ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF EFFLUENT QUALITY FROM NIGERIA BOTTLING COMPANY ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF EFFLUENT QUALITY FROM NIGERIA
BOTTLING COMPANY ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH
BY
ADEYEBA ADEDEJI JOSHUA
MATRIC NUMBER: 093754
SUBMITTED TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF CROP AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE LADOKE AKINTOLA UNIVERSITY OF
TECHNOLOGY OGBOMOSO, OYO STATE, NIGERIA.
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE AWARD DEGREE OF BACHELOR IN
TECHNOLOGY (B.TECH) IN CROP AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
FEBUARY 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE i
CERTIFICATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
TABLE OF CONTENT v
LIST OF TABLE vi
ABSTRACT vii
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction 1
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Literature Review 6
2.1 Industrial Activities and Water Pollution 6
2.2 Aquatic Pollution 7
2.3 Causes of Water Pollution 8
2.4 Impacts of Wastewater Effluents 10
2.4.1 Environmental Impacts 10
2.4.2 Health Impacts 11
2.5 Physico - chemical parameters 12
2.5.1 pH 13

2.5.2 Electrical Conductivity (EC) 13
2.5.3 Temperature 14
2.5.4 Colour 15
2.5.5 Total dissolved solids and Total suspended solids 16
2.5.6 Biochemical oxygen demand (𝐵𝑂𝐷5) 16
2.5.7 Chemical oxygen demand (COD) 18
2.5.8 Heavy metals 19
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Study Area 21
3.0.1 Location of Study Area 21
3.1 Study Design 22
3.2 Sampling procedures 22
3.3 Sample measurement 23
3.3.1 In-situ measurement 23
3.3.1.1 pH measurement 23
3.5.1.2 DO measurement 23
3.5.1.3 Electrical Conductivity (E.C) measurement 24
3.5.1.4 Temperature measurement 24
3.5.1.5 TDS measurement 24
3.5.2 Laboratory measurement 25
3.5.2.1 Determination of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 25

3.5.2.2 Determination of Sulphate (𝑆𝑂4
2−
) 25
3.5.2.3 Determination of Total Hardness 26
3.5.2.3 Heavy Metal Analysis 26
3.5.2.4 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (𝐵𝑂𝐷5) 27
3.5.2.5 Nitrate (N03) 27
3.5.2.6 Phosphate (𝑃𝑂4
3−
) 28
3.5.2.7 Iron (𝐹𝑒2+
) 28
3.6 Data statistical analysis 29
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Results
4.1 Discussions 38
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 Conclusion 53
5.2 Recommendation 53
References 55

CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that ADEYEBA, ADEDEJI JOSHUA with matric number 093754 of
the Department of Crop and Environmental Protection, Faculty of Agricultural Science, Ladoke
Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso. Oyo State, Nigeria
_________________ _________________
DR. G.O. ADESINA DATE
Supervisor
_________________ _________________
DR. G.O. ADESINA DATE
Head of Department

DEDICATION
This research work is dedicated to Almighty God who has been my help and strength and
to my loving parents, Pastor & Mrs. Kolawole Adeyeba.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to express my profound gratitude to my supervisor, DR. G.O. ADESINA for his
advice, immense guidance and direction throughout the course of this study.
My sincere goes grateful to Mr. Akinpelu Festus, whose assistance contributed a lot to the
success of this research work and Mr Ojo Oladiran for his assistance in the statistical analysis of
data collected. Also, my gratitude goes to all lectures of the Department of Crop and
Environmental Protection, thank you all for what you have built into me both academically and
morally, I say thank you all. My sincere appreciation goes to Dr. F.O Alao, Dr. T.A Ayandiran
and Dr. T.I Olabiyi for their advice, contributions and guidance towards the success of this work.
I cannot but indeed appreciate my parents Pastor & Mrs Kolawole Adeyeba and my
younger ones: Adeyinka, Adeola, Adebukola and Adedolapo Adeyeba for their encouragement,
advice, assistance, patience and understanding towards the success of my research work.
My sincere gratitude goes to the following people: Yinusa Ajoke, Omoloa Olasiyan, and
Prince Ajiboye, for their support towards the success of this work. Above all, I give thanks to God,
who has made this study possible.

