Approval letter
I confirm that the work reported in this thesis was carried out by the candidate under my
supervision as university requirement, and this thesis is about an assessment of Water Quality
in, Mogadishu-Somalia was conducted in 2020 and has been submitted for review with my
approval as university internal supervisor.
Supervisor
signature: …………………..
Mr. _______________________
Date: ………/………/2020
Dean faculty of Geosciences and Environment
signature: ……………………..
Mr. _______________________
Date: ………/………/2020
II
Declaration
This Research has been presented to Benadir University in Somalia for the award of Bachelor
degree of geosciences and environment.
We hereby declared that this is our original work and to the best of our knowledge that has
never been presented for any other award in any other university or institution.
Candidates
1. Mohamed Abdiaziz Diblawe
Signature ……………………….
2. Mohamed Abdulahi Jim’ale
Signature ……………………….
3. Mohamed Hussein Ahmed
Signature ……………………….
4. Abdifatah Mohumed Omar
Signature ……………………….
5. Abdulahi Isse Adan
Signature ……………………….
6. Hassan Odwa Abdi
Signature ……………………….
Date:
__/____/2020
III
Dedication
We dedicate this study; To our dear and beloved parents, dear Dean of the faculty, dear
teachers, dear supervisor. We also dedicate to all of our colleagues, the staff, the students,
everyone who contributed to this effort and all youths in Mogadishu
With love and respect
Acknowledgement
In the first place, we have to thank Allah, the creator of this universe, who created us to
worship him and made us to serve the sick people. Second, we have to thank our parents for
their love and support throughout our life. Thank you for giving us strength to reach for the
stars and chase our dreams, our families deserves our wholehearted thanks as well. We also
would like to express our deeply gratefulness to Benadir University.
IV
Then we are extremely thankful to our dear supervisor and guider, Mr.Abdirahman Mohamed
Tifow from whom we have received valuable advice, important comments, and much needed support
to keep going, that granted us being an outstanding and superiors among students, there is no word
that would capture our gratitude to him.
Very special thanks to our dear and beloved parents, our teachers, our supervisor, to all of
our colleagues and to everyone who contributed to this effort
We are respecting all my classmates and friends.
Allah blesses you all.
June 2020
V
Table of contents
Approval letter .............................................................................................................................. II
Declaration .................................................................................................................................... III
Dedication ..................................................................................................................................... IV
Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................ IV
Table of contents .......................................................................................................................... VI
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. IX
CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................ 1
1.0: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1: BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ...................................................................................... 1
1.2: PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................................................... 4
1.3: PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................ 5
1.4: OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY .......................................................................................... 5
1.5: RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................................... 5
1.6: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................... 5
1.7: SCOPE OF THE STUDY ...................................................................................................... 6
1.7.1: geographical scope ......................................................................................................... 6
1.7.2: content scope.................................................................................................................... 6
1.7.3: time scope......................................................................................................................... 6
1.8: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY .......................................................... 7
1.9: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ....................................................................................... 8
1.10: OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF THE STUDY ........................................................ 8
CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................. 9
REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE ........................................................... 9
2.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 9
2.1 GROUNDWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND ASSESSMENT .......................... 9
2.2 ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY ............................................................................ 10
2.1 WATER QUALITY .............................................................................................................. 12
VI
2.3 WATER AND WATER QUALITY .................................................................................... 16
2.4 PRIOR STUDIES .................................................................................................................. 18
2.5 SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 20
2.6 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 21
CHAPTER THREE ....................................................................................... 22
METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................... 22
3.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 22
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN .......................................................................................................... 22
3.2 RESEARCH POPULATION ............................................................................................... 22
3.2.1 Sample Size ..................................................................................................................... 22
3.2.2 SAMPLING PROCEDURE .......................................................................................... 23
3.3 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS ............................................................................................ 24
3.3.1 RELIABILITY ............................................................................................................... 24
3.3.2 VALIDITY ...................................................................................................................... 24
3.4 DATA GATHERING PROCEDURES ............................................................................... 25
3.5 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................ 25
3.6 ETHICAL ISSUES................................................................................................................ 25
3.7 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................... 25
CHAPTER FOUR .......................................................................................... 26
DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS ........ 26
4.1: DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 26
CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................ 46
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION................. 46
5.1: Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 46
5.1: Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 47
5.2: Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 48
References .................................................................................................................................... 49
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................. 50
QUESTIONNAIRE OF THE STUDY ......................................................... 50
VII
List of tables
Table 4.1: Gender ........................................................................................................................ 26
Table 4.2: Age .............................................................................................................................. 27
Table 4.3: Marital status............................................................................................................. 28
Table 4.4: Experience ................................................................................................................... 29
Table 4.5: Education ................................................................................................................... 30
Table 4.6: Do you drink water directly from the tap? ............................................................. 31
Table 4.7: What is the main source of water used by your household for cooking? ............. 32
Table 4.8: Would you rate the quality of your tap water as .................................................... 33
Table 4.9: How do you rate the taste of tap water?.................................................................. 34
Table 4.10: Do you feel that the quality of water is getting better? ........................................ 35
Table 4.11: In your experience, the taste of chlorine indicates ............................................... 36
Table 4.12: Do you treat your tap water in any way to make it safer to drink?.................... 37
Table 4.13: Why do you treat tap water before drinking it? Any other reasons?................. 38
Table 4.14: Do you use a water filter for your tap water?....................................................... 39
Table 4.15: Do you buy bottled water? ..................................................................................... 40
Table 4.16: To the best of your knowledge, where do households in the city get their tap
water? That is, what is the source of the tap water that you are consuming? (Check all that
apply) ............................................................................................................................................ 41
Table 4.17: What is your main water source available in your workplace for drinking? .... 42
Table 4.18: How would you rate the overall quality of the City of Mogadishu’s tap water?
Would you say...? ........................................................................................................................ 43
Table 4.19: Compared to five year ago, would you say that you … ....................................... 44
Table 4.20: Water quality in Mogadishu is. .............................................................................. 45
VIII
List of figures
Figure 4.1: Gender ..................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 4.2: Age ........................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 4.3: Marital status .......................................................................................................... 28
Figure 4.4: Experience ................................................................................................................. 29
Figure 4.5: Education................................................................................................................. 30
Figure 4.6: Do you drink water directly from the tap? .......................................................... 31
Figure 4.7: What is the main source of water used by your household for cooking? .......... 32
Figure 4.8: Would you rate the quality of your tap water as ................................................. 33
Figure 4.9: How do you rate the taste of tap water? ............................................................... 34
Figure 4.10: Do you feel that the quality of water is getting better? ..................................... 35
Figure 4.11: In your experience, the taste of chlorine indicates ............................................. 36
Figure 4.12: Do you treat your tap water in any way to make it safer to drink? ................. 37
Figure 4.13: Why do you treat tap water before drinking it? Any other reasons? .............. 38
Figure 4.14: Do you use a water filter for your tap water? .................................................... 39
Figure 4.15: Do you buy bottled water? ................................................................................... 40
Figure 4.16: To the best of your knowledge, where do households in the city get their tap
water? That is, what is the source of the tap water that you are consuming? (Check all that
apply) ............................................................................................................................................ 41
Figure 4.17: What is your main water source available in your workplace for drinking? . 42
Figure 4.18: How would you rate the overall quality of the City of Mogadishu’s tap water?
