| Literature DB >> 35173444 |
Wubalem Genanaw1, Girum Gebremeskel Kanno2, Dawit Derese1, Mekonnen Birhanie Aregu2.
Abstract
In Ethiopia, most of the coffee processing plants are generating large amounts of wastewater with high pollutant concentrations and discharge directly into the water bodies untreated or partially treated. The main objective of this study was to assess the effects of coffee wastewater discharged to river water quality using physicochemical parameters and macro-invertebrate indices. This study was conducted from November to the end of December 2019. Ten wastewater and river water samples were taken from coffee the processing plant and river. The macro-invertebrate samples were collected by kick sampling technique using a standard hand net. Shannon and Simpson diversity indices were examined at 3 sampling stations. The Pielou evenness index was also determined. It was found that except for TDS all the parameters of the raw wastewater and river water did not comply with the international discharge limit. The mean concentration of Faro coffee processing plant wastewater were BOD5 (2409.6 ± 173.1 mg/L), COD (4302 ± 437 mg/L), TSS (2824.6 ± 428.4 mg/L), TDS (3226 ± 623.6 mg/L), and TS (4183.3 ± 432.9 mg/L). Whereas from Bokaso coffee processing plant were BOD5 (3770 ± 604.4 mg/L), COD (4082.6 ± 921.9 mg/L), TSS (2766 ± 501.7 mg/L), TDS (3017 ± 747.6 mg/L), and TS (3874 ± 471.1 mg/L). A total of 392 macroinvertebrates belonging to 24 families and 7 orders were collected. The benthos assemblage communities in this river were 40, 56, and 296 at downstream 1, downstream 2, and upstream respectively. The value of the Simpson diversity index varies from 0.4 to 0.75. In the same manner, the value of the Shannon diversity index also varied from 0.5 to 1.36. Most of the physicochemical parameters of the raw wastewater were beyond the national and international discharge limits. The quality of Orsha river water downstream was more adversely affected compared to upstream.Entities:
Keywords: Coffee wastewater; macro-invertebrate; physicochemical characteristics; river water quality
Year: 2021 PMID: 35173444 PMCID: PMC8842449 DOI: 10.1177/11786302211061047
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Health Insights ISSN: 1178-6302
Figure 1.A sketch of sampling points in the Bokaso and Faro coffee processing plants and Orsha River.
Physiochemical characteristics of raw wastewater from the coffee processing plant.
| Parameters | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD |
|---|---|---|
| Faro coffee processing plant | Bokaso coffee processing plant | |
| PH | 2.38 ± 0.37 | 2.68 ± 0.62 |
| DO (mg/L) | 0.11 ± 0.07 | 0.49 ± 0.03 |
| BOD5 (mg/L) | 2409.6 ± 173.1 | 3770 ± 604.4 |
| COD (mg/L) | 4302 ± 437.0 | 4082.6 ± 921.9 |
| NH4-N (mg/L) | 21.8 ± 5.57 | 21.5 ± 7.1 |
| NO3-N (mg/L) | 68.3 ± 2.74 | 74.2 ± 54.33 |
| PO4-P (mg/L) | 29.6 ± 1.52 | 28.67 ± 5.5 |
| TSS (mg/L) | 2824.6 ± 428.4 | 2766 ± 501.7 |
| TDS (mg/L) | 3226 ± 623.6 | 3017 ± 747.6 |
| TS (mg/L) | 4183.3 ± 432.9 | 3874 ± 471.1 |
| TURB (NTU) | 457 ± 64 | 443 ± 124.5 |
Description of sampling point’s location of the 2 plants and the river.
| Source | Station | Types of wastewater sample |
|---|---|---|
| Bokaso coffee processing plant | B1 | Raw wastewater before entering the constructed wetland (influent) |
| B2 | Treated wastewater by constructed wetland | |
| B3 | Treated wastewater at the entry point of Orsha River | |
| B4 | Upstream (above the entry point) | |
| B5 | Downstream 1 of Orsha River (below the entry point) | |
| B6 | Downstream 2 of Orsha River | |
| Faro coffee processing plant | F1 | Raw wastewater (without treatment) discharged from the plant |
| F2 | The entry point of wastewater to Orsha River | |
| F3 | Downstream 1 of the river Orsha | |
| F4 | Downstream 2 of the river Orsha |
Mean concentration of selected physicochemical characteristics of upstream, entry point, and downstream 2 of Orsha River with Faro discharge.