ABSTRACT
The raise in industrial development in catchments has left no option but to discharge
industrial effluents into water bodies such as sea, rivers and streams. Discharging of industrial
effluents into water bodies if not done with care through effluent pre-treatment and assurance of
compliance with allowable standards can lead to water quality impairment.
This study was carried out to assess the effects of the effluents from Nigerian Bottling
Company on nearby rivers, Nigeria. Specific objectives were to determine pH, TDS, E.C,
temperature, colour, Odour, TSS, DO, COD, BOD5, total hardness, Sulphate, Phosphate, Iron,
Nitrate, Chloride, Lead, Calcium and Magnesium from Nigerian Bottling Company industries
effluents. This study involved sampling of effluents from Nigeria Bottling Company; it also
involves sampling of water from there selected points along receiving rivers.
The study area was selected to coincide with where industrial pollution was evident. This
was done throughout the three Plants. The collection of samples which was collected upstream of
industries to know the quality of water before industrial pollution, industrial effluent discharge
points, downstream of industries and at the confluence. The discharge points of Nigeria Bottling
Company were selected as sampling points. River sampling points was located. The points
downstream of industries was located as close as possible to the downstream side of the discharge
points. This study also involved flow (discharge) measurement from the effluent discharge
channels so as to evaluate the pollutant loading rate from these industries. Standard methods for
water and wastewater analysis were used for analysis; pH, E.C, TDS and temperature were
measured in situ. The results for industrial effluents and water samples were then compared with
FEPA (1991) industrial effluent standards and potable water standards respectively.

Overall, the study has shown that the quality of effluents from the discharge point is
unsatisfactory. Studies shows that The stream had high levels of TSS, BOD, COD, and low level
of DO. The presence of coliforms and E. coli is an indication of faecial pollution. The impact of
the effluent on the stream is camouflaged by the poor state of the stream water before it received
the plant’s effluent, which had a minor effect on already polluted stream. The results suggest that
the effluents being discharged continuously into the streams have considerable negative effects on
the water quality in the receiving streams. With increased industrial activities in Nigeria Bottling
Company, the load of nutrients and pollutants entering the receiving streams will continue to
increase and further diminish the quality of water. There should be proper checking of the Effluent
before it is being released i.e. bodies like NESREA, FEPA, should ensure that the effluent released
by the companies is of standard. Laws and policies should be enforced against those that go against
environmental rules and regulations.

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Water is a vital resource for agriculture, manufacturing, transportation, domestic and many
other human activities (Phiri et al., 2005). Rivers are indispensable freshwater systems that are
necessary for the continuation of life. They are resources of great importance across the globe. The
benefits of these systems to all living organism cannot be over emphasized as they remain one of
the most essential human needs (Roya, 2003). The healthy aquatic ecosystem is dependent on the
biological diversity and Physicochemical characteristics of water. Aquatic ecosystems are affected
by several wastes that significantly deplete biodiversity. The loss of biodiversity and its effects are
predicted to be greater for aquatic ecosystems than for terrestrial ecosystems.
Serious ecological and sanitary problems are associated with pollutants discharged into the
rivers. Water pollution has significant effect on human health, balance of aquatic ecosystems,
socioeconomic development and prosperity (Vaishali and Punita, 2010). Industrialization, like
other human activities that impact on the environment, often results in pollution and degradation.
It carries inevitable costs and problems in terms of pollution of the air, water resources and general
degradation of the natural environment (Thomas et al., 1992). High toxicity problems and
eutrophication are associated with point and non-point sources of pollution (Jain, 2002). While
most people in urban areas of the developing countries have access to piped water, rural areas still
rely on borehole and river water for domestic use.
Ninety percent of all wastewater (effluent) from the industries in developing countries is
discharged untreated directly into rivers, lakes or the oceans where they pollute the usable water
supply (Phiri et al., 2005; WWAP, 2009, Corcoran et al., 2010). Industrial effluents may contain