Would you say...? ........................................................................................................................ 43
Figure 4.19: Compared to five year ago, would you say that you … ..................................... 44
Figure 4.20: Water quality in Mogadishu is. ........................................................................... 45
IX
ABSTRACT
This study determined the assessment of Mogadishu Water Quality in Mogadishu-Somalia.
At present the water supply in Mogadishu totally depends on shallow ground water of poor
quality whose chloride severely exceeds the standard, therefore the quick restoration of the
water supply system in the city to provide qualified drinking water for citizens has become
the primary task urgently needing to be addressed by the local government and supply
departments. The main objective of this study was To assess the quality of water in the City
of Mogadishu, Somalia, to identify changes in water quality since the central government
were collapsed and the water purification plants were destroyed in the City of Mogadishu, to
assess attitudes of residents towards water quality issues and to provide recommendations for
enhancement of water quality management in the City Mogadishu. The study was conducted
through survey design, data was collected through questionnaire technique by the researcher,
analysis was done by using SPSS and Microsoft excel. Results of analysis are presented
through tables and figures, 70 respondents were used for the study each respondent was
issued with one questionnaire, 50 out of 70 questionnaires issued were responded. The
findings of this research are that water quality has positive effect on livelihoods much of the
respondents showed that water quality has a positive role on the community. The conclusion
is that there is a direct relationship between water quality and livelihoods. So the researcher
recommends federal government institutions should support the community to deliver safe
water.
X
CHAPTER ONE
1.0: INTRODUCTION
This is the first chapter of the Study and consists of the flowing Sections: background of the study,
problem statement, research purpose, research objectives, and research questions, significance of
the study, and scope of the study, theoretical and conceptual framework of the study and
Operational definitions of the study.
1.1: BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Globally , to provide safe drinking water that does not contain objectionable taste, odor or color;
to provide adequate quantities of water for domestic, commercial, industrial and fire protection
needs. All water produced by public water systems must be drinking water quality, even though
only about 1% of water produced is used for drinking and cooking. Groundwater treatment is much
less involved than surface water treatment. Groundwater has fewer impurities. Aeration may be
required to remove dissolved gases and aid in the removal of dissolved minerals. Fluoride is
sometimes added, but often the only step is disinfection. Addition of chemicals to reduce corrosion
may also be needed. Various regulations exist to control contaminants in drinking water in order
to ensure public safety. Part of an operator’s job is to collect samples, test them and report the
results to the state, which enforces these regulations. Operators must be able to recognize problems
in the treatment process that could result in violations. They should also be familiar with the limits
of certain substances in water so they can recognize when lab tests indicate violations. (Carter,
2018)
Regionally, the term “water quality” describes the physical, chemical and microbiological
characteristics of water. These properties collectively determine the overall water quality and the
fitness of the water for a specific use. These properties are either intrinsic to the water or are the
1
result of substances that are dissolved or suspended in the water. Water quality is only meaningful
when evaluated in relation to the use of the water. The reason is that water of a certain quality may
be fit for a specific use, but completely unfit for another use. For example, water that is fit for
human consumption may not be fit as boiler feed water because the dissolved inorganic salts that
are acceptable in drinking water, are not tolerated in boiler feed water, since they may precipitate
and cause blockages in the boiler equipment.
Water that is fit for domestic use (drinking water) must comply with specific requirements. The
most important requirement is that it must be safe to drink. Many raw water sources contain
harmful micro-organisms or other substances in concentrations that make the water unsafe to drink
or in other ways unfit for domestic use. These organisms and substances must be removed from
the water by means of treatment processes to make the water fit for domestic use. In addition to
the requirement that water must be safe to drink, water for domestic use must also be aesthetically
pleasing (have a clean appearance, taste and odour) and it must furthermore be chemically stable
(i.e. it must not cause corrosion or form deposits in pipes or fixtures such as geysers). The principal
objective therefore of water treatment is to produce water that is fit for domestic use reliably and
consistently from a raw water source at a cost that is reasonable to the consumers. A water
treatment plant employs many individual treatment processes (sometimes called unit processes
and unit operations) that are linked in a process train to produce water of the desired quality.
(Schutte, HANDBOOK FOR THE OPERATION OF WATER TREATMENT WORKS, 2006)
2
Nationally, mogadishu is the capital of somalia and also the main port and historical city ,the
current water supply system of the city is paralyzed ,as the society tend to be stale and the
population gathers in a rapid manner, the city expands gradually , at present the water supply in
Mogadishu totally depends on shallow ground water of poor quality whose chloride severely
exceeds the standard, therefore the quick restoration of the water supply system in the city to
provide qualified drinking water for citizens has become the primary task urgently needing to be
addressed by the local government and supply departments. (CGCOC Group Co., 2015)
Figure 1.1 map of mogadishu in somalia.
3
1.2: PROBLEM STATEMENT
Water is an essential resource, and is required not only for fulfilment of basic personal needs for
the local population, but also for an expanding industry and for agricultural irrigation networks.
Water operators must consider both water quantity and quality requirements in water provision for
meeting current and predicted demand (Spellman and Drinan, 2000). (Yunusi, 2013)
At present the water supply in Mogadishu totally depends on shallow ground water of poor quality
whose chloride severely exceeds the standard, therefore the quick restoration of the water supply
system in the city to provide qualified drinking water for citizens has become the primary task
urgently needing to be addressed by the local government and supply departments. (CGCOC
Group Co., 2015)
mogadishu, aug 13 2008 (ips) - Pipes, reservoirs and water treatment plants in south and central
Somalia have been extensively vandalised in the years since the collapse of Siad Barre's
government in 1991. In the long absence of central authority, Mogadishu's residents have devised
their own informal water distribution systems, but there are many shortcomings. The Bimalow
neighborhood, one of the few remaining populated pockets in Hawlwadag district in the south of
Mogadishu, is served by a well. All the public pipes have been looted, so like other privatelyowned wells in the city, the Bimalow well's management has laid a backbone of its own pipes.
(Warsameh, 2008)
Access to safe water is a significant problem in Somalia, aggravated by the destruction and looting
of water supply installations during the civil war, the continuing conflict, and a general lack of
maintenance. This situation is compounded by erratic rainfall patterns, which produce both
drought and flooding. It is estimated that less than 20 percent of the population has reliable access
to safe water throughout the year. (UNICEF, 2004)
4
1.3: PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this research is to assess and improve understanding of the quality of water in the
City of Mogadishu, Somalia. The water quality in the City of Mogadishu will be assessed and
compared with actual practices. Local people in the urban centre were interviewed in order to
assess public attitudes towards water quality.
1.4: OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
▪
To assess the quality of water in the City of Mogadishu, Somalia.
▪
To identify changes in water quality since the central government were collapsed and
the water purification plants were destroyed in the City of Mogadishu.
▪
To assess attitudes of residents towards water quality issues.
▪
To provide recommendations for enhancement of water quality management in the
City Mogadishu.
1.5: RESEARCH QUESTIONS
▪
What is the quality of water in the City of Mogadishu, Somalia?
▪
What are the processes to identify changes in water quality since the central
government were collapsed and the water purification plants were destroyed in the City
of Mogadishu?
▪
Why to assess attitudes of residents towards water quality issues?
▪
What are the recommendations for enhancement of water quality management in the
City Mogadishu?