| Parameter | Upstream (F3) (mean ± SD) | Entry point (F2) (mean ± SD) | Downstream 1 (F4) (mean ± SD) | Downstream 2 (F5) (mean ± SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 6.9 ± 0.24 | 3 ± 0.5 | 3.56 ± 0.35 | 4 ± 0.30 |
| DO (mg/L) | 10 ± 1.94 | 0.63 ± 0.49 | 0.96 ± 0.41 | 1.33 ± 0.15 |
| BOD (mg/L) | 28.1 ± 10.4 | 2091.6 ± 131.6 | 1869 ± 220.4 | 1456.3 ± 206.1 |
| COD (mg/L) | 105.6 ± 13.6 | 3600 ± 458.2 | 3300 ± 200 | 2652 ± 434 |
| NH4-N (mg/L) | 1 ± 0.31 | 21.1 ± 4.28 | 17.6 ± 2 | 15.6 ± 3 |
| NO3-N (mg/L) | 9.53 ± 2.73 | 62 ± 5.1 | 56 ± 3.6 | 37.3 ± 5.38 |
| PO4-P (mg/L) | 12.3 ± 3.21 | 23.1 ± 2.5 | 19.9 ± 1.85 | 15.1 ± 2.15 |
| TSS (mg/L) | 69.5 ± 10 | 2365.3 ± 486.2 | 1675.6 ± 26.9 | 1269.6 ± 306.2 |
| TDS (mg/L) | 129.3 ± 35.8 | 2624.3 ± 150.3 | 2201 ± 230.1 | 1851 ± 223.3 |
| TS (mg/L) | 184 ± 5.29 | 3961.3 ± 264.6 | 3296.3 ± 449.9 | 2372 ± 382.3 |
| TURB (NTU) | 17.1 ± 2.1 | 405.3 ± 39.5 | 316 ± 57.2 | 289 ± 61.5 |
Figure 2.Average concentrations of physicochemical parameters from both coffee processing plants discharged to the river.
Mean concentration of selected physicochemical characteristics of upstream, entry point, and downstream of Orsha River with Bokaso discharge.
| Parameter | Upstream (B4) (mean ± SD) | Entry point (B3) (mean ± SD) | Downstream 1 (B5) (mean ± SD) | Downstream 2 (B6) (mean ± SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 6.9 ± 0.24 | 3.77 ± 0.25 | 4.5 ± 0.35 | 5 ± 0.05 |
| DO (mg/L) | 10 ± 1.5 | 1.28 ± 0.08 | 1.65 ± 0.20 | 2.2 ± 0.05 |
| BOD (mg/L) | 28.1 ± 10.4 | 2887 ± 98.4 | 2757.6 ± 332.7 | 2422.3 ± 184.5 |
| COD (mg/L) | 105.6 ± 13.6 | 2840 ± 680 | 2487 ± 671.1 | 2129 ± 776 |
| NH4-N (mg/L) | 1 ± 0.31 | 17.3 ± 3.0 | 14.5 ± 1.5 | 10 ± 2 |
| NO3-N (mg/L) | 9.53 ± 2.73 | 33.9 ± 10.4 | 28.6 ± 11.3 | 24.2 ± 13.3 |
| PO4
| 12.33 ± 3.2 | 18.6 ± 7.3 | 15.6 ± 2.5 | 14.6 ± 3 |
| TSS (mg/L) | 69.5 ± 10 | 1514.6 ± 882.2 | 1367 ± 826.7 | 913.3 ± 476 |
| TDS (mg/L) | 129.3 ± 35.8 | 2010 ± 523.5 | 1694 ± 445.4 | 1196 ± 323.3 |
| TS (mg/L) | 184 ± 5.2 | 2567 ± 976.8 | 2262 ± 626.7 | 1936 ± 421.9 |
| TURB (NTU) | 17.1 ± 2.5 | 345 ± 78.7 | 300 ± 127 | 204.3 ± 147.8 |
The value of Orsha River water quality and the standard of wastewater discharge to the environment from an industry.