heavy metals like mercury, chromium, lead and cadmium; salts of cyanide, nitrite and nitrate;
organic matter, micro-organisms and nutrients; and toxic chemicals such as pesticides (Mkuula,
2004). Effluent is defined by U. S. EPA (2006) as wastewater treated or untreated that flows out
`of a treatment plant, sewer or industrial outfall. Unmanaged wastewater can be a source of
pollution and a hazard for the health of human populations and the environment (Corcoran, 2010).
Inability to effectively and efficiently manage vast amount of wastes generated by various
anthropogenic activities particularly in developing countries has created one of the most critical
problems in our environment. Of more importance is the manner in which industrial effluents are
being disposed into the ambient environment, water bodies like fresh water reservoirs being mostly
affected. With such activity, these natural resources are rendered unsuitable for both primary and
secondary usages (Fakayode, 2005). The major sources of drinking water in Nigeria-inland water
bodies and estuaries-have always been contaminated by the activities of the adjoining populations
and industrial establishments (Sangodoyin, 1995).
River systems are the primary means for disposal of industrial effluents, and these have the
capacity to alter the physical, chemical and biological nature of the receiving water body
(Sangodoyin, 1991). Of recent, there have been pollution stress on surface water bodies as a result
of increased industrial activities (Ajayi and Osibanji, 1981). The consequences of this are of great
magnitude to public health and the environment (Osibanji et al., 2011). Ideally, effluents from
industries are supposed to be properly treated before being discharged into the environment. In
Nigeria, there are laws put in place to guide and regulate industrial discharge practices and
environmental contamination generally. The federal environmental protection Agency (FEPA)
established to check environmental abuses has had little or no impact on pollution control in our
environment (Ezeronye and Amogu, 1998). In Nigeria 80% of the industries are located in urban

areas. Population explosion, uncontrolled urbanization and industrialization have caused a high
rate of waste generation in Nigeria (Rosegrant, 2001). Akpata (1990) pointed out that aquatic
pollution problem in Nigeria was increasing in scope and dimension. Olayemi (1994) identified
that regular, unregulated indiscriminate dumping of waste into water bodies worsen aquatic
pollution
Due to the increased pollution of watersheds in Nigeria caused by industrial effluents,
water quality declination could occur rapidly on the receiving rivers if attention is not paid to the
quality of the effluents. It is acceptable to discharge industrial effluents into a watercourse or
waterbody only when parameters of the effluent do not exceed the maximum permissible standards
of Federal Ministry of Environment (FEMEV). Nigeria is a high fertility country and there is
evidence that its large population inhibits government’s efforts in meeting the basic needs of the
people. With a population that already exceeds 130 million people and growing at roughly 3 per
cent annually, (United Nations, 2004). The increase in population has increased water demand for
domestic, irrigation, farming and industrial use. Many rivers have been evidently polluted due to
industrial development with inadequate water conservation measures. (Mkuula, 2004). Asa River
is a major river of economic, agricultural and environmental significance in Ilorin—the capital city
of Kwara State, Nigeria. The river receives effluents from industries located along its course, apart
from domestic wastes and other activities carried out along it that contribute to its pollution. It was
also reported that the major identified source of pollution of Asa River was direct runoff of
effluents from the industries (Adekunle and Eniola 2008). If the situation of receiving water bodies
is not urgently addressed, the impacts will be difficult to reverse in the near future and without a
baseline data this is not achievable. These affect the quality of the river water.

Rivers are the primary means for disposal of the treated, untreated or partially treated effluents
from industries which are near them. Industries like Nigerian Bottling Company discharge there
effluent directly into rivers that are nearby. which might cause the interference of the water quality
by increasing organic wastes and nutrients hence eutrophication which later cause low dissolved
oxygen with an unbalanced ecosystem, fish mortality, odours and aesthetic nuisances into the
aquatic systems downstream. Increased industrial activities has led to river water pollution stress
and become a common problem in most of the watersheds of Nigeria. Industrial effluents may
contain wastes some of which are toxic to human beings and the environment. People who live
near these rivers use water from these rivers for domestic purposes. Unfortunately, data and
information are lacking on the quality of the effluents from these industries and also on the quality
of the water from these rivers. This creates an urgent need to assess the effect of effluents from
Nigeria Bottling Company on water quality of these rivers.
The study assessed the current status of water quality in nearby rivers and it is hoped that
the results of this study will assist the relevant industries and authorities in designing appropriate
preventive measures to ensure that the water quality in the streams is improved. The study also
focused on determining the variation of the same parameters along nearby rivers. These parameters
were selected by considering the Nigeria Bottling Company that discharge their effluents into
nearby rivers. Furthermore, the study also measured effluents flow rate from Nigerian Bottling
Company and estimated pollution rates from Nigerian Bottling Company. The main limitation was
time, weather and finance which led to sample collection and analysis for only one day in a month.
Therefore, the general objective of this study was to assess the impact of the effluents from
Nigerian Bottling Company on the water quality in nearby rivers, and the specific objectives of
the research were to

1. Determine pH, TDS, E.C, temperature, colour, Odour, TSS, DO, COD, BOD5, total
hardness, Sulphate, Phosphate, Iron, Nitrate, Chloride, Lead, Calcium and Magnesium
from Nigerian Bottling Company effluents.
2. Evaluate the impact of industrial effluent on the quality of water in nearby rivers.