1.6: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This study is concerned with an assessment of Mogadishu water quality and this research aimed
to help gain a better understanding of water quality in the urban area of the City of mogadishu,
which can inform decision-making by the public and water managers and also the findings may
5
also contribute literature for the Benadir regional administration, Ministry of Water and Energy,
agencies or companies that interested in water quality and academicians who are interesting to
carry out for further study in this field.
1.7: SCOPE OF THE STUDY
1.7.1: geographical scope
This study will be drown from the field of geoscience and environment and concerned with the
assessment of Mogadishu water quality, this study will take place in Mogadishu Somalia.
1.7.2: content scope
In this scope water treatment is to prescribe acceptable limits for the
physical, chemical and
biological attributes of the quality water and meets the requirements of the local departments also
to provide potable water to a community by implementing a treatment process appropriate for the
size of the community being served and the quality and type of source water available to this
community and this study is focused on an assessing the quality of water in Mogadishu.
1.7.3: time scope
This study of an assessment of Mogadishu water quality limits to 2020.
6
1.8: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY
Water Quality
Source of Water
Water resource Mgt.
Effects of
Physical, Chemical &
Biological Quality
Livelihood
s
Water treatment
Water Pollution
7
1.9: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Water that are not chemically, physically and biologically treated can create risks to human health
and the environment, if water is treated probably through physically, biologically and chemically
will improve the safety of the humans health and the environment .
1.10: OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF THE STUDY
An assessment: is the process of gathering and discussing information from multiple and diverse
sources in order to develop a deep understanding of what students know, understand, and
can do with their knowledge as a result of their educational experiences.
Water: a substance composed of the chemical elements hydrogen and oxygen and existing in
gaseous, liquid, and solid states.
Quality: is the standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind; the
degree of excellence of something.
Source water: refers to sources of water (such as rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, springs, and
groundwater) that provide water to public drinking water supplies and private wells.
Water resource management: is the activity of planning, developing, distributing
and managing the optimum use of water resources.
Water treatment: is any process that improves the quality of water to make it more acceptable
for a specific end-use.
Water pollution: is the contamination of water bodies, usually as a result of human
activities. Water bodies include for example lakes, rivers, oceans, aquifers and groundwater.
8
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This study is intended to assess the water quality in Mogadishu Somalia.; therefore this chapter
consists of literature review related to exploring the quality of water in Mogadishu, finding out
types of problems as well as examining the importance of water quality as a case of Mogadishu.
2.1 GROUNDWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND ASSESSMENT
In Somalia, groundwater from hand dug wells and boreholes are increasingly becoming the
primary sources of water for the population (FAO-SWALIM, 2007). After the civil war in
1991, interventions by the UN Agencies and International NGOs in the Somali water sector
were substantial. UNICEF’s interventions in the water sector are remarkable. Private sector
has also invested in the urban water supply. After the civil war, the water supply services have
totally been run by unregulated private entities with no sufficient focus on the quality of the
supplied water, Groundwater has long been regarded as the best water resource for all types of
use.
Water quality assessment has become increasingly important as we move into the future as
human populations continue to increase the amount of wastes and pollution in water bodies.
Testing of water quality is therefore necessary, and the data requires frequent updates to remain
accurate and relevant. The quality of water is decided by its chemical, physical and biological
characteristics. Water quality could not be managed if there is lack of data. Data collection is
therefore precondition for any water quality management. Groundwater quality assessment
depends strongly on the amount and quality of the groundwater analysis available.
Assessments of water quality can be divided broadly into two categories – use-oriented and
9
impact-orientated (WMO, 2013). Use-oriented assessment indicates whether water quality is
satisfactory for specific purposes, such as drinking-water supply. Many water uses have
specific requirements with respect to physical and chemical variables or contaminants.
(MOHAMED, 2019)
2.2 ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY
In now days due to increase in population, industrialization, agricultural activities and
urbanization, large quantities of sewage and industrial wastewater are discharged into water bodies
has significantly contributed to the pollution of the surface and ground water. The objective of the
present study was to assess water quality of various ground water sources for drinking and
agriculture. For the assessment of water pollution status of the water bodies, the following water
quality parameters were analyzed: (1) pH (2) Conductivity (3) Temperature (4) Total dissolved
solid (TDS) (6) Total Alkalinity (7) Hardness (8) Cations and Anions (9) Carbonates and
Bicarbonates. (10) Sulphates.
Measurement of pH:
The pH is important parameter of water, which determines the suitability of water for various
purposes such as drinking, bathing, cooking, washing and agriculture etc. The pH level of water
having desirable limit is 6.5 to 8.5 as specified by the BIS. Pure water is said to be neutral, with a
pH of 7. Water with a pH below 7.0 is considered acidic while water with pH greater than 7.0 is
considered as basic or alkaline.
Measurement of Conductivity:
10
Electrical conductivity is the capacity of electrical current that passes through the water. It is
directly related to concentration of ionized substances in water and may also be related to problems
of excessive hardness. According to (Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) the desirable limit of
Conductivity is 600 μm/cm. Solutions of most inorganic acids, bases, and salts are relatively good
conductors. In contrast, the conductivity of distilled water is less than 1 μmhos/cm.
Measurement of Alkalinity:
The standard desirable limit of alkalinity of potable water is 120 mg/l. The maximum Permissible
level is 600 mg/l. Excessive alkalinity may cause eye irritation in human and chlorosis in plants
(Sisodia and Moundiotiya, 2006). It is measured by titration with standardized acid to a pH value
of 4.5 and is expressed commonly as milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate.
Measurement of TDS:
TDS in groundwater can also be due to natural sources such as sewage, urban runoff and industrial
waste (Joseph, 2001; Swarna Latha, 2008). According to BIS and ICMR the desirable limit of TDS
is 500 mg/l. If TDS value is more than 500 mg/l, it may cause gastro intestinal irritation. High
TDS presence in the water decreases the quality and affects the taste of water (Guru Prasad, 2005).
Measurement of Hardness:
The limit of total hardness value for drinking water is to be within 300 mg/l of CaCO3.Higher
concentration of hardness was found may be due to natural accumulation of salt, or surface runoff,
water enter from direct pollution by human activities.
Measurement of Chloride:
11
Chloride is one of the most important parameter in assessing the water quality and higher
concentration of chloride indicates higher degree of organic pollution (Yogendra and Puttaiah,
2008). According to BIS and ICMR the permissible limit of chloride in drinking water is 250 mg/l.
High concentration of chloride was observed may be due to natural processes such as the passage
of water through natural salt formations in the earth or it may be an indication of pollution from
industrial or domestic use (Renn, 1970). In drinking water, high chloride content may lead to
laxative effects (Raviprakash and Rao, 1989; Dahiya and Kaur, 1999).
Measurement of Turbidity:
Nephelometer instrument measures the intensity of scattered light by turbid particles at right angle
to the incident beam of light in comparison with the intensity of light passing through the sample.
Scattering of light is a function of Tyndall effect exhibited by colloidal suspended particles.
Turbidity of samples is measured by Nephelometer based on this principle. The maximum
Permissible level is 5 NTU, (Nephelometric Turbidity Units).
