pollution case studies assignment

Environmental Pollution [Environmental Studies Notes BCOM/BA/BSC 2nd SEM CBCS Pattern]

Unit 5: environmental pollution (8 lectures), environmental studies notes for ba, b.com and bsc cbcs pattern.

• Environmental pollution: types, causes, effects and controls; Air, water, soil and noise pollution

• Nuclear hazards and human health risks

• Solid waste management: Control measures of urban and industrial waste.

• Pollution case studies – Bharalu river, Deepor Beel, Kolong river

**************

Table of Contents

Soil Pollution

Land is an important component of environment because soil is vital for the substances of life on earth. An inch of soil takes about 500 to 1000 years to be build. It is estimated that the total surface area of earth is 3,15,14,640 square km out of which only about one third is land surface. It is a resource for which there is no substitute. So, it becomes necessary to protect soil from pollutants.

Soil pollution can be more dangerous than other types of pollution. Soil pollution is defined as the presence of toxic chemicals (pollutants or contaminants) in soil, in high enough concentrations to pose risk to human health and ecosystem. Soil pollution is the adverse alternation in the properties of the soil due to dumping of solid and semi-solid waste from agriculture, industry and urban areas. It also results because of washing down of pollutants by rain and faulty sanitation in the soil.

Sources of Soil Pollution

a) Agrochemicals: The application of inorganic fertilisers to crop lands and the use of toxic insecticides, pesticides, fungicides etc. for controlling diseases have an adverse impact of soil.

b) Industrial waste: The rapid growth of industries has resulted in the release of a lot of industrial waste on the land surface. The quality of those wastes depends on the types of raw materials and chemicals used in the industries. The toxic chemicals are absorbed by the green plants along with the nutrients and enter into the food chain and finally reaching the human being causing health hazards.

c) Domestic Garbage: Plastics are mainly used as packing materials which are normally thrown away as garbage. This garbage is pile up at public places which creates disposal problem.

d) Petroleum wastes: Contamination of soil by petroleum products is a major cause of soil pollution in several countries in the world.

e) Electric Waste: Electronic waste like cell phones, computers, gadgets, printers, radio, camera, video games, scanners, DVDs, Land phones etc. are non-biodegradable waste which is generally dumped in soil.

Measures to Control Soil Pollution

Since soil is vital for life, these should be protected from pollution. Some important measures to control soil pollution are:

a) Agro-chemicals should be used with caution in the field. Organic manure should be used instead of agro-chemicals.

b) Use of bio-fertilizers should be encouraged instead of chemical fertilizers.

c) Industrial effluents should be properly treated before discharging them on the soil. The effluents released should be subjected to proper treatment before their release into land mass.

d) The garbage produced should be dumped in closed chamber.

e) Adequate latrine facility should be provided in rural and urban areas.

f) Public awareness programmes should be implemented to educate people on health hazards due to soil pollution. Prevention of erosion and silting.

g) People should be trained regarding proper sanitary practices.

h) Application of pesticides should be controlled.

i) Bioremediation can be adopted for degradation of toxic chemicals present in soil.

Effects of Soil Pollution

a) Industrial wastes consist of a variety of chemicals which are extremely toxic. Chemical like acids, alkalis, pesticides, heavy metals etc. affect soil fertility and ultimately affect human health.

b) Nitrogen and phosphorus from the fertilizers in soil reach nearby water bodies with agricultural run-off and cause eutrophication.

c) Excess use of chemical fertilizers may result in reducing the ability of plants to fix nitrogen.

d) Pollutants in soil cause alteration in soil structure, causing death of many soil organisms which can affect the food chain.

e) Decline in the microorganisms found in the soil creating additional problems of soil erosion.

f) Contamination of underground and surface drinking water.

Water Pollution

Water is undoubtedly the most precious natural resource that exists on our planet. It is essential for the survival of any form of life. Lakes, rivers, seas and groundwater are the main source of water. Water pollution is the pollution of bodies of water , such as lakes, rivers, seas, the oceans, as well as groundwater. It occurs when pollutants reach these bodies of water , without treatment. Waste from homes, factories and other buildings are main pollutant of the water bodies.

Sources of Water Pollution:

a) Domestic wastes if they are not properly treated and released into water bodies cause serious water pollution.

b) Industrial wastes such as Toxic chemicals, acids, alkalis, metallic salts, phenols, cyanides are released into water bodies causes thermal pollution of water.

c) Agricultural pollutants such as excessive nutrients, ammonia and nitrates, pathogens, antibiotics and hormones.

d) Run off from urban areas such as rainfall and snowmelt can wash natural and man-made pollutants into rivers, lakes, wetlands, and coastal waters.

e) Oil pollution

f) Radioactive waste produced during industrial, medical and scientific processes.

Effects of Water Pollution

Domestic and hospital sewage contain many undesirable pathogenic microorganisms, and its disposal into a water without proper treatment may cause outbreak of serious diseases, such as, amoebiasis dysentery, typhoid, jaundice, cholera, etc. Metals like lead, zinc, arsenic, copper, mercury and cadmium in industrial waste waters adversely affect humans and other animals. Some of the serious effects of water pollution are listed below:

a) Drinking contaminated water causes health problems like cancer, reproductive problems, typhoid fever, stomach sickness and skin rashes in humans.

b) Excess fluoride in water causes defects in teeth and bones called fluorosis, while arsenic can cause significant damage to the liver and nervous system.

c) Oil spills in the water cause animals to die when they ingest or encounter it.

d) Excess radioactive materials in water cause genetic mutations, birth defects and cancer.

e) Excess sediments in water cause cloudiness reducing photosynthetic ability, which disrupts the aquatic food chain.

Control of water pollution

a) The first and most important step in controlling water pollution is to Increase public education and awareness around the world concerning the causes and impacts of water pollution.

b) Government initiatives like Swachh Bharat Mission helps in reducing domestic wastes.

c) Setting up effluent treatment plants to treat waste water.

d) Laws, standards and practices should be established to prevent water pollution and these laws should be modified from time to time based on current requirements and technological advancements.

e) Planting more trees will reduce the amount of sulphur dioxide and nitric oxide.

f) Industrial plants should be based on recycling operations as it helps prevent disposal of wastes into natural waters but also extraction of products from waste.

g) Thermal pollution can be reduced by employing techniques like cooling ponds, wet/dry cooling towers etc.

Air Pollution

We all breathe in air, we can feel, and even smell the air and say whether it is fresh or stale. The pollution in air may not be noticed until we see smoke coming out from some source. All human activities from cooking at home to activities in highly mechanized industries contribute to air pollution.

The World Health Organization defines air pollution as “the presence of materials in the air in such concentration which are harmful to man and his environment.”

In Simple words, it is the occurrence or addition of foreign particles, gases and other pollutants into the air which have an adverse effect on human beings, animals, vegetation, buildings, etc.

Air Pollutants

Pollutants are classified into primary and secondary pollutants.

Primary pollutants: they are emitted into the atmosphere directly from the source and retains the same chemical form. Examples are carbon monoxide, sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, suspended particulate matter(SPM).

Secondary pollutants: they are formed by the inter mingling and reactions of primary pollutants. Examples are photochemical smog, acid rain, PAN etc.