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES AND WATER BODIES
Water pollution can be defined as any physical, chemical or biological change in water
quality which adversely impacts living organisms in the environment or which makes a water
resource unsuitable for one or more of its beneficial uses (UNEP/WHO, 1988). Water pollution
due to discharge of untreated industrial effluents into water bodies is a major problem in the global
context (Mathuthu et al., 1997). The problem of water pollution is being experienced by both
developing and developed countries. Human activities give rise to water pollution by introducing
various categories of substances or waste into a water body. The more common types of polluting
substances include pathogenic organisms, oxygen demanding organic substances, plant nutrients
that stimulate algal blooms, inorganic and organic toxic substances (Cornish and Mensahh, 1999).
According to WHO/UNICEF (2010), globally almost nine hundred million people lack
access to safe drinking water. Water quality is affected by changes in nutrients, sedimentation,
temperature, pH, heavy metals, non-metallic toxins, persistent organics, pesticides, and biological
factors; among many other factors. The discharge of industrial effluent into water bodies is one of
the main causes of environmental pollution in many cities, especially in developing countries.
Many of these industries lack liquid and solid waste regulations and proper disposal facilities,
including for harmful waste (World Health Organization (WHO, 2004) cited by (Chikogu et al.,
2012).
Over the last few decades in Nigeria, a considerable population growth has taken place,
accompanied by a steep increase in urbanization, industrial and agricultural land use, and this has

led to a tremendous increase in discharge of a wide range of pollutants to receiving water bodies
and this has in-turn caused an undesirable effect on the different components of the aquatic
environment (Authman, 1998). Water pollution is a major global problem which requires ongoing
evaluation and revision of water resource policy at all levels (international down to individual
aquifers and wells). It has been suggested that it is the leading worldwide cause of deaths and
diseases and that it accounts for the deaths of more than 14,000 people daily (Pink, 2006; West,
2006). Increasing numbers and amounts of industrial, agricultural and commercial chemicals
discharged into the aquatic environment have led to various deleterious effects on aquatic
organisms.
Aquatic organisms, including fish, accumulate pollutants directly from contaminated water
and indirectly via the food chain (Hammer, 2004; Mohammed, 2009). The pollutants are usually
pathogens, silt and suspended solid particles such as soils, sewage materials, disposed foods,
cosmetics, automobile emissions, construction debris and eroded banks from rivers and other
waterways (Galadima et al., 2011). Aquatic environments have suddenly become the most polluted
in Nigeria, in recent times and research on aquatic pollution has centered on the determination of
the various contaminants and the establishment of the effects of these compounds on water quality
and aquatic organisms (Sikoki and Kolo, 1993).
2.1 AQUATIC POLLUTION
Pollution of the aquatic environment with various chemicals is related to nutritional,
reproductive, and behavioral problems that have been occurring in organisms, especially fish,
colonizing the polluted area. Consequently, this pollution can create significant problems at either
the individual or population level, and can lead to a decrease in the population, resulting in

unexpected threats to wildlife and to the consumers of these organisms (Baloch et al., 2001). By
this decade, biomarker studies, used in the evaluation of environmental health as an indicator of
toxic effects of environmental pollutants, have become very important and essential. Changes in
biochemical level are the “early warning” responses of an organism to environmental alterations
and are critically important. Identification of molecular biomarkers associated with the early
prediction, diagnosis and monitoring of major physiological alterations and diseases of fish caused
by pollution, may contribute towards in situ conservation of fish populations. As a consequence,
biomarkers can be taken as short-term indications of biological effects that will be seen in either
the long or short term (Baloch et al., 2001).
2.2 CAUSES OF WATER POLLUTION
One of the most critical problems of developing countries is improper management of vast
amount of wastes generated by various anthropogenic activities. More challenging is the unsafe
disposal of these wastes into the ambient environment. Water bodies especially freshwater
reservoirs are the most affected. This has often rendered these natural resources unsuitable for both
primary and/or secondary usage (Fakayode, 2005). The quality of freshwater at any point on a site
reflects the combined effects of many processes along water pathways and both quantity and
quality of water are affected by human activities (Peters and Meybeck, 2000).
Wastewaters are generated by many industries as a consequence of their operation and
processing. Depending on the industry and their water use, the wastewaters contain suspended
solids, both degradable and non-biodegradable organics; oils and greases; heavy metal ions;
dissolved inorganics; acids, bases and coloring compounds (Kosaric, 1992). In Nigeria, there are
many small to large cottage industrial establishments that discharge such harmful wastewater