Measurement of Temperature:
The temperature is measured with help of Digital Thermometer. The thermometer is immersed in
sample and temperature is recorded. (M.J.Pawari1S.M.Gavande2, 2015)
2.1 WATER QUALITY
Clean water is essential for humans and has a profound effect on health and has the capacity to
reduce illness. Paradoxical, it is a medium that disease-causing-agents may be transported through
and transmitted into humans. Water impacts on human health through consumption of water
consisting of pathogenic organisms or toxic chemicals. Water also impact on human health if not
12
consumed in a required amount, leading to dehydration and/or other personal health issues (World
Health Organization [WHO], 2012).
The usage of water does not only stretch to drinking supply but also other activities such as
cooking, hygiene practice etc. and the access to clean water varies today with several areas that
are vulnerable of water deficiency or sufferer from scarcity (United Nations World Water
Assessment Programme [WWAP], 2014). Clean water deficiency is both a projected and also an
increasing ongoing problem, both in well developed and developing countries. So far there is
generally seldom a problem to find water sources, rather the problem is to get access to fresh and
clean water. (United Nations Development Programme [UNDP], 2006). Davis & Lambert (2002)
and Loo et al. (2012) identifies three typical situations and scenarios where the access to safe
drinking water are problematic.
Water deficiency when migrating or hiking. This can be refugees migrating to other countries or
regions. Temporary or permanent settlements where access to safe water is missing or lacking.
This sites can be refugee camps, temporary tent camps after nature disasters, rural areas or slums.
A society where the infrastructure for water, sewage or energy systems has been destroyed or
damaged due to war or nature disasters. Looking at these situations, a common cause for all three
scenarios, are disasters or catastrophes. When hazards result in substantial physical loss and
damage a disaster occur. A disaster is also defined as social or economic disruptions that directly
or indirectly threaten people’s lives (Davis & Lambert, 2002). About 700 thousand people lost
their lives, over 1.4 million were injured and approximately 23 million became homeless as a result
of disasters between 2005 and 2015 (United Nations [UN], 2015a). Water security in areas with
low societal security and less developed infrastructure are often more vulnerable to nature disasters
such as earthquakes, storms, flooding etc. The effects of such events are also even more devastating
13
to low developed countries that may lack social and economic ability to handle casualties and
destruction due to these events (Davis & Lambert, 2002). \
Many disasters and catastrophes are exacerbated by climate change and have increased in
frequency and intensity during the recent decade (UN, 2015a). Due to climate change and increase
in global mean surface temperature (GMST), scientists claim that the access to clean water and
water security will be even more threatened in the future. There will be larger areas with scarcity
and water deficiency (WWAP, 2014). The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) is a
government agency in Sweden, with a task to develop the societal ability to prevent and handle
emergencies, accidents and crises (The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency [MSB], 2016). The
agency supports various actors when a crisis or an accident occurs, both abroad and at a national
level. The personnel supporting at a crisis zone are sometimes working under extreme conditions
where basic needs, such as access to food and fresh water can be a deficiency. Clean water is a
vital base factor after a catastrophe. Water is used to clean wounds, for surgery, cooking food and
of course for drinking supply. \
To provide drinking water with a sufficient quality has shown to be one of the most important
factors after a catastrophe. Safe water supply is also one of the first priorities after a disaster (Foo
et al., 2012). This to prevent dehydration, spreading of water related diseases (diarrhoea, hepatitis
A etc.) and also for the relief workers to perform and help during extreme circumstances (United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR], 2007). To ensure that the personal working
at these sites can continue to solve problems without endangering their own health by dehydration
or other water borne diseases, different methods can be used to treat water for personal use. The
MSB conventionally use the disinfectant chlorine dioxide to purify water where no other solutions,
such as temporary water treatment plants or other provision of drinking water is available.
14
The two types of chlorine dioxide substances used by MSB are currently either in pill or in liquid
form (P. Bloom, personal contact, 12 April, 2016). On a personal level an alternative to the chlorine
pills could be different types of filters or treatment by UV-light. The most actual filters used for
this study are the Katadyn bottle and the Lifesaver bottle. The UV-light method is provided by the
product SteriPEN. Examination and evaluation on how these five products differ in perspectives
of function, treatment ability, environmental effects and costs will be of interest for MSB, but also
other agencies and NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisations) that have personnel working at
crisiszones and emergency zones. In a wider scale it could also be of interest for states with an
erratic climate or low water security. At sites where nature disasters can cause water defiance for
the population, these products may be used as water treatment method for short term use.
Aim and Purpose The aim of the study is to create an information basis where five different water
treatment products designed for personal use is examined from the parameters; manageability,
purification capacity, environmental impact and economic aspect. This study is done in purpose
for MSB that is in need of a water treatment product for short time use that is easy to handle, easy
distributed and that also provides a water with a quality that doesn’t causes acute or chronical
health problems. Additionally the product should have low environmental impact and be economic
viable. (Österdahl, Water treatment, 2016)
Most water treatment plants (especially large plants) employ coagulation, sedimentation, and
filtration processes for water purification. The major sources of wastes are the sedimentation
basins and filter backwashes. Alum coagulation sludges, which are high in gelatinous metal
hydroxides, comprise large quantities of small particles. These are among the most difficult
sludges to handle because of their low settling rate, low permeability to water, and thixotropic
characteristics. Generally, about 5% of the treated water is used for washing filters. Volume
15
reduction of backwashes and recycling of washwater to the plant influent can reduce waste
production and cut costs. In the case of treatment plants that remove iron and manganese through
aeration or potassium permanganate oxidation, disposal of sludge to receiving waters may cause
problems such as water discoloration and destruction of aquatic life. Treatment plants that use an
ion exchange softening process have brine wastes (high salts) which become critical disposal
problems, especially when the sludge has a high manganese content.
The salts cannot readily be recovered or removed from the wastes. Brine wastes are almost
impossible to treat. Formerly, wastes from water treatment plants were returned to their original
source or discharged to nearby receiving water. Illinois laws and regulations now consider waste
discharged directly from water treatment plants to receiving water as a pollutant. All wastes have
to be treated to an acceptable level prior to their release into the environment, and water treatment
plant wastes are no exception. However, occasionally a site-specific variance for direct discharge
may be granted by the pollution 2 control authorities. In these cases, treatment of water plant
wastes is not necessary before final disposal. , Many water treatment plants do not have adequate
facilities to investigate the quantity of waste produced, its characteristics and treatability, and
appropriate waste disposal practices. Methods for assessing waste production have not been welldefined, and the composition of wastes has" scarcely been reported in the literature. Very little
research has been conducted on the effects of coagulant and lime sludges applied to farmlands.
(water, 1987)
2.3 WATER AND WATER QUALITY
Water is the most valuable natural resource available to man, without which no life can survive.
Therefore, adequate and safe water supply is a pre-requisite for significant socio-economic
development of any community (Algaon-odot et al., 2012). Water bodies’ pollution is the
16
introduction of contaminants into water bodies. Water pollutants are directly or indirectly
discharged into water bodies without adequate treatment to remove harmful substances (Michael
Hogan, 2014). Water pollution affects plants and animals living in these water bodies, and also,
affects other aquatic biota. Globally, the most prevalent water quality problem is eutrophication the introduction of nutrients (mainly phosphates and nitrates) into water bodies. Eutrophication
substantially impairs beneficial uses of water (UNDESA, 2105).
