Seasonal Assessment of Water Quality of Hand-Dug Wells Used for Drinking and Agricultural Purposes in Makeni, Northern Province, Sierra Leone

Volume: 11 | Issue: 01 | Year 2025 | Subscription
International Journal of Environmental Chemistry
Received Date: 02/06/2025
Acceptance Date: 02/12/2025
Published On: 2025-04-24
First Page: 159
Last Page: 172

Journal Menu


By: Yahaya Kudush Kawa, Gibrilla Thullah, Victoria Olufemi Danke Kawa, and Prince T. Mabey

Chemistry Department, Njala University, Njala Campus, Bo, Sierra Leone.
Institute of Environmental Management and Quality Control, Njala University, Njala Campus, Bo, Sierra Leone.
Mathematics Department, Milton Margai Technical University, Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Institute of Environmental Management and Quality Control, Njala University, Njala Campus, Bo, Sierra Leone

Abstract

The study assesses four Wells’ groundwater quality in terms of its suitability for agricultural irrigation and drinking purposes. From January to December 2024, the following physicochemical parameters pH, turbidity, electrical conductivity (EC), total dissolved solids (TDS), ammonia, nitrate, fluoride, and chromium were examined. To evaluate each Well’s overall water quality, the water quality index (WQI) was computed. Well two (90.56) and Well three (71.14) WQI values show that the water is good for drinking in relation to their physicochemical analyses. Well one (350.17) and Well four (418.58) WQI values show that the water is unsuitable for drinking. This is primarily due to elevated chromium levels in Well one and Well two which render their water not suitable for drinking purposes. Well three, with the lowest WQI of 71.14 is good for irrigation purposes since the farmers are using these Wells for watering their crops during the dry season. Lower WQI values suggest that the water is of better quality in terms of irrigation purposes, with fewer contaminants and lower levels of salinity or hardness is beneficial for plant growth and the health of the soil. Well two also have a relatively low WQI of 90.56, which makes it another good source for irrigation purposes. Well One and Well Four have much higher WQI values, which might indicate poorer water quality and could be less suitable for irrigation. High WQI values often correlate with higher levels of contaminants which could affect crops and soil over time.

Loading

Citation:

How to cite this article: Yahaya Kudush Kawa, Gibrilla Thullah, Victoria Olufemi Danke Kawa, and Prince T. Mabey, Seasonal Assessment of Water Quality of Hand-Dug Wells Used for Drinking and Agricultural Purposes in Makeni, Northern Province, Sierra Leone. International Journal of Environmental Chemistry. 2025; 11(01): 159-172p.

How to cite this URL: Yahaya Kudush Kawa, Gibrilla Thullah, Victoria Olufemi Danke Kawa, and Prince T. Mabey, Seasonal Assessment of Water Quality of Hand-Dug Wells Used for Drinking and Agricultural Purposes in Makeni, Northern Province, Sierra Leone. International Journal of Environmental Chemistry. 2025; 11(01): 159-172p. Available from:https://journalspub.com/publication/ijec/article=16369

Refrences:

  1. Al-Heety EAM, Turki AM, Al-Othman EMA. Assessment of the water quality index of Euphrates River between Heet and Ramadi Cities, Iraq. Int J Basic Appl Sci. 2011;11(6):38.
  2. Akoteyon IS, Omotayo AO, Soladoye O, Olaoye HO. Determination of water quality index and suitability of urban river for municipal water supply in Lagos-Nigeria. Eur J Sci Res. 2011;54(2):263–271.
  3. Balan I, Shivakumar M, Kumar PM. An assessment of groundwater quality using water quality index in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. Chron Young Sci. 2012;3(2):146.
  4. Katyal D. Water quality indices used for surface water vulnerability assessment. Int J Environ Sci. 2011;2(1).
  5. Brown RM, McClelland NI, Deininger RA, O’Connor MF. A water quality index—crashing the psychological barrier. In: Indicators of Environmental Quality: Proceedings of a symposium held during the AAAS meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, December 26–31, 1971. US: Springer; 1972. 173–182.
  6. Gebrekidan Mebrahtu GM, Samuel Zerabruk SZ. Concentration of heavy metals in drinking water from urban areas of the Tigray region, northern Ethiopia.
  7. Kakati SS, Sarma HP. Studies on water quality index of drinking water of Lakhimpur District. Indian J Environ Prot. 2007;27(5):425.
  8. Li P, Tian R, Xue C, Wu J. Progress, opportunities, and key fields for groundwater quality research under the impacts of human activities in China with a special focus on western China. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;24:13224–13234.
  9. Ward MH, Jones RR, Brender JD, De Kok TM, Weyer PJ, Nolan BT, et al. Drinking water nitrate and human health: an updated review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(7):1557.
  10. Kapoor D, Singh MP. Heavy metal contamination in water and its possible sources. In: Heavy metals in the environment. Elsevier; 2021. 179–189.
  11. Nguyen VD, Sreenivasan N, Lam E, Ayers T, Kargbo D, Dafae F, et al. Cholera epidemic associated with consumption of unsafe drinking water and street-vended water—Eastern Freetown, Sierra Leone, 2012. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014;90(3):518.
  12. Sajil Kumar PJ, James EJ. Physicochemical parameters and their sources in groundwater in Thirupathur region, Tamilnadu, South India. Appl Water Sci. 2013;3:219–228.
  13. Ramakrishnaiah CR, Sadashivaiah C, Ranganna G. Assessment of water quality index for the groundwater in Tumkur Taluk, Karnataka State, India. J Chem. 2009;6(2):523–530.
  14. Reza R, Singh G. Assessment of groundwater quality status by using water quality index method in Orissa, India. World Appl Sci J. 2010;9(12):1392–1397.
  15. Sharma D, Kansal A. Water quality analysis of River Yamuna using water quality index in the national capital territory, India (2000–2009). Appl Water Sci. 2011;1:147–157.
  16. Kushtagi S, Srinivas P. Studies on chemistry and water quality index of groundwater in Chincholi Taluk, Gulbarga district, Karnataka, India. Int J Environ Sci. 2012;2(3):1154–1160.
  17. Srinivas P, Kumar GP, Prasad AS, Hemalatha T. Generation of groundwater quality index map—A case study. Civ Environ Res. 2011;1(2):9–21.
  18. Štambuk-Giljanović N. Water quality evaluation by index in Dalmatia. Water Res. 1999;33(16):3423–3440.
  19. Rao NS, Dinakar A, Sun L. Estimation of groundwater pollution levels and specific ionic sources in the groundwater, using a comprehensive approach of geochemical ratios, pollution index of groundwater, unmix model and land use/land cover—A case study. J Contam Hydrol. 2022;248:103990.
  20. Van der Ploeg MJ, Appels WM, Cirkel DG, Oosterwoud MR, Witte JP, Van der Zee SE. Microtopography as a driving mechanism for ecohydrological processes in shallow groundwater systems. Vadose Zone J. 2012;11(3):vzj2011–0098.
  21. Toma JJ. Evaluating raw and treated water quality of Greater Zab River within Erbil city by index analysis. Int J Emerg Technol Comput Appl Sci. 2013;3(2):147–154.
  22. Wang Y, Li P. Appraisal of shallow groundwater quality with human health risk assessment in different seasons in rural areas of the Guanzhong Plain (China). Environ Res. 2022;207:112210.
  23. Xie X, Wang Y, Li J, Su C, Duan M. Hydrogeochemical and isotopic investigations on groundwater salinization in the Datong Basin, Northern China. J Am Water Resour Assoc. 2013;49(2):402–414.
  24. Zhao H, Song F, Su F, Shen Y, Li P. Removal of cadmium from contaminated groundwater using a novel silicon/aluminum nanomaterial: an experimental study. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2021;80:234–247.