Evaluating Drinking Water Treatment Methods in the Njala University and Neighboring Mokonde Communities in Southern Sierra Leone

A. Barrie, Abubakarr Swaray, M. Barrie, J. Beah
{"title":"Evaluating Drinking Water Treatment Methods in the Njala University and Neighboring Mokonde Communities in Southern Sierra Leone","authors":"A. Barrie, Abubakarr Swaray, M. Barrie, J. Beah","doi":"10.4236/nr.2021.128019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are always faced with the challenge of securing safe water for beneficial uses. Most communities lack a centralized water supply system and, thus, each residence utilizes the treatment method that they can afford. This study evaluated three treatment methods for drinking water in the Njala University and Mokonde communities in southern Sierra Leone. In the perceived natural treatment, residents in the Mokonde community believe that groundwater has been purified by the soil media and, hence, does not require further treatment. In the conventional treatment, the Njala University Water Works use sand filtration and chlorine disinfection to treat water from the Taia River. The third treatment method, first flush diversion, was introduced by Njala University researchers in 2014. We studied the populations of coliform bacteria and E. coli in untreated and treated water samples to determine if each of the treatment methods supported the beneficial use of drinking. This study concludes that the natural filtration does not remove pathogens in the well water. Even though the first flush and conventional treatments were efficient in reducing microbial populations in the water, the World Health Organization’s 100% removal guideline was not achieved most of the time. Therefore, all three treatment methods did not support the beneficial use of drinking. Further treatment was needed to render the water potable.","PeriodicalId":19086,"journal":{"name":"Natural Resources","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Natural Resources","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/nr.2021.128019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are always faced with the challenge of securing safe water for beneficial uses. Most communities lack a centralized water supply system and, thus, each residence utilizes the treatment method that they can afford. This study evaluated three treatment methods for drinking water in the Njala University and Mokonde communities in southern Sierra Leone. In the perceived natural treatment, residents in the Mokonde community believe that groundwater has been purified by the soil media and, hence, does not require further treatment. In the conventional treatment, the Njala University Water Works use sand filtration and chlorine disinfection to treat water from the Taia River. The third treatment method, first flush diversion, was introduced by Njala University researchers in 2014. We studied the populations of coliform bacteria and E. coli in untreated and treated water samples to determine if each of the treatment methods supported the beneficial use of drinking. This study concludes that the natural filtration does not remove pathogens in the well water. Even though the first flush and conventional treatments were efficient in reducing microbial populations in the water, the World Health Organization’s 100% removal guideline was not achieved most of the time. Therefore, all three treatment methods did not support the beneficial use of drinking. Further treatment was needed to render the water potable.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估塞拉利昂南部Njala大学和邻近Mokonde社区的饮用水处理方法
撒哈拉以南非洲(SSA)的农村社区一直面临着确保安全用水用于有益用途的挑战。大多数社区缺乏集中供水系统,因此,每个居民都使用他们负担得起的处理方法。本研究评估了塞拉利昂南部Njala大学和Mokonde社区饮用水的三种处理方法。在感知的自然处理中,Mokonde社区的居民认为地下水已经被土壤介质净化,因此不需要进一步处理。在常规处理中,Njala大学水厂使用砂过滤和氯消毒来处理来自Taia河的水。第三种治疗方法是第一次冲水分流,由Njala大学的研究人员于2014年引入。我们研究了未经处理和处理的水样中大肠菌群和大肠杆菌的数量,以确定每一种处理方法是否支持有益的饮用。本研究表明,自然过滤不能去除井水中的病原菌。尽管第一次冲洗和常规处理在减少水中微生物数量方面是有效的,但世界卫生组织100%去除水中微生物的指导方针在大多数情况下并没有实现。因此,这三种治疗方法都不支持饮酒的有益使用。需要进一步处理以使水可饮用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Legacy Gold Mine Sites & Dumps in the Witwatersrand: Challenges and Required Action Natural Environment and Landscape Energy of Western Georgia Benthic Macroinvertebrates of Bull Run Creek: A Pre-Restoration Baseline Embryonic Development and Eclosion Season of New Species Berastagia (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) from Taiwan Regeneration Potential of Woody Species at the Side of Secondary Roads Post-Logging of Loundoungou-Toukoulaka Forest Management Unit, Republic of the Congo
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1