Water quality refers to the chemical, physical, biological, and radiological characteristics of water
(Dier song et al., 2009). It is a measure of the conditions of water relative to the requirement of
oneor more biotic species, and or to any human need or purpose. It is most frequently used by
reference to a set of standards against which compliance can be assessed. The most common
standards used to access water quality relate to health of ecosystems, safely of human contact and
consumption (USEPA, 2005). Water quality parameters are parameters in which the assessment
of water quality is based. Water quality parameters are divided into three categories; physical
parameters, chemical parameters and biological parameters (Ben-coker, 2012). Some of the
physicochemical parameters include turbidity, temperature, electrical conductivity (EC), total
suspended solids (TSS), pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), nitrates, nitrites, phosphates, biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD), etc. Water is adjudged safe if these parameters fall within certain range
that is tolerable by human when consumed; and also tolerable by living organism within the aquatic
environment (Standard organization of Nigeria, 2007). Water quality standard or guideline
describes the quality parameters set for drinking water (Arokoya et al., 2014).
Despite the truism that every human on this planet needs water to survive, and that water may
contain many harmful constitutions, there is no universally recognized or acceptable international
standard for drinking water. Even where standards do exist, and are applied, the permitted
17
concentration of individual constituents may vary by as much as ten times from one set of standards
to another. Many developed countries specify standards to be applied in their own country. In
Europe, this includes the European Drinking water directives; and in U.S.A, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (Arokoyu et al., 2004). (BM, 2016)
2.4 PRIOR STUDIES
State health department, State water resource, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
personnel, as appropriate, should be consulted in the early stages of project planning regarding
supply sources and associated water treatment needs. In addition to the usual treatment that may
be required to insure delivery of potable water, consideration will be given to the need for special
treatment to protect pipelines, water heaters, plumbing fixtures, and other equipment against
scaling, corrosion, and staining, Because of the widely varying conditions and the many types of
water, it is not possible to establish criteria for all cases of special water treatment. Treatment for
prevention of scaling and corrosion may not be entirely effective; and in many cases a decision as
to the necessity of special treatment cannot be reached prior to actual operating experiences. In
general, special treatment will be provided only in cases where a study of water analyses and
experience with the water definitely show that there will be severe corrosion of the water system
or that severe scaling of hot-water heaters, storage tanks, and other parts of the plumbing system
will occur. Marginal cases will be deferred and treatment provided only after operating experience
determines treatment to be necessary. (FORCE, 1985)
The first references to clean water or ‘sweet water’ and for water to be good for use after passage
over a certain number of stones date back about 3000 years to Biblical times. The Roman
aqueducts are well-known later landmarks in Europe as testimony of conveying clean water to
cities. By the eighteenth century the removal of particles from water by filtration was known as an
18
effective way of clarifying water and the first municipal water filtration plant started operating in
Scotland in 1832. However, the main objective at that time was simply to supply clear water
because the germ theory and the knowledge that diseases could be spread by water was still
unknown. It was only in 1855 that Dr John Snow, an epidemiologist showed empirically that a
cholera outbreak in London was caused by drinking water contaminated by faecal wastes from a
cholera patient.
However, the concept of disinfection as a disease preventing measure and a practical disinfection
process only developed much later. Pasteur demonstrated his germ theory only in the 1880’s and
chlorination as treatment process was developed after 1905. By the early 1900’s the large increase
in the number of water supply systems without proper treatment in the USA contributed to major
outbreaks in water-borne diseases. However, it was only with the introduction of chlorine as a
treatment process to disinfect water in 1908 that the spreading of diseases through contaminated
water could be controlled. Chlorination was rapidly accepted as an essential part of water treatment
and this resulted in a substantial decline in the number of deaths due to water-borne diseases.
Research on coagulation-flocculation, sedimentation and filtration as basic water treatment
processes during the early part of the previous century contributed to a better understanding of
these processes and much improved performance. New processes were also developed during that
time in Europe. The use of ozone for disinfection and taste- and colour enhancement was
introduced early in the century in France and Germany.
The most significant process development since the introduction of chlorine during the previous
century was the development of synthetic membranes as treatment process. The first practical
reverse osmosis membranes for the desalination of seawater were developed in the 1960’s. Later,
other types of membranes were developed, including nanofiltration (NF), ultrafiltration (UF) and
19
microfiltration (MF) membranes. These membranes find application in water treatment other than
just desalination. For example, NF and UF membranes are used to replace some conventional
treatment processes for removal of natural organic substances and micro-organisms from water.
(Schutte, 2006)
2.5 SUMMARY
Water is fully treated before being supplied to a distribution system from where it will go on to
feed consumers. Smaller supplies, such as those feeding individual properties, would normally still
be expected to have a suitable form of treatment situated such that it will provide water for drinking
and other domestic uses at all points in the property, It is essential that the design of any treatment
process is based on a full investigation of site conditions, including chemical and microbiological
analysis of the water to be treated, a risk assessment and the results of laboratory or pilot scale
tests to determine the effectiveness of the process and the chemical dosing requirements. This
chapter provides an overview of the basic principles of water treatment; anyone planning to install
or upgrade a water treatment process should seek expert guidance. Where water is used for any
domestic purposes it must be wholesome. Requirement for treatment may vary according to
rainfall, catchment activity or other reasons. Although monitoring may indicate that the water is
bacteriologically safe some of the time, it is extremely likely that there will be a bacteriological
challenge at other times. In practice this means that many supplies will require a disinfection stage
unless the supply can be shown by risk assessment and frequent surveillance to be likely to be
consistently pathogen free, Purpose of water treatment – to provide safe drinking water that does
not contain objectionable taste, odor or color; to provide adequate quantities of water for domestic,
commercial, industrial and fire protection needs.
20
2.6 CONCLUSION
Water quality brings many importances to the society today. One of the importances of water
quality is to ensure that water is more suitable to be used by industries and individuals. The purpose
of assessing water quality is to remove contaminations from water, so that it would be more
suitable for it to be used. There are several processes that can be used to treat water such as
filtration, disinfection that is majorly in use to clean water, Water is the key to a person’s survival
because without water survival is simply not an option. Hence, it is important to make sure water
is purified in order to drink otherwise bacteria in the water can be harmful to your organs if drunk
in normal consumption. According to a global research, a large number of people at their early
ages die from water born diseases in most of the developing countries. Thus, it is very important
to get the proper treatment of the water for a healthy living. Water treatment industry can be very
helpful for the society today because they are saving the lives of many innocent human beings who
die from fatal diseases such as cholera, typhoid which cause by consuming contaminated water.
21
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.0 INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents a detailed description of the research methodology which refers to the
procedure to be followed and discusses research design, research population, sample size,
sampling procedure, research instrument, validity and reliability of the instrument, data gathering
procedure, data analysis, ethical consideration and limitations of the study.
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN
This study follows Descriptive Research design. It is cross-sectional and quantitative. In analytical
research, the researcher has to use facts or information already available, and analyze them to make
a critical evaluation of the material. It is a cross-sectional survey and the researcher will examine
many people at same time because most research projects undertaken for academic courses are
necessarily time constrained.
3.2 RESEARCH POPULATION
Population refers to the entire group of people that the researcher wishes to investigate (Nwubaet
al, 1986). The study population is 70 in different area. Those consist of small scale of waste
disposal agencies and their employee, teachers and students. These are selected because as they
concern our topic.