effluents. Although, the physicochemical analysis of the effluents indicates that most of these
industries conform to the recommended FEPA (FEPA, 1991) guidelines.
2.3 CONTENT OF NIGERIAN BOTTLING COMPANY EFFLUENT
Industrial effluents have very varied compositions depending on the types of industries,
water use and materials processed. The effluents may contain suspended solids and soluble solids,
organics both degradable and non-biodegradable, colour, odour, high temperature, pH, oils,
greases, acids, bases and coloring compounds. Industrial wastewaters may also contain inorganic
chemicals such as free ammonia, organic nitrogen, nitrites, nitrates, organic phosphorus, inorganic
phosphorus, chloride and sulphate (Kanu et al., 2011).
Wastewaters may also contain trace elements, which include some heavy metals such as
iron, copper, zinc, cobalt, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, and others (UNEP/GEMS, 2007). Examples
of waste effluents generated by breweries, pulp and paper, bottle washing plants and matchbox
industries are oxygen-consuming wastes, high concentration suspended solids, colored wastes,
high temperature and detergent (Kanu et al., 2011). The wastewaters from beverage industry are
produced from backwashing and reverse osmosis reject waters, product spills, clean-in-place spent
and rinses, plant and equipment sanitation wash down and drainage from the ammonia compressor
room and the reject crushing operations. The process related wastewater from beverage industry
is expected to contain high organics, acidity, chlorinated surfactants, and the minerals (Arthur,
2010). The most widely used parameter of organic pollution measurement applied to both
wastewater and surface water is the 5 days’ biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) (Metcalf and
Eddy, 1995).

2.4 IMPACTS OF WASTEWATER EFFLUENTS
The quality of wastewater effluents is responsible for the degradation of the receiving water
bodies, such as lakes, rivers, streams. The potential deleterious effects of polluted wastewater
effluents on the quality of receiving water bodies are manifold and depend on volume of the
discharge, the chemical and microbiological concentration/ composition of the effluents. It also
depends on type of the discharge for example whether it is amount of suspended solids or organic
matter or hazardous pollutants like heavy metals and organo-chlorines, and the characteristics of
the receiving waters (Owili, 2003).
Eutrophication of water sources may also create environmental conditions that favour the
growth of toxin producing cyanobacteria. Chronic exposure to such toxins produced by these
organisms can cause gastroenteritis, liver damage, nervous system impairment, skin irritation and
liver cancer in animals (EPA, 2000; Eynard et al., 2000; WHO, 2006). In extension, recreational
water users and anyone else coming into contact with the infected water is at risk (Resource Quality
Services, 2004). The potential deleterious effects of pollutants from sewage effluents on the
receiving water quality of the coastal environment are manifold and depend on volume of the
discharge, the chemical composition and concentrations in the effluent (Owili, 2003).
2.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The impacts of such degradation may result in decreased levels of dissolved oxygen,
physical changes to receiving waters, release of toxic substances, bioaccumulation or bio-
magnifications in aquatic life, and increased nutrient loads (Environmental Canada, 1997).
Wastewater is a complex resource, with both advantages and inconveniences for its use.
Wastewater and its nutrient contents can be used for crop production, thus providing significant
benefits to the farming communities and society in general. However, wastewater use can also

