Grahamstown’s water is fit for human consumption according to Makana, but some experts are doubtful of the legitimacy of tests.
Grahamstown’s water is fit for human consumption according to Makana, but some experts are doubtful of the legitimacy of tests.
The most recent water quality tests were found to be compliant with the Department of Water Affairs South African National Drinking Water Standard (Sans).
The municipality conducts monthly sampling from areas around Makana which are tested by the Amatola Water Board. The water quality results are subdivided into physical, chemical and microbiological requirements and should comply with the 241 drinking waters specifications required by Sans.
The director of the Rhodes University Institute for Water Research, Denis Hughes said the “results indicate they have addressed a lot of issues they had previously with the operational management of the [water]treatment works”.
He said this is possibly in response to the new appointment of personnel and the fact that Amatola Water is on now on board.
“I am somewhat suspicious of the conductivity values, they are a bit too uniform for me, there is normally a lot more variations,” he added.
Chairman of the Kowie River Catchment Campaign (KCC), Jim Cambray noticed a typographical error in the report of the incorrect use of units, where the municipality used micros per gram (μlg) instead of μg/l (micro grams per litre of water).
He appreciates the feedback from the municipality regarding water quality, however he said that “the frequency of only monthly sampling does not fulfil the municipality’s obligations. More frequent sampling is required”.
Cambray said that the KCC queried why arsenic levels were not analysed in April as this was of concern in parts of town prior to the municipality conducting more regular sampling.
“I see that arsenic levels are now being noted however we need a sampling site in the industrial area where the high arsenic levels were recorded,” he said.
“The arsenic levels were recorded as 75.61 μg/l in January 2010 that is more than seven times the permissible level of Less than 10 micrograms a litre (μg/l).”
According to the Sans, the acceptable limit is below 10 μg/l. The maximum allowable is between 10 and50 μg/l. Hughes questioned the arsenic level of 8.7 μg/l from the sample collected at the Indoor Sports Centre in Joza.
“It just seems strange that one part of the distribution is nine times higher” compared to the level of the other sampled parts. He said this is a cause for concern, but not dangerous as it sits within the category of Class 1 water, where the maximum allowed is less than 10 μg/l. Class ll water permits the maximum of 10 – 50 μg/l.
Hughes said that the implications of this is some sort of contamination.
“If you are dealing with a well mannered management, you would isolate it and go back down the line to investigate where the problem originates.”
Cambray also suggested the source of the arsenic be investigated. “We need longer term data to assess the trends and this is why more frequent and regular sampling is required,” Cambray said.