3.2.1 Sample Size
From the target population of private well owners in Mogadishu, the researcher selected 50
respondents as the sample size. The key respondents comprised of 5 head of private wells, 15
employees of mineral water factory, 10 teachers, 20 students, and. Table 3.1 shows the distribution
of the sampling respondents.
22
Table 3.1: Showing Categories of Respondents & Sample Size
Category of Respondents
Population
Sample size
head of private wells
10
5
employees of mineral water factory
20
15
Teachers
15
10
Students
25
20
Total
70
50
The researcher used Slovene’s formula to select the respondents of the study from the population;
using the following formula:
Where n is the required sample size, N is the target population size and e is the standard error or
level of significance, which is popularly known to be =0.05 or 5%. For this study, N = 95 and so
the sample size was calculated as follows;
n=
N
1 + N (e) 2
n=
70
= 50
(70 + 1)(0.140) 2
3.2.2 SAMPLING PROCEDURE
In this study, purposive sampling technique was employed. According to Amin (2005), purposive
sampling is the type of sampling where the researcher uses his/her judgment or common sense
23
regarding participants from whom the information was collected. The researcher used purposive
sampling in order to choose the respondents that he believes to have the information concerning
this study by using his own judgment, and then the researcher distributed the questionnaire to them.
Moreover, the researcher chose purposive sampling because the researcher wanted to get the key
informants of this study, for that reason; selecting the respondents is more useful for this study
than the representativeness of the sample.
3.3 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS
The questionnaire of the study was developed by the researcher to collect information about the
evaluation of public private partnership projects in Mogadishu as a case study of the seaport and
airport so that this enabled to make the items in the questionnaire as valid as possible.
3.3.1 RELIABILITY
Reliability is trustworthiness of a measuring instrument; it is the degree to which the instrument
consistently measures whatever it is meant to be measuring. The researcher conducts a pilot study
before the final collection of data. Data collection tools are pilot tested in order to ascertain his
ability to solicit the relevant responses to support the study. The justification for establishing the
reliability of the instruments is determined by the consistency, relevancy and clarity of the
instruments.
3.3.2 VALIDITY
Validity is the ability to produce findings that are in agreement with theoretical or conceptual
values; in other words, to produce accurate results and to measure what is supposed to be measured
(Amin, 2005). There are different ways of testing the validity of a result, as going back to the
respondents and see if they agree or support the result. This is called face validity and could happen
in personal conversations or in groups. In this study the researcher uses that way of testing the
validity of the result.
24
3.4 DATA GATHERING PROCEDURES
After the researcher gets an approval from the academic, the authorities concerned attach letter to
the questionnaire confirming that the researcher is student of Benadir University, Faculty of
Geosciences and Environment in Mogadishu, Somalia and then questionnaire is distributed to the
selected respondents.
3.5 DATA ANALYSIS
This part addresses, processing and analysis. The data was collected through descriptive analysis.
The data was collected from the study area, edited, collated and tabulated. Data was collected
through questionnaire and interview, and A-4 point liker scale was used to measure the output of
each item answered by the respondent. SPSS statistical computer software was used to tabulate
the data.
3.6 ETHICAL ISSUES
Under this, the respondents are informed that participation is voluntary so that they make informed
decision to participate or not. The researcher also goes with an introductory letter Protecting
respondents through data confidentiality also minimizes links between answers and identifiers, to
avoid putting respondents in trouble. In addition, the researcher avoids racial or tribal remarks,
which are not gender sensitive.
3.7 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
The researcher was supposed to face number of problems including unwillingness of the
respondents to answer the research questions probably. Also the researcher faced language
barriers, as some of the respondents do not know English language so the researcher tried to
translate them in their local language.
25
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1: DATA ANALYSIS
In this chapter we analyze data from respondents and presented in table and figures, containing the
type of responses, and frequencies, percentages and cumulative percentages,.
Table 4.1: Gender
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative Percent
Male
38
76%
76%
Female
12
24%
100%
Total
50
100%
The above table and the following figure show that 76% of the respondents of the questionnaire
where the male, while 24% of the respondents were female.
Figure 4.1: Gender
Gender
24%
76%
Source: Primary Data 2020
26
Table 4.2: Age
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative Percent
20-30
30
60%
60%
31-45
16
32%
92%
46 and above
4
8%
100%
Total
50
100%
The above table and the following figure show that 60% of the respondents of the questionnaire
where the in the age 20-30, 32% of the respondents were in the age 31-45 while only 8% of the
respondents were in the age of 46 and above.
Figure 4.2: Age
Age
60%
32%
8%
20-30
31-45
46 and above
Source: Primary Data 2020
27
Table 4.3: Marital status
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative Percent
Single
35
70%
70%
Married
15
30%
100%
Total
50
100%
The above table and the following figure show that 70% of the respondents of the questionnaire
where single, 30% of the respondents were married
Figure 4.3: Marital status
Marital status
90
80
70
70
60
50
40
30
30
20
10
0
Single
Married
Source: Primary Data 2020
28
Table 4.4: Experience
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative Percent
Less than a year
7
14%
14%
1-3 years
40
80%
94%
4 years above
3
6%
100%
Total
50
100%
The above table and the following figure show that 14% of the respondents of the questionnaire
had less than a year of experience, 80% of the respondents 1-3 of experience and 6% of the
respondents had 4 years above of experience
Figure 4.4: Experience
Experience
80%
14%
6%
lesss than a year
1-3 years
4 years and above
Source: Primary Data 2020
29
Table 4.5: Education
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative Percent
Diploma
0
0%
0%
Bachelor
37
74%
74%
Master
10
20%
94%
PHD
3
6%
100%
Total
50
100%
The above table and the following figure show that 74% of the respondents of the questionnaire
had bachelor degree, and 20% of the respondents had master degree while only 6% of the
respondents had PHD degree
Figure 4.5: Education
Education
74%
20%
6%
0%
Diploma
Bachelor
Master
Source: Primary Data 2020
30
PHD
Table 4.6: Do you drink water directly from the tap?
Valid
Yes
No
I only drink purified water
I only drink filtered water
Total
Frequency
Percentage
30
5
8
7
50
60%
10%
16%
14%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 60% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered yes that they drink water directly from the tap, 10% of them said No to that issue while
16% of them answered only drink purified water to that issue and only 14% of the remaining
respondents said only drink filtered water to that issue.
Figure 4.6: Do you drink water directly from the tap?
Do you drink water directly from the tap?
60%
16%
14%
10%
Yes
No
I only drink
purified water
Source: Primary Data 2020
31
I only drink
filtered water
Table 4.7: What is the main source of water used by your household for
cooking?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Tap water
35
70%
Purified water
8
16%
Filtered water
7
14%
Total
50
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 70% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered yes that the main source of water used by your household for cooking, 16% of them said
Purified water to that issue while 14% of the remaining respondents said Filtered water to that
issue.
Figure 4.7: What is the main source of water used by your household for
cooking?
What is the main source of water used by your
household for cooking?
70%
Tap water
16%
14%
Purified water
Filtered water
Source primary data 2020
32
Table 4.8: Would you rate the quality of your tap water as
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Excellent
10
20%
Very good
Fair
Satisfactory
Poor
Total
5
6
17
12
50
10%
12%
34%
24%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 20% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered excellent to that issue, 10% of them said very good to that issue while 12% of the
respondents said fair to that issue, and 34% of them said satisfactory, while only 24% of them said
poor to that issue..