Sources and causes of Air Pollution

The sources of air pollution are classified into two groups: Natural and Man- made sources.

(a) Natural sources:

1) Volcanic eruption: releasing poisonous gases like SO2, H2S, CO etc.

2) Forest fires: Very large quantities of smoke and particulate matter are liberated during their breakout.

3) Decomposition of organic and inorganic substances: Methane gas, carbon dioxide is released into the air.

4) Dust: Dust is always present in the atmosphere in varying amount.

(b) Manmade sources:

1) Deforestation.

2) Burning of fossil fuels.

3) Emission from vehicles.

4) Rapid industrialization.

5) Modern agricultural practices.

Effects of Air Pollution

Air pollution is very dangerous for health. Some of the adverse effects of air pollution are given below:

1. Air pollution affects our respiratory system and causes breathing difficulties.

2. Diseases such as bronchitis, asthma, lung cancer, tuberculosis and pneumonia caused due to air pollution.

3. Increased concentration of carbon dioxide in atmosphere causes global warming.

4. Air pollution causes acid rain which damages crop plants, trees and buildings. It also makes the soil acidic.

5. Ozone layer depletion due to air pollution which allows ultraviolet radiation to reach the earth. Such radiation causes various skin and eye diseases.

6. Excess nitrogen oxides in the atmosphere results in respiratory problems and bronchitis.

Measures to Control Air Pollution

Air pollution can control from the following points:

1. A raw material for feedstock should be renewable rather than depleting.

2. Better designed equipment and smokeless fuels should be used in houses and industries. Less polluting fuels should be used.

3. Growing plants capable of fixing carbon monoxide. Example: Phaseolus vulgaris, Daucus carota.

4. Growing plants capable of metabolizing nitrogen oxides and other gaseous pollutants. Example: Vitis, Pimis, Pyrus etc.

5. Use of non-conventional sources of energy should be encouraged.

6. Use of public transport to control fuel consumption.

7. Automobiles should be properly maintained and adhere to emission control standards.

8. Proper Environmental Impact Assessment for any developmental work must be done.

Environmental Studies MCQs Multiple Choice Questions and Answers

➡ Top 100 Environmental Studies MCQs

Environmental Studies Chapterwise Notes

➡ Unit 1: Introduction to Environmental Studies

➡ Unit 2: Ecosystems

➡ Unit 3: Natural Resources: Types, Renewable and Non-renewable Resources

➡ Unit 4: Biodiversity and Conservation (Available in DTS App – Only for Members)

➡ Unit 5: Environmental Pollution

➡ Unit 6: Social Issues and the Environment

➡ Unit 7: Environmental Policies & Practices

➡ Unit 8: Human Communities and the Environment

➡ Unit 9: Field work

Environmental Studies Question Papers

➡ Dibrugarh University 2022

➡ Gauhati University 2022

➡ Assam University 2019 2021

➡ Kolkata University (Coming Soon)

Environmental Studies Solved Question Papers

Noise pollution.

Noise is one of the most pervasive pollutant. A musical clock may be nice to listen during the day, but may be an irritant during sleep at night. Noise by definition is “sound without value” or “any noise that is unwanted by the recipient”.

Noise in industries such as stone cutting and crushing, steel forgings, loudspeakers, shouting by hawkers selling their wares, movement of heavy transport vehicles, railways and airports leads to irritation and an increased blood pressure, loss of temper, decrease in work efficiency, loss of hearing which may be first temporary but can become permanent in the noise stress continues. It is therefore of utmost importance that excessive noise is controlled.

Noise level is measured in terms of decibels (dB). W.H.O. (World Health Organization) has prescribed optimum noise level as 45 dB by day and 35 dB by night. Anything above 80 dB is hazardous.

Causes and Sources of Noise Pollution

There are several sources of noise that contribute to both indoor and outdoor noise pollution which are listed below:

a) Cutting and Crushing in Industries/ Factories.

b) M ovement of heavy transport vehicles, railways and airports etc.

c) Sound generated during Construction activities.

d) Household chores such as washing and cleaning.

e) Playing of loud speakers during festivals/ social events and also hearing loud music in home.

f) Fire crackers burning during festivals and celebrations.

g) Microphones, Television and radio run in loud voice.

h) Loudspeakers in religious places.

h) Some noises are also caused by nature which are called a tmospheric noise which arises due to spurious radio frequency waves due to lightning and other natural disturbances occurring in the atmosphere. Natural phenomena like lightning, thunder, volcanic eruption, earthquake, sound of the ocean waves, etc.

Effects of Noise Pollution

a) Hearing Problems: Exposure to noise can damage one of the most vital organs of the body, the ear.

b) Poor Cognitive Function: With regular exposure to loud noise, the ability to read, learn and understand decreases significantly over time.

c) Serious diseases: High noise pollution can cause high blood pressure and loss of temperament.

d) Sleep disorders – exposure to noise reduces duration of sleep, diminish quality of sleep, Psychic disorders.

e) Wild life issues – noise bring about changes in the behavioural aptitude of birds and animals. They become inefficient in hunting and hence disturb the balance of ecosystem.

Thermal Pollution

The excessive heat dissipated into air or water from the industries increases the temperatures of the entire ecosystem and hence causes thermal pollution. Industrial waste and heat not only causes widespread climatological changes but also it can cause the damage of aquatic and terrestrial life. The effect of thermal pollution is more prominently marked in aquatic system.

The industries like iron and steel plants, petroleum refineries, nuclear reactor, electronic power plants etc. use large amount of water for cooling purposes. The water carries a lot of heat which when released into nearby bodies leads to thermal power pollution. Such an increase in temperature of the aquatic bodies by 8 to 10 degree celcius becomes injuries to the aquatic life.

When an increase in temperature of the aquatic body affects and disrupts the normal activities of the aquatic living organisms, the process is known as thermal pollution.

Sources of Thermal Pollution

a) Nuclear reactor

b) Industrial Wastes

c) Hydro-electric Power Plant

d) Thermal Power

e) Domestic Sewage

Effects of thermal pollution

Thermal pollution affects the living organism in the following ways:

a) It reduces the dissolved oxygen content of water.

b) It changes the characteristics properties of water.

c) It influences reproductive cycle, digestion rate, respiration rate and many enzymatic activities of living organism.

d) It favours the growth of certain bacteria and pathogens.

e) The egg of fish may hatch early or fail to hatch at all.

f) Thermal pollution results in low dissolved oxygen levels thereby perishing aquatic organisms.

Measures to Control Thermal Pollution

1. Colling of Pond’s water is the simplest and cheapest method to control thermal pollution.

2. Plantation of trees upon the banks of rivers, seas and other water bodies. Trees not only help in controlling thermal pollution but also aid in a better environment.

3. Creating artificial lakes for cooling of ponds.

4. Recycling of used water of factories.

5. Co-generation of heat from hot water and used in different tasks of industries.

Solid Waste Management

Industrialization across the world has brought a lot of good as well as bad things as well. One of the negative effects of industrialization is the creation of solid waste and consequent environmental degradation.