impose negative impacts on communities and on ecosystems. The impacts of low dissolved oxygen
levels include an effect on the survival of fish by increasing their susceptibility to diseases,
retardation in growth, hampered swimming ability, alteration in feeding and migration, and, when
extreme, lead to rapid death. Long-term reductions in dissolved oxygen concentrations can result
in changes in species composition (Chambers and Mills, 1996; Environmental Canada, 1997).
Poorly treated wastewater effluent can also lead to physical changes to receiving water bodies. All
aquatic life forms have characteristic temperature preference and tolerance limits. Any increase in
the average temperature of a water body can have ecological impacts. Because municipal
wastewater effluents are warmer than receiving water bodies, they are a source of thermal
enhancement (Horner et al., 1994). Also, the release of suspended solids into receiving waters can
have a number of direct and indirect environmental effects, including reduced sunlight penetration
(reduced photosynthesis), physical harm to fish, and toxic effects from contaminants attached to
suspended particles (Horner et al., 1994). Another environmental impact of untreated wastewater
effluent, which at times can be linked to health, is the phenomenon of bioaccumulation and bio-
magnifications of contaminants.
2.4.2 HEALTH IMPACTS
Diseases caused by bacteria, viruses and protozoa are the most common health hazards
associated with untreated drinking and recreational waters. The main sources of these microbial
contaminants in wastewater are human and animal wastes (EPA, 2000; Environmental Canada,
2003; WHO, 2006). These contain a wide variety of viruses, bacteria, and protozoa that may get
washed into drinking water supplies or receiving water bodies (Kris, 2007). Microbial pathogens
are considered to be critical factors contributing to numerous waterborne outbreaks. Many
microbial pathogens in wastewater can cause chronic diseases with costly long-term effects, such

as degenerative heart disease and stomach ulcer. The detection, isolation and identification of the
different types of microbial pollutants in wastewater are always difficult, expensive and time
consuming. To avoid this, indicator organisms are always used to determine the relative risk of the
possible presence of a particular pathogen in wastewater (Paillard et al., 2005).
Viruses are among the most important and potentially most hazardous pollutants in
wastewater. They are generally more resistant to treatment, more infectious, more difficult to
detect and require smaller doses to cause infections (Okoh, et al., 2007). Bacteria are the most
common microbial pollutants in wastewater. They cause a wide range of infections, such as
diarrhea, dysentery, skin and tissue infections, etc. Disease-causing bacteria found in water include
different types of bacteria, such as E. coli O157:H7; Listeria, Salmonella, Leptospirosis, Vibrio,
Campylobacter, etc. (Absar, 2005). Wastewater consists of vast quantities of bacteria, most of
which are harmless to man. However, pathogenic forms that cause diseases, such as typhoid,
dysentery, and other intestinal disorders may be present in wastewater. The tests for total coliform
and faecial coliform nonpathogenic bacteria are used to indicate the presence of pathogenic
bacteria (APHA, 2001).
2.5 PHYSICO - CHEMICAL PARAMETERS OF WATER BODY
It is very essential and important to test the water before it is used for drinking, domestic,
agricultural or industrial purpose. Water must be tested with different physico - chemical
parameters. Selection of parameters for testing of water is solely depends upon for what purpose
we are going to use that water and what extent we need its quality and purity. Some physical test
should be performed for testing water’s physical appearance such as temperature, color, odour,
pH, turbidity, TDS etc. while chemical tests should be perform for its BOD, COD, dissolved

oxygen, alkalinity, hardness and other characters. For obtaining more and more quality and purity
water, it should be tested for its trace metal and heavy metal contents (Patil et al., 2012).
2.5.1 pH
The pH is a measure of the acid balance of a solution and is defined as the negative of the
logarithm to the base 10 of the hydrogen ion concentration (UNESCO/WHO/UNEP, 1996). In
waters with high algal concentrations, pH varies diurnally, reaching values as high as 10 during
the day when algae are using carbon dioxide in photosynthesis. pH drops during the night when
the algae respire and produce carbon dioxide, as reported in Salequzzaman et al., (2008), pH
changes can tip the ecological balance of the aquatic system and excessive acidity can result in the
release of hydrogen sulfide. The pH of water affects the solubility of many toxic and nutritive
chemicals; therefore, the availability of these substances to aquatic organisms is affected.
According to (Mosley et al., 2004), water with a pH > 8.5 indicates that the water is hard. Most
metals become more water soluble and more toxic with increase in acidity. Toxicity of cyanides
and sulfides also increases with a decrease in pH (increase in acidity). The content of toxic forms
of ammonia to the nontoxic form also depends on pH dynamics.
2.5.2 Electrical Conductivity (EC)
Electrical conductivity is a function of total dissolved solids (TDS) known as ions
concentration, which determines the quality of water (Tariq et al., 2006). Electric Conductivity or
Total Dissolved Solids is a measure of how much total salt (inorganic ions such as sodium,
chloride, magnesium, and calcium) is present in the water (Mosley et al.,2004), the more ions the
higher the conductivity. Conductivity itself is not a human or aquatic health concern, but because
it is easily measured, it can serve as an indicator of other water quality problems. If the conductivity
of a stream suddenly increases, it indicates that there is a source of dissolved ions in the vicinity.