| Parameters | Orsha River | Discharge permit limit | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F2 | F3 | F4 | F5 | B3 | B4 | B5 | EEPA | |
| pH | 3 | 6.9 | 3.56 | 4 | 3.7 | 4.5 | 5 | 6-9 |
| DO | 0.63 | 10 | 0.96 | 1.33 | 1.28 | 1.65 | 2.23 | — |
| BOD | 2091.6 | 28.5 | 1869 | 1456.3 | 2887 | 2757.6 | 2422.3 | 80 |
| COD | 3600 | 105.6 | 3300 | 2652 | 2840 | 2487 | 2129 | 250 |
| NH4-N | 21.1 | 1 | 17.6 | 15.6 | 17.3 | 14.5 | 10 | 5 |
| NO3-N | 62 | 9.5 | 56 | 37.3 | 33.9 | 28.6 | 24.2 | 20 |
| PO4-P | 23.1 | 12.3 | 19.9 | 15.1 | 18.6 | 15.6 | 14.6 | 5 |
| TSS | 2365.33 | 69.5 | 1675.6 | 1269.6 | 1514.6 | 1367 | 9133.3 | 100 |
| TDS | 2624.3 | 129.3 | 2201 | 1851 | 2010 | 1694 | 1196 | 3000 |
| TS | 3961 | 184 | 3296.3 | 2372 | 2567 | 2262 | 1936 | — |
| TURB | 405.3 | 17 | 316 | 289 | 345 | 300 | 204.3 | |
Average concentrations of selected physicochemical characteristics in Bokaso coffee processing plant influent, effluent, and its treatment efficiency.
| Parameters | Influent value (mean ± SD) | Effluent value (after treating) (mean ± SD) | % Removal efficiency | EEPA
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PH | 2.6 ± 0.6 | 3.37 ± 0.2 | 6-9 | |
| DO (mg/L) | 0.49 ± 0.03 | 0.9 ± 0.46 | — | |
| BOD (mg/L) | 3770 ± 604.4 | 3149 ± 103.0 | 16.4 | 80 |
| COD (mg/L) | 4082.6 ± 922.9 | 3260 ± 620.0 | 20.1 | 250 |
| NH4-N (mg/L) | 21.5 ± 7.1 | 19.3 ± 3.5 | 10 | 5 |
| NO3-N (mg/L) | 74.2 ± 54.3 | 49.8 ± 12.4 | 32.8 | 20 |
| PO4-P (mg/L) | 28.6 ± 5.5 | 20 ± 3.2 | 30 | 5 |
| TSS (mg/L) | 2766 ± 501.7 | 1852.3 ± 875.5 | 33 | 100 |
| TDS (mg/L) | 3017 ± 747.6 | 2544 ± 377.9 | 15.6 | 3000 |
| TS (mg/L) | 3874 ± 471.1 | 2912 ± 1100 | 24.8 | — |
| TURB (NTU) | 443 ± 124.5 | 378 ± 102.8 | 14.6 | — |
Cumulative number of individuals for macro-invertebrate taxa of Orsha River.
| Order/family | Upstream | Downstream 1 | Downstream 2 | Total | % Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ephemeroptera | |||||
| Baetidae | 12 | 0 | 4 | 16 | 4 |
| Heptageniidae | 18 | 1 | 0 | 19 | 4.8 |
| Epemeridae | 19 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 2 |
| Caenidae | 13 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 3.3 |
| Plecoptera | |||||
| Perlidae | 12 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 3 |
| Trichoptera | |||||
| Hydropsychidae | 16 | 0 | 2 | 18 | 4.6 |
| Hydroptilidae | 21 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 5.3 |
| Leptoceridae | 24 | 1 | 0 | 25 | 6.4 |
| Polycentropodae | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 1 |
| Odonata | |||||
| Coenagrionidae | 10 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 3.6 |
| Libellulidae | 15 | 2 | 1 | 18 | 4.6 |
| Gomphidae | 12 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 3 |
| Aeshnidae | 8 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 2 |
| Hemiptera | |||||
| Belostomatidae | 13 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 3.8 |
| Corixidae | 11 | 3 | 0 | 14 | 3.6 |
| Gerridae | 18 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 4.6 |
| Diptera | |||||
| Chironomidae | 0 | 10 | 21 | 31 | 8 |
| Ceratopogonidae | 15 | 2 | 4 | 21 | 5.3 |
| Simulidae | 0 | 10 | 14 | 24 | 6.1 |
| Syrphidae | 0 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 2.5 |
| Tibulidae | 16 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 4 |
| Coleoptera | |||||
| Gyrinidae | 20 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 5.1 |
| Elmidae | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 2.5 |
| Dytiscidae | 13 | 1 | 0 | 14 | 3.6 |
| Total | 296 | 40 | 56 | 392 | |