الفهرس 
INTRODUCTIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 124 |  |  |
| | | from | 124 | | |
Abstract
The Drinking Water Canal was constructed in 1988 because of the pollution in El-Mahmodia Canal. It was about 16km in length. This canal supplied water to Bab Sharki, ElManshia 1, ElManshia 2, ElNozha and Forn ElGeraia Water Purification Plants (WPPs) ) and Medor company in Alexandria. It received polluted from:
1- Domestic wastes from the illegal settlements of inhabitants living along the banks of the canal.
2- The different pollution sources distributed intermittently along the canal such as dead animals and wastes produced by human activities as cleaning clothes and utensils and others.
3- Ayadi Elmostakbal hospital and Acasia club disposal its sewage to the Drinking Water Canal
4- Tard Elkalaa Drain when the level of water in it was higher than the level of water in the Drinking Water Canal, seepage was happen to the Drinking Water Canal.
5- The water of the Drinking water Canal was polluted from El-Mahmodia Canal.
The aim of the present study is to determine the association between the effects of catchment pollution sources on the quality of Drinking Water Canal, Alexandria, Egypt by determine the chemical and biological pollution indicators in raw water flowing in the Drinking Water Canal, determine the sources of water pollution along Drinking Water Canal and design a mathematical model for Drinking Water Canal pollutants.
Six sampling sites were chosen to determine the changes in chemical and biological characteristic of the Drinking Water Canal. The selected locations were as following:
Site 1: The intake of Drinking Water Canal on El-Mahmoudia Canal.
Site 2: Around 4 km downstream the intake of Drinking Water Canal.
Site 3: Around 750 m upstream from Kalaa Pumping Station.
Site 4: At Kalaa Pumping Station.
Site 5: Around 4 km downstream Kalaa Pumping Station.
Site 6: The intake of Elmanshia 1 Water Purification Plant.
Twelve samples from each site were collected for analysis. Analyses were conducted in the laboratory for BOD5, COD, DO, Ammonia, NO2, NO3, Total Phosphate, TBC, TC, FC, FS and algae. The analyses were performed according to the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater except BOD5 according to Hach Company and Ammonia according to The Examination of Waters and Water Supplies.
The pollution indicators:
BOD5 mean values were ranged from (12.63- 15.85 mg/l) at site 5 and site 2. COD mean values were ranged from (51.46- 60.39 mg/l) at site 1 and site 2. DO mean values were ranged from (4.65- 5.54 mg/l) at site 6 and site 4. Ammonia mean values were ranged from (1.29- 2.55 mg/l) at site 1 and site 5. NO2 mean values were ranged from (0.41- 0.49 mg/l) at site 1 and site 6. NO3 mean values were ranged from (6.45- 7.69 mg/l) at site 3 and site 6. Total Phosphate mean values were ranged from (0.23- 0.25 mg/l) at site 6 and site 1,4 . Total Bacterial Count geometric mean (GM) values were ranged from (3.5×103- 7.7 ×103 cfu/1ml) at site 6 and site 1. TC geometric mean (GM) values were ranged from (2×103 - 7.8×103 cfu/100ml) at site 6 and site 1. FC geometric mean (GM) values were ranged from (2.4×102 - 9.8×102 cfu/100ml) at site 6 and site 1. FS geometric mean (GM) values were ranged from (3.3×102 – 2.5×103 cfu/100ml) at site 6 and site 1. Number of algae geometric mean (GM) values were ranged from (4.7×105 - 6.4×105 U/l) at site 6 and site 2.
from the foregoing it is clear that the BOD5, COD and Ammonia are high in the Drinking Water Canal according to the law No 48 for year 1982.
Correlation Coefficients Analysis
TBC has significant and high positive correlation with FC, FS, and very strong negative correlation with NO2. TC has significant and high positive correlation with FC, FS, DO, NO3 and negative correlation with Ammonia. FC has significant and very strong positive correlation with FS, NO3 and very strong negative correlation with Ammonia and Nitrite. FS has high negative correlation with NO2. BOD5 has strong positive correlation with COD. DO has significant and very strong positive correlation with Nitrate and strong negative correlation with Ammonia.