According to Britannica, “Solid-waste management is the collecting, treating and disposing of solid material that is discarded because it has served its purpose or is no longer useful. Improper disposal of municipal solid waste can create unsanitary conditions, and these conditions in turn can lead to pollution of the environment and to the outbreaks of vector-borne disease”

Human and animal activities generate different kinds of wastes. These wastes are generally in solid form, and may cause pollution of land, water and air unless treated and disposed off. The process of collection, transportation, treatment and disposal can be grouped under solid waste management. The increase in the quantity of solid waste is due to overpopulation, affluence and technological advancement.

Bad effects of solid wastes

a) Open dumps are malodorous places in which disease carrying vermins such as rats and files proliferate.

b) Methane gas is released into the surrounding air due to decomposition of solid wastes by the micro-organisms.

c) Hazardous materials dissolved in this liquid contaminate underground water and solid strata.

d) The leachate consisting of a variety of chemical constituents’ seeps and pollute the ground water.

e) Absence of landfill lingers aggravate the problem furthermore.

Types of Solid Waste

Solid wastes (waste which are neither liquid nor gaseous) can be classified into:

a) Urban or municipal wastes

b) Industrial wastes

Sources of Urban Waste

– Domestic wastes: It includes a variety of materials thrown out from homes.

– Food waste, Cloth, Waste paper, Glass bottles, Polythene bags, Waste metals, plastic containers, scrap, paints etc.

– Commercial wastes: It includes wastes coming out from shops, markets, hotels, offices, institutions, etc.

– Waste paper, packaging material, cans, bottle, polythene bags, etc.

– Construction wastes: It includes wastes of construction materials. • Wood, Concrete, Debris, etc.

– Horticulture waste and waste from slaughter houses include vegetable parts, residues and remains of slaughtered animals, respectively.

– Biomedical wastes: It includes mostly waste organic materials

– Anatomical wastes, Infectious wastes, glass bottles, plastic, metal syringe, etc.

– Mining waste: A large amount of solid waste is released from the mining activities. The increase in solid waste is due to overpopulation, affluence and technological advancement.

Sources of Industrial Waste

The main source of industrial wastes are chemical industries, metal and mineral processing industries.

– Nuclear plants: Generate radioactive wastes

– Thermal power plants: Produce solid waste in the form of fly ash 3

– Chemical Industries: Produce large quantities of hazardous and toxic materials.

– Other industries: Other industries produce packing materials, rubbish, organic wastes, acid, alkali, scrap metals, rubber, plastic, paper, glass, wood, oils, paints, dyes, etc.

Measures to Control Solid Waste

i) Sanitary Landfill: This is the most popular solid waste disposal method used today. Disposing of waste in a landfill involves burying the waste, in abandoned or unused places. In this method garbage is spread out in thin layers, compacted and covered with clay, sand or plastic liner. The liners protect the ground water from being contaminated. When the landfill is full, it is covered with layers of sand, clay, top soil and gravel to prevent seepage of water.

ii) Incineration : It is the hygienic way of disposing solid waste. It is a thermal process (controlled combustion) in which the waste material is converted to heat, gas, steam and ash, which can be used for electrical generation and domestic heating. It is suitable for hazardous, organic and medical wastes. Combustible substance should be separated and removed before incineration process. Wet municipal waste should be preheated before incineration process. It reduces the volume of waste up to 20 or 30% of the original volume.

iii) Composting: It is a popular method by which bulk organic matter is converted into fertilizer by biological action. Microorganisms like fungi, bacteria convert degradable organic waste into broken, odourless mass called humus, which is a good fertilizer. Separated compostable waste is dumped in underground trenches in layers of 1.5m and finally covered with soil of 20 cm and left for decomposition.

Sometimes, actinomycetes are introduced for active decomposition. Biological action will start within two to three days. Good quality environmental friendly manure is formed from the compost and can be used for agricultural purpose.

iv) Vermi Composting: It has become very popular in the last few years. In vermi composting, earthworms are added to the compost. These help to break the waste and the added excreta of the worms makes the compost rich in nutrients. It is very useful biofertilizer and soil conditioner.

Introduction to Environmental Studies [Environmental Studies Notes BCOM/BA/BSC 2nd SEM CBCS Pattern]
Natural Resources Types, Renewable and Non-renewable Resources

A Case Study of Environmental Injustice: The Failure in Flint

Carla campbell.

1 Department of Public Health Sciences, Room 408, College of Health Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso, 500 W. University Ave, El Paso, TX 79968, USA

Rachael Greenberg

2 National Nurse-led Care Consortium (NNCC), Philadelphia, PA 19102, USA; su.ccnn@grebneergr

Deepa Mankikar

3 Research and Evaluation Group, Public Health Management Corporation, Philadelphia, PA 19102, USA; gro.cmhp@rakiknamd

Ronald D. Ross

4 Occupational and Environmental Medicine Consultant, Las Cruces, NM 88001, USA; [email protected]

The failure by the city of Flint, Michigan to properly treat its municipal water system after a change in the source of water, has resulted in elevated lead levels in the city’s water and an increase in city children’s blood lead levels. Lead exposure in young children can lead to decrements in intelligence, development, behavior, attention and other neurological functions. This lack of ability to provide safe drinking water represents a failure to protect the public’s health at various governmental levels. This article describes how the tragedy happened, how low-income and minority populations are at particularly high risk for lead exposure and environmental injustice, and ways that we can move forward to prevent childhood lead exposure and lead poisoning, as well as prevent future Flint-like exposure events from occurring. Control of the manufacture and use of toxic chemicals to prevent adverse exposure to these substances is also discussed. Environmental injustice occurred throughout the Flint water contamination incident and there are lessons we can all learn from this debacle to move forward in promoting environmental justice.

1. Description of the Flint Water Crisis

At this point, most Americans have heard of the avoidable and abject failure of government on the local, state and federal level; environmental authorities; and water company officials to prevent the mass poisoning of hundreds of children and adults in Flint, Michigan from April 2014 to December 2015 [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. One tends to imagine chemical poisoning as a victim dropping dead in a murder mystery, or the immediate casualties in an industrial accident or a chemical warfare attack. Unlike the release of methyl isocyanate gas in Bhopal, India in 1984 or the release of radiation with the radiation accident in Chernobyl, Ukraine in 1986, the poisoning of the population in Flint was an insidious one. People drinking the contaminated water would never have known they had elevated blood lead levels (BLLs) without specific medical testing for blood lead levels. In fact, if the water contamination had not been made public, most exposed children and their families would have never suspected they were being exposed over a 20-month period of time, and it would be expected that the water contamination and lead exposure would have continued up until today.

Lead can cause immediate acute poisoning but the subacute, moderate, long-term exposure impact of concern in Flint is more common, and much more insidious. Any resulting behavioral disturbance or loss of intellectual function would probably not been have linked by their physicians or families to lead poisoning, and instead accepted as something that had just occurred. Additionally, the adverse effects from this event may take years to surface as most negative health effects from low-level lead exposure develop slowly [ 4 ]. Hypertension and kidney damage may not present until long after the exposure. Any resulting behavioral disturbance or loss of intellectual function would probably have not been linked by their physicians or families to lead poisoning, and instead accepted as something that had just occurred.