Figure 4.8: Would you rate the quality of your tap water as
Would you rate the quality of your tap water as
34%
24%
20%
10%
Excellent
Very good
12%
Fair
Satisfactory
Source: Primary data 2020
33
Poor
Table 4.9: How do you rate the taste of tap water?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Very good
6
12%
good
Fair
Poor
Won’t drink it
Total
20
9
8
7
50
40%
18%
16%
14%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 12% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered good to that issue, 40% of them said good to that issue while 18% of the respondents
said fair to that issue, and 16% of them said poor, while only 14% of them said won’t drink it to
that issue..
Figure 4.9: How do you rate the taste of tap water?
How do you rate the taste of tap water?
40%
18%
12%
Very good
good
Fair
16%
Poor
Source: Primary data 2020
34
14%
Won’t drink
it
Table 4.10: Do you feel that the quality of water is getting better?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Getting much better
8
16%
Getting somewhat better
Staying the same
Getting somewhat worse
Getting much worse
Total
18
11
7
6
50
36%
22%
14%
12%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 16% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered Getting much better to that issue, 36% of them said Getting somewhat better to that
issue while 22% of the respondents said Staying the same to that issue, and 14% of them said
Getting somewhat worse, while only 12% of them said Getting much worse it to that issue..
Figure 4.10: Do you feel that the quality of water is getting better?
Do you feel that the quality of water is getting better?
36%
22%
16%
14%
12%
Getting much
better
Getting
somewhat
better
Staying the
same
Getting
somewhat
worse
Source Primary data 2020
35
Getting much
worse
Table 4.11: In your experience, the taste of chlorine indicates
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Safe water
36
72%
Less safe water
Unsafe water
Total
9
5
50
18%
10%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 72% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered safe water to that issue, 18% of them said less safe water to that issue while 10% of the
respondents said unsafe water to that issue..
Figure 4.11: In your experience, the taste of chlorine indicates
In your experience, the taste of chlorine indicates
72%
18%
10%
Safe water
Less safe water
Unsafe water
Source: Primary data 2020
36
Table 4.12: Do you treat your tap water in any way to make it safer to drink?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Yes
22
44%
No
Total
28
50
56%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 44% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered yes to that issue, 56% of them said no to that issue.
Figure 4.12: Do you treat your tap water in any way to make it safer to drink?
Do you treat your tap water in any way to make it safer
to drink?
yes
no
44%
56%
Source: primary data 2020
37
Table 4.13: Why do you treat tap water before drinking it? Any other reasons?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
To remove impurities
10
20%
To improve taste
To remove chemicals
To ensure safety
All above
Total
8
7
5
20
50
16%
14%
10%
20%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 20% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered to remove impurities to that issue, 16% of them said to improve taste to that issue while
14% of the respondents said to remove chemicals to that issue, 10% of them said to ensure safety
and while 20% of them said all above.
Figure 4.13: Why do you treat tap water before drinking it? Any other reasons?
Why do you treat tap water before drinking it? Any
other reasons?
20%
20%
16%
14%
10%
To remove
impurities
To improve
taste
To remove
chemicals
To ensure
safety
Source: Primary data 2020
38
All above
Table 4.14: Do you use a water filter for your tap water?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Yes
18
36%
No
Total
32
50
64%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 36% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered yes to that issue, 64% of them said no to that issue.
Figure 4.14: Do you use a water filter for your tap water?
Do you use a water filter for your tap water?
64%
36%
yes
no
Source: primary data 2020
39
Table 4.15: Do you buy bottled water?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Yes
20
40%
No
Total
30
50
60%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 40% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered yes to that issue, 60% of them said no to that issue.
Figure 4.15: Do you buy bottled water?
Do you buy bottled water?
40%
60%
Source: primary data 2020
40
Table 4.16: To the best of your knowledge, where do households in the city get
their tap water? That is, what is the source of the tap water that you are
consuming? (Check all that apply)
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Reservoir
6
12%
Mountain snow/ice melt
Ground water
Rivers/creeks/streams
Total
2
38
4
50
4%
76%
8%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 12% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered reservoir to that issue, 4% of them said mountain snow/ice melt to that issue while 76%
of the respondents said ground water to that issue, and only 8% of the them said
river/creeks/streams to that issue.
Figure 4.16: To the best of your knowledge, where do households in the city get their tap water?
That is, what is the source of the tap water that you are consuming? (Check all that apply)
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Source: Primary Data 2020
41
Table 4.17: What is your main water source available in your workplace for
drinking?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Tap water
27
54%
Boiled tap water
Bottled water
Filtered water
Total
8
10
5
50
16%
20%
10%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 54% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered tap water to that issue, 16% of them said boiled water to that issue while 20% of the
respondents said bottled water to that issue, and only 10% of the them said filtered water to that
issue.
Figure 4.17: What is your main water source available in your workplace for drinking?
What is your main water source available in your
workplace for drinking?
54%
16%
Tap water
Boiled tap
water
20%
10%
Bottled water
Source: Primary data 2020
42
Filtered water
Table 4.18: How would you rate the overall quality of the City of Mogadishu’s
tap water? Would you say...?
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Excellence
21
42%
Good
Fair
Poor
Very poor
Total
9
11
6
3
50
18%
22%
12%
6%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 42% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered excellence to that issue, 18% of them said good to that issue while 22% of the
respondents said fair to that issue, 12% of the respondents said poor to that issue, and only 6% of
the them said very poor to that issue.
Figure 4.18: How would you rate the overall quality of the City of Mogadishu’s tap water? Would
you say...?
How would you rate the overall quality of the City of
Mogadishu’s tap water? Would you say...?
42%
22%
18%
12%
6%
Excellence
Good
Fair
Poor
Source: primary data 2020
43
Very poor
Table 4.19: Compared to five year ago, would you say that you …
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Are more aware of water quality issues
22
44%
Have about the same level of awareness
Are less aware
Total
17
11
50
34%
22%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 44% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered are more aware of water quality issues to that issue, 34% of them saidhave about the
same level of awareness to that issue and only 22% of the them said are less awareness to that
issue.
Figure 4.19: Compared to five year ago, would you say that you.
Compared to five year ago, would you say that you
44%
34%
22%
Are more aware of
water quality issues
Have about the
same level of
awareness
Are less aware
Source: primary data 2020
44
Table 4.20: Water quality in Mogadishu is.
Valid
Frequency
Percentage
Good
20
40%
Very good
Poor
Very poor
Total
7
10
13
50
14%
20%
26%
100%
The above table and the below figure show that 40% of the respondents of the questionnaire
answered good to that issue, 14% of them said very good to that issue and only 20% of the them
said poor to that issue, 26% of the them said very poor.
Figure 4.20: Water quality in Mogadishu
Water quality in Mogadishu is
Good
Very good
Poor
Very poor
26%
40%
20%
14%
Source: Primary data 2020
45
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter presented the conclusion and recommendations of the study. The first section 5.1
presents discussion, the second section 5.2 presents conclusion of the researcher the third section
5.2 presents the recommendations of the researcher and further researches.