Modeling of water pollution indicators
(FC) model
This model suggest that the prediction of FC by measuring of the two predictors parameters Ammonia and NO2 of water in Drinking Water Canal in any sites. This model may also be suggestive tool predicting R2= 98.2%, which means that 98.2% of total variation in FC can be explained by the linear relationship between independent variables.
Ammonia model
These models suggest that the prediction of Ammonia by measuring of the one predictor parameter FC of water in Drinking Water Canal in any sites in first model and two predictors parameters FC and NO2 in second model. These models may also be suggestive tool predicting R2= 81.9% and R2= 95.9% which means that 81.9% and 95.9% of total variation in Ammonia can be explained by the linear relationship between independent variables.
FS model
These models suggest that the prediction of FS by measuring of the one predictor parameter TBC of water in Drinking Water Canal in any sites in first model and two predictors parameters TBC and Ammonia in second model and three predictors parameters TBC, Ammonia and FC in third model. These models may also be suggestive tool predicting R2= 94.2% , R2= 99.1% and R2=100% which means that 94.2% , 99.1% and 100% of total variation in FS can be explained by the linear relationship between independent variables.
BOD model
There was only one variable COD was selected in stepwise regression but no significant, values more than 0.05.
DO model
There was only one variable TC was selected in stepwise regression but no significant, values more than 0.05.
PO4 model
There was no valid regression. When independent variables were entered into equation, no variable was selected in stepwise regression. Hence, no model was selected for this variable.
Algae model
There was no valid regression. When independent variables were entered into equation, no variable was selected in stepwise regression. Hence, no model was selected for this variable.
TC model
There were only two variables NO3 and FS were selected in stepwise regression but no significant, values more than 0.05.
TBC model
This model suggest that the prediction of TBC by measuring of the one predictor parameter FS of water in Drinking Water Canal in any sites. This model may also be suggestive tool predicting R2= 94.2%, which means that 94.2% of total variation in FC can be explained by the linear relationship between independent variables.
NO2 model
This model suggest that the prediction of NO2 by measuring of the one predictor parameter TBC of water in Drinking Water Canal in any sites. This model may also be suggestive tool predicting R2= 87.1%, which means that 87.1% of total variation in FC can be explained by the linear relationship between independent variables.
Table (7.1): Summarize for regression model between dependent and independent variables for (6) sites in the Drinking Water Canal
Dependent variables R2% Adj R2% Predictors
FC 98.2% 97.1% Ammonia, NO2
Ammonia 81.9%
95.9% 77.4%
93.2% FC
FC, NO2
FS 94.2%
99.1%
100% 92.8%
98.6%
99.9% TBC
TBC, Ammonia
TBC, Ammonia, FC
TBC 94.2% 92.8% FS
NO2 87.1% 83.8% TBC
from the foregoing it is clear that the models for water pollution indicators could predict the dependent variables by independent variables in any sites in the Drinking Water Canal.
Study recommended that:
1- Enforcement of the Egyptian law No. 48/82 when any violation to the law is made.
2- To carry out Environmental Impact Assessment for any new activities that would affect the Drinking Water Canal in the future.
3- To control the garbage and solid waste dumping in to the canal or on the banks of canal.
4- Develop new models to include the other pollution indicators.
5- Continuous monitory program should be carried out to detect the early defects in the canal and any discharge of the waste.
6- Creation of a body to monitor and to be linked directly with the higher authorities.
7- Environmental and health education programs should be implemented through Medias as television or radio to emphasize the health hazards of imparting pollutants to the canal water by washing clothes and utensils, disposing faecal matters of human activities, rubbish, swim of animals, cleaning animals and throwing dead animals and such all unhygienic habits