The Flint disaster was due to the switch in water supply from Lake Huron to the Flint River, which was then not treated with an anti-corrosion chemical to prevent lead particles and solubilized lead from being released from the interior of water pipes, particularly those from lead service lines or those with lead solder. This water was known to be very corrosive, so corrosive that, in fact, it was not used by the nearby auto industry [ 2 ]. The General Motors plant switched to water from the neighboring Flint Township when General Motors noticed rust spots on newly machined parts [ 2 ]. This corrosive new water supply was then not treated with the anti-corrosion treatment, in noncompliance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Lead and Copper Rule, which calls for action when a water supply is found to be corrosive to prevent the potential release of metals from water service lines [ 5 ].

A national water expert, Dr. Marc Edwards, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech University, has stated that the published instructions by EPA for collection of water samples for lead analysis were biased in the direction of underestimating the lead content of the water samples. He had spent years communicating this problem to EPA without a subsequent change in these instructions [ 6 ]. Dr. Edwards testified before Congress in spring 2016 that the Regional EPA Administrator was not alert to what was happening in Flint. Dr. Edwards also published papers previously bringing to the public attention the lead contamination of drinking water in Washington, DC. After Washington, DC made a change in its water disinfectant from chlorine to chloramine, residents were exposed to water with high levels of lead (140 ppb and above) from 2001 to 2004 [ 7 , 8 ]. This resulted in an increase of blood lead levels in young children (many from high-risk neighborhoods) of four times the amount that it was prior to the change in water disinfectant [ 7 , 8 ]. Dr. Edwards was a key player in ensuring that this issue was brought to light and those responsible parties were held accountable [ 9 ]. For comparison, the EPA standard for maximum contaminant level for lead in water is 15 ppb [ 5 ].

Regarding the Flint, Michigan water contamination incident, Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha, a local pediatrician, performed a study looking at blood lead levels (BLLs) from Flint children from 2013 (before the water change) to 2015 (after the water change), assessing the percentage of BLLs over the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reference level of 5 µg/dL, reviewing water levels in Flint, and identifying geographical locations of blood and water levels using geospatial analysis. Her study demonstrated that the level of elevated blood lead levels (above 5 µg/dL) in a group of Flint children almost doubled between levels collected prior to the change in water source and afterwards; among children living in the area with highest water lead levels the percentage with elevated BLLs was approximately three times higher when compared to pre-diversion levels (4% versus 10.6%) [ 10 ]. These are extraordinary changes! (The specific blood lead levels or even range of BLLs was not reported in the article.) Unfortunately, many children in Flint already had multiple risk factors for lead poisoning, including “poor nutrition, concentrated poverty, and older housing stock” [ 10 ].

2. Elevated Blood Lead Levels in US Children and the Adverse Health Impacts and Costs of Exposure

Lead exposure in young children can lead to decrements in intelligence, development, behavior, attention, and other neurological functions. Two giants in childhood lead poisoning research and advocacy, Dr. Philip Landrigan and Dr. David Bellinger, summarize the adverse effects of lead very completely, yet succinctly: “Lead is a devastating poison. It damages children’s brains, erodes intelligence, diminishes creativity and the ability to weigh consequences and make good decisions, impairs language skills, shortens attention span, and predisposes to hyperactive and aggressive behavior. Lead exposure in early childhood is linked to later increased risk for dyslexia and school failure.” [ 11 ] Other articles and reports have also confirmed these adverse effects [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ].

Therefore, it is important to determine the extent of the problem of elevated blood lead levels in U.S. children. Currently, based on data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2003 to 2012, 3.24% of children overall aged 1–5 years had a BLL > 5 µg/dL, compared with 7.8% of non-Hispanic Black (NHB) children [ 21 ]. Males had higher adjusted BLLs than females, and a higher poverty income ratio was associated with lower adjusted blood lead levels. Adjusted BLLs increased in renter-occupied (as opposed to owner-occupied) homes and with an increase in the numbers of smokers inside the home [ 21 ]. A previous analysis by Dixon et al. [ 22 ] of NHANES data from 1999 to 2004 found that BLLs were affected by the levels of lead in the floor and the condition of and surface type of the floor; that non-Hispanic Black children had higher BLLs than non-Hispanic white (NHW) children; that Mexican-born children had higher BLLs than those born in the U.S.; that houses built before 1940 were associated with children with higher BLLs; that children living in houses with a smoker had higher BLLs than those living with non-smokers; and that the odds of NHB children having BLLs > 5 µg/dL and > 10 µg/dL were more than double that of NHW children [ 21 , 22 ]. A recent report suggested that many children requiring blood lead testing due to Medicaid insurance status or state or city requirements for testing are not getting tested, and/or the results are not being properly followed up on [ 23 ].

The costs from lead poisoning are considerable, as are the cost savings for prevention of childhood lead poisoning. Attina and Trasande state that in the United States and Europe the lead-attributable economic costs have been estimated at $50.9 and $55 billion dollars, respectively [ 24 ]. Interestingly, they estimate a total cost of $977 billion of international dollars in low- and middle-income countries, with economic losses equal to $134.7 billion in Africa, $142.3 billion in Latin American and the Caribbean, and $699.9 billion in Asia, giving a total economic loss for these countries in the range of $728.6–$1,162.5 billion [ 24 ]. A previous analysis showed that each dollar invested in lead paint hazard control results in a return of $17–$221 or a net savings of $181–$269 billion for a specific cohort of children under six years of age as the benefits of BLL reduction would include categories such as health care, lifetime earnings, tax revenue, special education, attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, and the direct costs of crime [ 25 ]. Another prior analysis estimated the economic benefits resulting from an historic lowering of children’s BLLs as measured by data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) to be $110–$319 billion for each year’s cohort of 3.8 million two-year-old children, using a discounted lifetime earnings of $723,300 for each two-year-old child in 2000 dollars [ 26 ]. These estimated benefits were due to projected improvements in worker productivity due to increased intelligence quotient (I.Q.) points.

3. How the Flint Case and Other Examples Exhibit Environmental Injustice

Most affected by this egregious environmental disaster was a mostly poor and African-American population [ 27 ]. Some have speculated whether such an error in judgment might have occurred if a different population had been involved, and The New York Times uses the term racism in its editorial [ 27 ]. Another New York Times article talks of an analysis of emails from Governor Rick Snyder’s office that did not mention race but talked of costs involving Flint’s water supply, questioned scientific data regarding water contamination with lead, and mentioned uncertainties about the duties of state and local health officials [ 28 ]. It also mentions that some civil rights advocates were indicating that the Flint water crisis appeared to represent environmental racism [ 28 ]. The article goes on to discuss that the switch in water source was explicitly decided in favor of saving money for the financially unstable city of Flint, and that an emergency manager appointed by Gov. Snyder to carry out the running of the city was himself African-American [ 28 ]. One of Gov. Snyder’s key staff people sounded an alarm about the concern for lead in water, but the state health department responded back that the Flint water was safe [ 28 ].

