] Almuktar, S., Hamdan, A.N.A., Scholz, M. (2020). Assessment of the effluents of Basra City main water treatment plants for drinking and irrigation purposes. Water, 12(12): 3334. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12123334
[11] Raman, B.V., Bouwmeester, R., Mohan, S. (2009). Fuzzy logic water quality index and importance of water quality parameters. Air, Soil and Water Research, 2: ASWR-S2156. https://doi.org/10.4137/aswr.s2156
[12] Graimed, B.H., Farhan, S.L. (2016). Evaluation of potable central water services project Al-Kut City using Weighted Arithmetic Index Method. Association of Arab Universities Journal of Engineering Sciences, 23(2): 1-8. https://jaaru.org/index.php/auisseng/article/view/98.
[13] Acharya, S., Sharma, S.K., Khandegar, V. (2018). Assessment of groundwater quality by water quality indices for irrigation and drinking in South West Delhi, India. Data in Brief, 18: 2019-2028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.04.120
[14] Bordalo, A.A., Teixeira, R., Wiebe, W.J. (2006). A water quality index applied to an international shared river basin: The case of the Douro River. Environmental Management, 38: 910-920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0037-6
[15] Al Chalabi, A.S. (2020). Assessment of drinking water quality and the efficiency of the Al-buradieiah water treatment plant in Basra city. Nat. Environ. Poll. Technol, 19(3): 1057-1065. https://doi.org/10.46488/NEPT.2020.v19i03.016
[16] Al Chalabi, A.S. (2020). Evaluation of the efficiency and quality of the water of the Al-Hartha water treatment plant in Basra city. Current World Environment, 15(1): 75-86. https://doi.org/10.12944/CWE.15.1.11
[17] Naeem, S.M., Al Chalabi, A.S., Al-Marj, O.K. (2022). Assessment of WQI for the Al-Jubalia water treatment plant. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 23(10): 216-228. https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/152517.
[18] APHA. (1998). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste water (20 ed.): American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C., USA. https://beta-static.fishersci.com.
[19] Ismail, A.H., Robescu, D. (2019). Assessment of water quality of the Danube River using water quality indices technique. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, 18(8): 1727-1737.
[20] Mohammed, R.A. (2013). Water quality index for basrah water supply. Engineering and Technology Journal, 31(8a): 1543-1555.
[21] Imneisi, I.B., Aydin, M. (2016). Water quality index (WQI) for main source of drinking water (Karaçomak Dam) in Kastamonu City, Turkey. Journal of uoJ Environmental & Analytical Toxicology, 6: 407. https://doi.org/10.4172/2161-0525.1000407
[22] Hamdan, A.N.A. (2017). The use of water quality index to evaluate groundwater quality in West of Basrah Wells. Kufa Journal of Engineering, 8(1): 51–64.
[23] Aliyu, G.A., Jamil, N.R.B., Adam, M.B., Zulkeflee, Z. (2019). Assessment of Guinea Savanna River system to evaluate water quality and water monitoring networks. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 5(3): 345-356. https://doi.org/10.22034/GJESM.2019.03.07
[24] Chaterjee, C., Raziuddin, M. (2002). Determination of water quality index (WQI) of a degraded river in Asanol Industrial area, Raniganj, Burdwan, West Bengal. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, 2: 181-189.
[25] World Health Organization. (2008). Guidelines for drinking-water quality: Second addendum. 1: Recommendations. Geneva, Switzerland.
[26] IME. (2020). Iraqi Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality and Wastewater. Iraq Ministry of Environment. Baghdad, Iraq. https://pdfcoffee.com/-447--pdf-free.html.
[27] Sebastian, A., Frassetto, L.A., Sellmeyer, D.E., Morris Jr, R.C. (2006). The evolution-informed optimal dietary potassium intake of human beings greatly exceeds current and recommended intakes. Seminars in Nephrology, 26(6): 447-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semnephrol.2006.10.003
[28] Sehar, S., Naz, I., Ali, M.I., Ahmed, S. (2011). Monitoring of physico-chemical and microbiological analysis of under ground water samples of district Kallar Syedan, Rawalpindi-Pakistan. Research Journal of Chemical Sciences, 1(8): 24-30.
[29] Singh, S.K., Kumar, L. (2014). Characterization of rural drinking water sources in Bhiwani district, Haryana: A case study. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Innovations, 2(4): 27-37.
[30] Udayalaxmi, G., Himabindu, D., Ramadass, G. (2010). Geochemical evaluation of groundwater quality in selected areas of Hyderabad, AP, India. Indian journal of Science and Technology, 3(5): 546-553.
[31] Eassa, A.M., Mahmood, A.A. (2012). An Assessment of the treated water quality for some drinking water supplies at Basrah. Journal of Basrah Researches (Sciences), 38(3): 95-105.
[32] United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Wastewater Management. Municipal Support Division, National Risk Management Research Laboratory. (US). Technology Transfer, & Support Division. (2004). Guidelines for water reuse. US Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC, USA.