5.1: Discussion
The respondents were asked that do you drink water directly from the tap. Much of the respondents
were answered yes that they drink water directly to the tap. This is true because Somali society has
a culture and norms which affect the way they live so much of the residents in Mogadishu as the
research indicate drink water directly from the tap. The respondents were also asked that do you
feel that the quality of water is getting better. Most of the respondents answered agree that the quality
of water in the Mogadishu is getting better because Somali is nowadays became a federal government
which helped the community to improve their life so the hope is that water quality and supply in the capital
is getting better.
The respondents were also asked that in your experience, the taste of chlorine indicates, most the
respondents answered safe the water to that issue, chlorine is always used to safe water or prevent
from bacteria. They also asked that why do you treat tap water before drinking it? Some of the
respondents answered to remove impurities some other of the respondents answered to improve
taste and some other said to improve chemically but most of the respondents answered all above
which means that they treat water before they drink.
The respondents were also asked that to the best of your knowledge, where households in the city
get their tap w ater. That is, what is the source of the tap water that you are consuming? Much of
the respondents answered ground water.
46
5.1: Conclusion
This research conducted an assessment of Mogadishu water quality.
Globally, to provide safe drinking water that does not contain objectionable taste, colour; to
provide adequate quantities of water for domestic, commercial, industrial and fire protection needs.
All water produced by public water systems must be drinking water quality, even though only
about 1% of water produced is used for drinking and cooking. Groundwater treatment is much less
involved than surface water treatment. Groundwater has fewer impurities. Aeration may be
required to remove dissolved gases and aid in the removal of dissolved minerals. Fluoride is
sometimes added, but often the only step is disinfection. Addition of chemicals to reduce corrosion
may also be needed. Various regulations exist to control contaminants in drinking water in order
to ensure public safety.
Regionally, the term “water quality” describes the physical, chemical and microbiological
characteristics of water. These properties collectively determine the overall water quality and the
fitness of the water for a specific use. These properties are either intrinsic to the water or are the
result of substances that are dissolved or suspended in the water. Water quality is only meaningful
when evaluated in relation to the use of the water. The reason is that water of a certain quality may
be fit for a specific use, but completely unfit for another use. For example, water that is fit for
human consumption may not be fit as boiler feed water because the dissolved inorganic salts that
are acceptable in drinking water, are not tolerated in boiler feed water, since they may precipitate
and cause blockages in the boiler equipment.
A water treatment plant employs many individual treatment processes (sometimes called unit
processes and unit operations) that are linked in a process train to produce water of the desired
quality. (Schutte, HANDBOOK FOR THE OPERATION OF WATER TREATMENT WORKS,
2006)
47
5.2: Recommendations
Water quality is very important for the community life in Mogadishu Somalia. So the researcher
recommends the following points:
•
Mogadishu community should improve their water quality through chlorine and other
chemical elements.
•
To develop society awareness towards advantages of water quality in human life
•
The federal government institutions should support the community to deliver safe water
•
For further research such as:
✓ Water purification
✓ Water resource management
✓ Water treatment
✓ Source of water
✓ Water filtration
✓ And more others
48
References
BM, O.-O. (2016). Physicochemical properties of water quality.
Carter, A. (2018). Introduction to Water tratment .
CGCOC Group Co. (2015). mogadishu existing water supply system rehabilitation and expenstion project
Farma. (1965, 1970).
FORCE, D. O. (1985). water Supply - Water Treatment - USACE.
M.J.Pawari1S.M.Gavande2. (2015). Assessment of Water Quality Parameters. International Journal of
Science and Research (IJSR) .
Markowitz, 1. (1952).
MOHAMED, D. A. (2019). DHUSA-MAREB, ABUDWAK and jowhar water quality assessment and
monotoring. MOGADISHU.
Österdahl, M. (2016). Water treatment.
Österdahl, M. (2016). Water treatment at personal level.
Schutte, F. (2006). HANDBOOK FOR THE OPERATION OF water treatment b.
Schutte, F. (2006). HANDBOOK FOR THE OPERATION OF WATER TREATMENT WORKS.
Sunderam et al. 2015, V. a. (n.d.). 2015,2016.
UNICEF. (2004). WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL SANITATION.
United Nations. (2005). Poverty Lines.
Warsameh, A. (2008). DEVELOPMENT-SOMALIA: Finding Water in Mogadishu. Retrieved from inter press
service.
water, I. S. (1987). WASTES FROM WATER treatment plants .
Yunusi, D. (2013). An Assessment of the Quality of domestic drinking water in kumul. kumul.
49
APPENDIX
QUESTIONNAIRE OF THE STUDY
Dear Respondent:
I am student pursuing Bachelor Degree in Geosciences and Environment of Benadir University,
who is carrying out a study titled as “An Assessment of Water Quality in Mogadishu Somalia”.
Therefore- this questionnaire is designed to evaluate “An Assessment of Water Quality in
Mogadishu Somalia”. The information you provided will be used for an academic purposes only
and utmost confidentiality.
Thank you very much in advance for being one of the respondents of this study. I greatly appreciate
your assistance.
Instructions: please put tick ( √ ) where possible only:
Section A: personal information:
1. Gender:
A) Male
B) female
2. Age:
A) 20-30
B) 31-40
C) 41 -50
D) 51 and above
3. Marital status:
A) Single
B) married
4. Experience:
A) less than a year
B)
B)1 -3 years
C) 4 years and above
5. Education level:
A) bachelor
C) master
D) PHD
50
QUESTIONNAIRES
1. Do you drink water directly from the tap?
a) Yes
b) No
c) I only drink purified water
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
d) I only drink filtered water
What is the main source of water used by your household for cooking?
a) Tap water
b) Purified water
c) Filtered water
Would you rate the quality of your tap water as
a) Excellent
b) Very good
c) Fair
d) Satisfactory
e) Poor
How do you rate the taste of tap water?
a) Very good
b) Good
c) Fair
d) Poor
e) Won’t drink it
Do you feel that the quality of water is getting better?
a) Getting much better
b) Getting somewhat better
c) Staying the same
d) Getting somewhat worse
e) Getting much worse
In your experience, the taste of chlorine indicates:
a) Safe water
b) Less safe water
c) Unsafe water
Do you treat your tap water in any way to make it safer to drink?
a) Yes
b) No
Why do you treat tap water before drinking it? Any other reasons? (Check all that apply)
51
a) To remove impurities
b) To improve taste
c) To remove chemicals
d) To ensure safety
e) All above
9. Do you use a water filter for your tap water?
a) Yes
b) No
10. Do you buy bottled water?
a) Yes
b) No
11. To the best of your knowledge, where do households in the city get their tap water? That
is, what is the source of the tap water that you are consuming? (Check all that apply)
a) Reservoir
b) Mountain snow/ice melt
c) Groundwater
d) Rivers/creeks/streams
e) Dam
12. What is your main water source available in your workplace for drinking?
a) Tap water
b) Boiled tap water
c) Bottled water
d) Filtered water
e) Other
13. How would you rate the overall quality of the City of Mogadishu’s tap water? Would you
say...?
a) Excellent
b) Good
c) Fair
d) Poor
e) Very poor
14. Compared to five year ago, would you say that you …
a) are more aware of water quality issues.
b) have about the same level of awareness.
c) are less aware.
15. Water quality in Mogadishu is:
a) Good
b) Very good
c) Poor
d) Very poor
52