The Flint Water Advisory Task Force, comprised of five experts in public health and water policy and convened by Governor Snyder, repeatedly stated in its findings that the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) improperly and inaccurately described the Flint water as being safe, which unfortunately was then interpreted as accurate by other state agencies and city and county agencies [ 29 ]. The Task Force report also described the Flint water crisis as “a story of government failure, intransigence, unpreparedness, delay, inaction and environmental injustice”, and adds that the MDEQ failed in its responsibility to properly enforce drinking water regulations, while the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHD) failed its mission to protect public health [ 29 ]. A recent article suggests these two agencies produced sampling data that were flawed, failed to provide accurate information to the Governor’s office, the EPA and the public, and did not respond appropriately when given information by environmental health and medical professionals [ 30 ]. The Task Force report also explains that state-appointed emergency managers replaced local decision-makers in Flint, thus removing “the checks and balances and public accountability that come with public decision-making” [ 29 ]. The group also credits the public and engaged Flint citizens with continuing to question government leadership (although the Task Force noted “callous and dismissive responses to citizens’ expressed concerns”), and the media for its investigative journalism of the crisis [ 29 ]. The Task Force’s conclusion was that “Flint water customers were needlessly and tragically exposed to toxic levels of lead and other hazards through mismanagement of their drinking water supply” [ 29 ]. The Flint Water Advisory Task Force suggests that the Michigan governor should issue an executive order to mandate training and guidance on environmental justice across all state agencies, with acknowledgement that the Flint crisis of water contamination is an example of environmental injustice which has fallen on a predominantly African-American community [ 29 ]. The Task Force issued 44 recommendations to remedy the results of the failure of proper governance and resultant lead poisoning [ 29 , 30 ].

Many have spoken out about this environmental injustice, including research scientists and clinicians [ 11 , 31 , 32 , 33 ] and public health professionals [ 34 ]. Even the EPA administrator, Gina McCarthy, is speaking about how Michigan evaded the EPA regarding the Flint water crisis and how this type of disaster cannot happen elsewhere [ 34 , 35 ]. Dr. Robert Bullard, dean of the School of Public Health at Texas Southern University, calls the Flint water crisis—leading to lead exposure and poisoning with long delays in addressing the problem—a classic case of environmental racism [ 36 ]. “Environmental racism is real…so real that even having the facts, having the documentation and having the information has never been enough to provide equal protection for people of color and poor people” [ 37 ]. He continues, “It takes longer for the response and it takes longer for the recovery in communities of color and low-income communities.” [ 37 ] He explains that regional EPA officials and state officials in Michigan responded first with a cover-up, “and then defensively—either trying to avoid responsibility or minimizing the extent of the damage”, as contrasted with handling of other environmental problems in predominantly white communities [ 37 ]. An example is then given of government officials on all levels helping to clean up a spill of coal ash in Roane County, Tennessee, in a mostly white community [ 37 ]. A Democrat who represents Flint, Michigan, Representative Dan Kildee, called race “the single greatest determinant of what happened in Flint” [ 28 ]. What is the solution? Dr. Bullard suggests that real solutions will result when communities previously left out of decision-making are offered a seat at the table [ 31 ]. In order to stop unequal protection from environmental hazards, Dr. Bullard has come up with five principles he suggests government adopt to further environmental justice: “guaranteeing the right to environmental protection, preventing harm before it occurs, shifting the burden of proof to the polluters, obviating proof of intent to discriminate, and redressing existing inequities” [ 37 ]. Charles Lee, another author writing about environmental justice who worked in the Office of Environmental Justice at EPA, quotes a definition of the environment as “the place where we live, where we work, and where we play” [ 38 ]. He goes on to state that “environmental justice must be the starting point for achieving healthy people, homes, and communities” [ 38 ]. Lastly, the Flint Water Task Force elaborates on its finding of environmental injustice in the Flint case. “Environmental justice or injustice, therefore, is not about intent. Rather, it is about process and results—fair treatment, equal protection, and meaningful participation in neutral forums that honor human dignity…The facts of the Flint water crisis lead us to the inescapable conclusion that this is a case of environmental injustice. Flint residents, who are majority Black or African American and among the most impoverished of any metropolitan area in the United States, did not enjoy the same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards as that provided to other communities” [ 29 ].

The reader is referred to several references [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] for a more detailed timeline of the specific events and actions that occurred in Flint. The Flint Water Task Force report also provides a summary of its findings and recommendations, giving greater details on the specific events and actions during the switch in water supply [ 29 ]. Regardless of the motivations behind the water supply mismanagement, we must improve governmental safeguards and public health surveillance to strive to avoid such needless exposures to environmental toxicants in the future.

Another recent disaster, involving contamination of local water supplies, was that of the contamination of the Animas River in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico by mine waste from the Gold King Mine, leading to excessively high levels of some toxic elements metals including lead, arsenic and cadmium (all of these being toxic metals) [ 39 , 40 , 41 ]. The river water was subsequently off limits for agricultural use and closed for recreational use [ 39 , 42 ]. The Navajo Nation has recently expressed how difficult and problematic this poisoning of their drinking water source has been to this tribe, and that they have not been adequately reimbursed for the adverse impacts to their water source and way of life [ 43 , 44 ]. The Native American Rights Fund states that a source of clean and abundant water is hard to come by for many Native tribes and peoples and that many face health and developmental risks from environmental problems such as surface and groundwater contamination, hazardous waste disposal, illegal dumping, and mining wastes, all of which can contribute to poor quality of water [ 45 ]. As the Flint, the Navajo Nation, and the Native American Rights group exposures highlight, poor and minority communities are unfortunately too often exposed to poisonous chemicals in their neighborhoods and on their tribal lands, leading to environmental injustice [ 44 ].

Not only has the incident in Flint brought to light the contamination of Flint’s water system, it raises issues about local water supplies to towns and cities, and particularly to child care centers and school systems, around the nation [ 46 , 47 , 48 ]. This has caused our nation to focus on investigating for lead contamination in water supplies in other cities, particularly in school systems, child care centers and other places occupied by children [ 49 , 50 ]. A Huffington Post article states that the Flint water crisis has provided a wake-up call to the country with the “discovery” of poisoned water in many communities in the U.S., and that our water infrastructure is outdated and deteriorating, and that water sampling procedures for lead are also “dangerously” outdated, as they allow for 10% of the population to be exposed to levels over the EPA maximum contaminant level [ 51 ]. Some cities have been cited for their exemplary actions in keeping their city water supplies free from lead contamination [ 52 ].

Historically, the scientists in the companies that put lead in gasoline and lead in paint became aware of the dangers of those specific lead exposures, but it took much time to finally remove lead from these products; many counties banned the use of lead-based paint in residential housing before the U.S. did [ 53 , 54 ]. One author states, “Flint’s tragedy is shedding light on a health issue that’s been lurking in U.S. households for what seems like forever. But that demands the question: Why has lead poisoning never really been treated like what it is—the longest-lasting childhood-health epidemic in U.S. history?” [ 55 ]. Bliss then goes on to describe how when in the 1950s, when “millions of children had had been chronically or acutely exposed (to lead)” and this had been linked to health problems, that “If the lead industry had stepped up then (or if it had been forced to by government)”, maybe lead poisoning would have been treated like any other major childhood disease—polio, for example. In the 1950s, “Fewer than sixty thousand new cases of polio per year created a near-panic among American parents and a national mobilization that led to vaccination campaigns that virtually wiped out the disease within a decade”, write Rosner and Markowitz [ 56 ]. “With lead poisoning, the industry and federal government could have mobilized together to systemically detoxify the nation’s lead-infested housing stock, and end the epidemic right there” [ 55 ]. Bliss then goes on to describe how “the industry’s powerful leaders diverted the attention of health officials away from their products, and toward class and race” by associating childhood lead poisoning with that of a child “with ‘ignorant’ parents living in ‘slums’” [ 55 ]. Bliss goes on to state that “lead poisoning in children can be eradicated…Today the cost of detoxifying the entire nation hovers around $1 trillion, says Rosner. Any federal effort to systematically identify and remove lead from infested households would be complex, decades-long, and require ongoing policy reform. ‘But it’s also saving a next generation of children,’ Rosner says. ‘You’re actually going to stop these kids from being poisoned. And isn’t that worth something?’” [ 56 ]. “And Rosner is a tiny bit hopeful. Amid national conversation about economic inequality, a housing crisis, and the value of black and Latino lives, the attention that Flint has brought to lead might usher in the country’s first comprehensive lead-poisoning prevention program” [ 56 ].

With the information about lead contamination in Flint and many cities around the country, one might wonder whether there is a dearth of information or recommendations about how to prevent and manage childhood lead poisoning. There is not. Many authors have weighed in on this question recently [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 19 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ], some with very specific plans and ideas. Primary prevention of lead exposure has been particularly emphasized in almost all of them. Landrigan and Bellinger compel us to “map the sources of lead, get the lead out, and make sure there is no new lead” [ 11 ]. Jacobs and colleagues at the National Center for Healthy Housing have started a campaign for lead exposure detection and lead poisoning prevention based on these three principles: “find it, fix it, and fund it” [ 33 ]. Some call for revised standards for lead in air, house dust, soil and water [ 12 , 61 , 62 , 63 ]. The chief causes of lead exposure are nicely summarized by Levin and colleagues [ 64 ]. Unfortunately, childhood lead poisoning prevention is often deemed to be not important enough to work on, with other pressing medical and public health problems intervening; it is also complicated, complex and involves many stakeholders. Thus, the clinicians, government officials, and public health officials looking for a quick fix and a one-prescription answer to this medical problem are often disappointed and discouraged.

Concern about the neurotoxic effects of lead has been expanded now to include the neurotoxic effects of many more new chemicals out in use by the American public, including children. Children are exposed to chemicals in their everyday lives, as these are found in toys, children’s products, personal care items such as shampoos and skin creams, on foods in the form of pesticide residues, and in the air in the form of air pollutants. Some authors have weighed in on the need for more control of the manufacture and use of these toxicants and for more research into adverse health effects [ 31 , 65 , 66 ]. In 2015, a unique group of research scientists, clinicians, government representatives, and health care advocates met to form the Project TENDR (Targeting Environmental Neurodevelopmental Risks) which focuses on engendering action to prevent exposure of fetuses, infants and children to environmental toxicants [ 67 ]. The group has created a list of five chemical classes of neurotoxins which have adverse effects on brain development. The list includes lead, specific air pollutants, organophosphate pesticides, phthalates, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), which are flame retardants. These were selected based on the degree of evidence for their adverse effects and the ability of this group and other scientists, clinicians, government officials, and advocates to work effectively to prevent exposures to these toxicants. Project TENDR has recently released a consensus statement with many signatures of both individuals and groups [ 67 , 68 , 69 ], as well as other articles on the project’s work [ 70 ]. Later this year, the group will release specific recommendations for prevention of exposure to the five chemical groups. The recent passage of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act has been a welcome revision and updating of the Toxic Substances Control Act promulgated by EPA in 1976 [ 71 , 72 , 73 ]. This is a step in right direction for better control of exposures to lead and other toxic chemicals in our environment.

4. Future Directions: How to Move Toward Environmental Justice

How do we remedy the situation in Flint, Michigan, and prevent future episodes similar to the Flint and Navajo Nation disasters? The Flint Water Task Force recommends that the MDHHS establish a Flint Toxic Exposure Registry to follow-up on the children and adults who were residing in Flint from April 2014 until the present, and carry out more aggressive clinical and public health follow-up for all children with elevated BLLs in the state [ 29 ]. It also recommends that routine lead screening and appropriate follow-up occur in the children’s medical homes (with the primary care provider) [ 29 ]. Additionally, the Task Force recommends that the Genesee County Health Department improve follow-up of health concerns in cooperation with the MDHHS and City of Flint “to effect timely, comprehensive, and coordinated activity and ensure the best health outcomes for children and adults affected” [ 29 ]. Dr. Hanna-Attisha has established the Flint Child Health and Development Fund which will support children and their families to obtain the optimum health and development outcomes, early childhood education, access to a pediatric medical home, improved nutrition and integrated social services [ 6 ]. The Michigan State University (MSU)/Hurley Pediatric Public Health Initiative will assess, monitor, and intervene to increase children’s readiness to succeed in school by providing the above services, along with stimulating environments and parenting education [ 6 ]. This type of close follow-up has been recommended under the Flint Recovery and Remediation section of the Flint Water Task Force, as well as a recommendation to establish a dedicated subsidiary fund in the Michigan Health Endowment Fund for funding health-related services for Flint residents [ 29 ]. Therefore, local efforts will be taken to counteract the negative consequences of exposure to lead for Flint’s children. Several recent publications support the positive effects that enriched home environments can have on cognition and behavior in both human and animal studies [ 74 , 75 , 76 ].

Secondly, government agencies at the federal, state and local level and municipal authorities will need to improve their performance to ensure environmental justice, rather than contribute toward environmental injustice. This was mandated in an Executive Order by President William Clinton which requires all federal agencies to take action to ensure environmental justice [ 77 ]. The American Academy of Pediatrics provides a good starting point regarding childhood lead exposure prevention with their recommendation that “The US EPA and HUD should review their protocols for identifying and mitigating residential lead hazards (e.g., lead-based paint, dust, and soil) and lead-contaminated water from lead service lines or lead solder and revise downward the allowable levels of lead in house dust, soil, paint, and water to conform with the recognition that there are no safe levels of lead” [ 12 ]. They also give many other recommendations for government, as well as for pediatricians and other health care providers, for reducing and preventing children’s exposure to lead. Other groups, authors and reports have weighed in on what needs to be fixed and carried out, as indicated earlier in this article. As Bellinger puts it, “We know where the lead is, how people are exposed, and how it damages health. What we lack is the political will to do what should be done” [ 32 ].

Looking at the Flint case specifically, why was the water supply switched in Flint? The evidence seems to point to financial reasons for this. In Flint, state officials decided to save money without concern for providing environmental protections for a community at well-established increased risk. This is clear injustice in environmental protection to a low income and minority community. Why weren’t the corrosion control measures implemented? The Flint Water Task Force implicates various leadership groups, including the MDEQ, MDHHS, Michigan’s Governor’s Office, State-appointed Emergency Managers, the EPA, and City of Flint, although the MDEQ and EPA seem to share most culpability [ 29 ].

5. Conclusions

In short, this crisis was the result of failures on every level. We have presented various comments about how environmental racism and injustice played into this situation. Why were the concerns and complaints about water quality from a mostly African-American community not addressed? The facts presented demonstrate that environmental injustice is the major and underlying factor involved in the events in Flint. Having a state-appointed emergency manager in charge took away the normal communication the City of Flint might have had with its residents and constituents. The Flint Water Task Force has a list of 44 recommendations, mostly directed at the various agencies and offices involved, for improving the situation and preventing further problems [ 29 ]. Much of this involves recommending that these entities seek and follow expert advice, whether on water treatment techniques or protecting the public’s health [ 29 ]. It is also imperative to rebuild relationships with Flint’s community and respond to community needs in order to make real and lasting change. Perhaps putting the Flint situation under a microscopic analysis may prevent future episodes of such environmental injustice.

We must do a better job at moving forward and preventing environmental injustice; our future work is cut out for us.

Author Contributions

The concept of the paper was developed by all of the authors. Carla Campbell performed the lead writing. Rachael Greenberg, Deepa Mankikar and Ronald Ross contributed references, edited the paper, and contributed to the revisions. All authors reviewed the article and approved the final content.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

THE BENEFITS OF AN ONLINE JOURNAL FOCUSED ON ENVIRONMENTAL CASE STUDIES

The case for case studies in confronting environmental issues.

Split-Screen
Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data
Peer Review
Open the PDF for in another window
Guest Access
Get Permissions
Cite Icon Cite
Search Site

Wil Burns; The Case for Case Studies in Confronting Environmental Issues. Case Studies in the Environment 31 December 2017; 1 (1): 1–4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/cse.2017.sc.burns01

Download citation file:

Ris (Zotero)
Reference Manager

In its most distilled form, a “case study” involves investigation of “real-life phenomenon through detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions, and their relationships” [ 1 , 2 ]. The “case” may focus upon an individual, organization, event, or project, anchored in a specific time and place. Most cases are based on real events, or a plausible construction of events, and tell a story, often involving issues or conflicts which require resolution [ 3 ]. They also frequently include central characters and quotations and dialogue [ 4 ]. Often the objective of a case study approach is to develop a theory regarding the nature and causes of similarities between instances of a class of events [ 5 ]. More broadly, case studies seek to illustrate broader, overarching principles or theses.

In recent years, researchers have increasingly embraced the study method in recognition of the limitations of quantitative methods to provide in-depth and holistic explanations of social problems [ 6 ]. A case study, in the context of environmental issues, usually involves the focus on an actual environmental situation, commonly involving a decision, an issue, a challenge, or an opportunity faced by a group of individuals, an organization, or a society.

Case studies enjoy a natural advantage in research of an exploratory nature. As Yin concludes, case studies allow a researcher to “reveal the multiplicity of factors [which] have interacted to produce the unique character of the entity that is the subject of study” [ 7 ]. Explanatory case studies can facilitate conducting causal studies, and in extremely complex and multivariate cases, help to structure analyses that employ pattern-matching techniques [ 8 ]. Descriptive case studies help researchers to formulate hypotheses of cause-effect relationships from descriptive theories [ 8 ].

Case studies have been employed throughout history to facilitate the pursuit of knowledge and its dissemination. The Hippocratic Corpus in the fifth century BC employed case studies to develop insights into medicine that stimulated discoveries for centuries to come [ 9 ]. The case study approach also informed the work of Darwin, Freud, and Piaget.

The formal use of case studies in academia began at Harvard Law School at the turn of the twentieth century [ 10 ]. In recent years, empirical research has demonstrated the value of the case study method as a pedagogical tool in the classroom, with case studies employed in the humanities, social sciences, engineering, law, medicine, and business [ 11 , 12 ]. Case studies have also been used by practitioners in a wide array of fields, including medicine, law, and business [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. In environmental science and policy sectors, case studies are particularly salutary in providing practitioners with examples of best practices [ 18 ], and to assist them in developing effective recommendations and policy prescriptions [ 8 , 19 , 20 ].

Many learners are more inductive than deductive reasoners. Case studies can help to facilitate learning by helping them to reason from examples, analogies, and models, as well as from basic principles [ 21 , 22 , 23 ]. Studies surveying faculty and student learning results associated with the use of case studies demonstrate significant increases in student critical thinking skills and knowledge acquisition, as well as enhanced ability to make connections between multiple content areas and to view issues from different perspectives [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Case studies also promote active learning, which has been proven to enhance learning outcomes [ 21 , 27 , 28 , 29 ]. Through careful examination and discussion of various cases, “students learn to identify actual problems, to recognize key players and their agendas, and to become aware of those aspects of the situation that contribute to the problem” [ 30 , 31 , 32 ]. Moreover, cases can serve as models or paradigms that facilitate understanding similar cases [ 33 ].

Additionally, case-based instructional methods usually employ empirical or realistic narratives to afford students the opportunity to integrate multiple sources of information in real-world contexts in ways that might not be captured through experimental or survey research methods [ 6 ]. Studies have indicated that this can increase student motivation to participate in class activities, promoting learning and increasing performance on assessments [ 34 ]. It also often affords students the opportunities to engage with ethical and societal issues related to their disciplines [ 35 ], as well as facilitating interdisciplinary learning [ 34 ]. The fostering of effective integrative learning experiences in the classroom was identified as one of the four essential learning outcomes in the Learning for the New Global Century report of the Association of American Colleges and Universities [ 36 ].

Case studies have proven to be a valuable component of teaching environmental studies and science by fostering critical transdisciplinary perspectives conductive to addressing environmental issues [ 37 ], as contributing to efforts to “flip the curriculum” in an effort to foster engaged learning in environmental studies and science courses [ 38 ]. Case studies are also a valuable tool for environmental practitioners. They can provide guidelines for best practices [ 15 , 39 ], as well as lessons learned by others in any given professional sector, including in the environmental arena [ 40 , 41 ]. The case study method has proven to be an effective tool to assist environmental professional in developing effective recommendations and policy prescriptions [ 19 , 20 ]. Also pertinent to the environmental sector, case study research can also help to identify relevant variables to facilitate subsequent statistical research [ 42 ]. Moreover, case studies can be employed in organizations for training purposes to foster problem-based learning and the ability to formulate solutions [ 43 ].

Most instructors and environmental professionals that have utilized case studies in the classroom, or in their work, have found them to be a valuable tool [ 6 ]. However, within the classroom environment one of the main obstacles to using case-based instructional method is lack of preparation time, with most instructors currently preparing their own case studies [ 35 ]. The imposing nature of case study construction, as well as the imposing cost of developing cases internally [ 38 ], ensures that many instructors eschew this teaching method.

Moreover, there is imposing challenge of developing effective discussion questions to scaffold case-based learning exercises [ 4 , 44 ]. Case studies also are often not subjected to sufficient academic rigor, undermining their effectiveness and credibility [ 45 , 46 ]. Finally, many instructors are intimidated by the challenge of student evaluation when case studies are incorporated into the educational process [ 47 ].

Case Studies in the Environment hopes to address all of these challenges. It will seek to develop a substantial compendium of case studies in the following categories in field of environmental science and studies:

Ecology and Biodiversity Conservation

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

Environmental Law, Policy and Management

Energy and the Environment

Water Management, Science and Technology

Sustainability

Each case study will be 1,500–3,000 words, and will be subject to peer-review by experts in the field of both environmental studies and science and case studies. Moreover, each case study will be accompanied by a set of suggested discussion questions to help scaffold their use in the classroom, 1 as well as a set of Power Point slides for lectures or presentations in professional environments. It is our hope to ultimately develop a community of academics and practitioners around case studies through workshops, conference panels and online interaction.

Recipient(s) will receive an email with a link to 'The Case for Case Studies in Confronting Environmental Issues' and will not need an account to access the content.

Subject: The Case for Case Studies in Confronting Environmental Issues

(Optional message may have a maximum of 1000 characters.)

Citing articles via

Email alerts, affiliations.

Recent Content
All Content
Special Collections
Info for Authors
Info for Reviewers
Info for Librarians
Editorial Team
Prize Competition
Online ISSN 2473-9510

Stay Informed

Disciplines.

Ancient World
Anthropology
Communication
Criminology & Criminal Justice
Film & Media Studies
Food & Wine
Browse All Disciplines
Browse All Courses
Book Authors
Booksellers
Instructions
Journal Authors
Journal Editors
Media & Journalists
Planned Giving

About UC Press

Press Releases
Seasonal Catalog
Acquisitions Editors
Customer Service
Exam/Desk Requests
Media Inquiries
Print-Disability
Rights & Permissions
UC Press Foundation

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Study Guides
Homework Questions

Case Study 3 Water Pollution

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

A Case Study of Water Contamination in Bharalu River, Guwahati, Assam

2022, International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)

This project is about the case study of contamination in the Bharalu River, Guwahati. The Bharalu is one of the most contaminated of all the tributaries of the river Brahmaputra. The Bharalu carries a large portion of the cities' municipal and other wastes therefore contaminating it. It is regarded as one of the major sources of contamination affecting the overall quality of the Brahmaputra River. As the Brahmaputra is considered as the main source of drinking water for Guwahati and for the whole valley, it is important that the inputs to river are not excessively loaded with pollutants. Analysis of several physio-chemical parameters such as pH, BOD, DO and chemicals such as fluoride are observed.

Related Papers

International Journal of Engineering Research and

Bibhash Sarma

Kapileswar Mishra

Water is said to be our life because we need it fordrinking, bathing, relaxing, fishing and irrigatingour crops. Besides, we produce energy fromwater and navigate in it. Water is so an essentialresource for our life that ancient civilizations have been developed in almost all river valleys of ourcountry. With the growth of the modern civilization, our life is threatened due to pollution of waterboth from surface and underground. The doctorsforecast that several stomach, lever and skin diseases spread due to polluted water. In ourcountry, especially in the state of Orissa, thescarcity of pure drinking water is so much feltthat 50% of urban people and 80% of rural peopleare affected by water pollution.In the present research program the status of pollution of water in two major rivers namely Mahanadi and Brahmani of Odisha has been analysed. The main pollutant of water in Mahanadi is the sewerage systems in sambalpur and Cuttack town whereas the main pollutant of Brahmani is the efflu...

International Journal of Scientific Research and Management

Dr Nirmal Kumar Bhuyan

The present investigation is aimed at assessing the current water quality standard along the stretch of Brahmani river in terms of physico-chemical parameters. In the selected study area, river Brahmani is receiving a considerable amount of industrial wastes and witnessing a considerable amount of human and agricultural activities .Nine samples were collected along the entire stretches of the river basin during the period from September-2013 to August-2014 on the first working day of every month. Various physico-chemical parameters like pH,, EC, total hardness, total alkalinity sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, nitrate, sulphate D.O., B.O.D. etc. were analyzed. The present study indicates that the water quality of Brahmani river is well within tolerance limit taking the physico-chemical parameters into considerations.

Pollution Research

Mridul Buragohain

Water is supreme crucial part of human and animal life. Contaminated water is biggest problem in the world. In this study 42 numbers of drinking water samples were collected from 14 wards of North Lakhimpur town and have been analyzed for some drinking water quality parameters like pH, fluoride (F-). iron (Fe), arsenic (As), lead (Pb) and mercury (Hg). The result showed that pH, FFe, As, Pb and Hg ranged from 6.4 to 7.5, 0.02 to 0.64 mg/l, 0.033 to 1.17 mg/l, BDL to 0.0018 mg/l, 0.015 to 0.146 mg/l, and 0.0001 to 0.00559 mg/l respectively. All the measured parameters were within the standard drinking water quality values of WHO except Fe and Hg content. The concentration of Fe was found higher than the standard limit value of WHO (0.3 mg/l) in 33.33% of the analysed sampling stations and the concentration of Hg was found higher than the standard limit value of WHO (0.001 mg/l) in 21.43% of the analysed sampling stations. In general the present investigation found that the maximum pa...

A B M Sadique Rayhan

This study evaluates the chemical properties of Shitalakhya River water bodies based on its chemical parameters such as Total Suspended Solids (TSS), pH, Electric Conductivity (EC), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Total Nitrogen (N), Chlorine (Cl), Total Phosphorous (P), Sulfur (S), and Potassium (K). To do this chemical analysis, pre-monsoon and post-monsoon seasons were considered to collect the samples from this river. This analysis shows that Total dissolved solids (TSS) of this river in both seasons have crossed the standard limit announced by WHO. The pH is less enough in the pre-monsoon season and in post monsoon, it is up to the standard value. EC and Phosphorous both have crossed the standard value of drinking water in the Shitalakhya River. Nitrogen is too much less although it is a vital element. TDS, DO, BOD, COD, Cl, and S are approximately under the range of standard limits. This assessment could be helpful for using it under agro-ecological planning. This water quality measurement leads whether or not it could use it for agricultural and household purposes. The parameters that are high should be reduced in a proper treatment method so that this water can be used both for agricultural and drinking purposes.

Editor Biolife Journal

Three stations were selected to a stretch of 65 km along the North bank of River Bhavani. The samples were collected tri-monthly between 9am-11am during the first week of July and October 2013 and January and April 2014. The analysis indicated that the water samples were found to process high BOD, COD, TDS and pH as well as lesser oxygen and EC. This induces that the quality of water in river at the study area was greatly affected due to the discharge of pollutants. Therefore a continuous monitoring and surveillance are at most important to protect the river water from degradation.

Sangeeta Madan

Water quality of Tons river near Tapkeshwar temple in Dehradun was assessed in terms of their physico-chemical parameters. Samples were collected on the monthly basis since January to March, 2011 from three sites viz confluence zone of temple, upstream and downstream river water. Total number of nine samples were analysed and a correlation matrices among parameters was determined. River water was showing alkaline character throughout the study period. pH, alkalinity and chloride were found to be under the acceptable limit of BIS (2009), although turbidity and hardness were exceeding the limits at all three sites but total dissolved solid only on confluence zone and downstream river sites. Water samples from the confluence zone near the temple showed slightly higher concentration of all the parameters than other sites. The present study reveals the slight effects of various religious activities on confluence site of tons river water near the temple which were found to be under the prescribed permissible limits of BIS (2009).

Current Science

Anket Sharma

Hydrogeology Journal

Dr Wilfred Kadewa

THE IJES Editor