Therefore, conductivity measurements can be used as a quick way to locate potential water quality
problems. All natural waters contain some dissolved solids due to the dissolution and weathering
of rock and soil. Some but not the entire dissolved solids act as conductors and contribute to
conductance. Waters with high TDS are unpalatable and potentially unhealthy.
According to (Nadia, 2006) discharge of wastewater with a high TDS level would have
adverse impact on aquatic life, render the receiving water unfit for drinking and domestic purposes,
reduce crop yield if used for irrigation, and exacerbate corrosion in water networks.
2.5.3 Temperature
Temperature is the basically important factor for its effect on other properties of waste
water (Khuzali et al., 2012). Water temperature is influenced by substrate composition, turbidity,
vegetation cover, run-off, inflows and heat exchange with the air. Water temperature varies with
season, elevation, geographic location, and climatic conditions and is influenced by stream flow,
streamside vegetation, groundwater inputs and water effluent from industrial activities. Water
temperature also increases when warm water is discharged into streams from industries (Imoobe
and Koye, 2010). Discharging industrial effluents with increased temperature will cause
remarkable reduction in the self-purification capacity of a water body and cause the growth of
undesirable algae (Khuzali et al., 2012). Temperature can be measured using a thermometer with
a range of 0–50°C or a suitable electronic thermometer. The probe (or thermometer) is placed in
the water to be measured.
Since the solubility of dissolved oxygen decreases with increasing water temperature, high
water temperatures limit the availability of dissolved oxygen for aquatic life. In addition, water
temperature regulates various biochemical reaction rates that influence water quality. The EPA
(2002) permissible standard for temperature in drinking water is 25°C while maximum limits for

discharging industrial effluent into receiving water body are 40°C and 20-35°C respectively.
Metabolic rate and the reproductive activities of aquatic life are controlled by water temperature.
Metabolic activity increases with a rise in temperature, thus increasing aquatic organisms demand
for oxygen (Imoobe and Koye, 2010). Depletion of dissolved oxygen could impact metabolic and
reproductive activities of the aquatic environment and speed up rates of photosynthesis and
decomposition. It could also provide the right environment to enhance faster growth of pathogens,
which may increase susceptibility of aquatic organisms to disease (Imoobe and Koye, 2010; Akali
et al., 2011).
2.5.4 Colour
Pure water is colorless. Colour or true colour refers to the colour of water upon removal of
suspended solids (i.e. once the sample has been filtered). Colour is expressed in colour units or
platinum-cobalt units (PCU, Pt/Co or Pt-Co units). Colour in water can result from the presence
of natural metallic ions (iron and manganese), humus and peat materials, plankton, weeds, and
industrial wastes. Colour in natural waters can also originate from decomposition of organic matter
and discharge of certain waste. Water colour also originates from algal metabolism. Colour in
water can be measured by visual aid, colour kit or spectrophotometer (Patil et al., 2012). The
discharge of untreated and partially treated wastewater from textile and dyeing operations, pulp
and paper production, tanneries, food processing, chemical production and mining, refining and
slaughter operation may contribute colour to the receiving waters. Colour interfere with
penetration of light and affects photosynthesis. Colour may also hinder oxygen absorption from
the atmosphere (Walakira, 2011).

2.5.5 Total dissolved solids and Total suspended solids
Total dissolved solids (TDS) are made up of inorganic salts, as well as a small amount of
organic matter (WHO, 2003). TDS is an important chemical parameter in water, mainly indicates
the presence of various minerals including ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, phosphate, alkalis, some acids,
sulphates, metallic ions which are comprised both colloidal and dissolved solids in water (WHO,
2003; Vaishali and Punita, 2010; Islam et al., 2012). TDS is measured by many techniques some
of them are gravimetric method and electrode method using conductivity meter (ASTM, 2003).
The (EPA, 2002) standard for TDS in drinking water is 500mg/l. For industrial effluents (EPA,
2002) maximum permissible standards for discharging industrial effluent into receiving water
body for TDS is 1000 mg/l. At high flows, the TDS values tend to be diluted by surface runoff and
for most rivers there are an inverse correlation between discharge rate and TDS (Vaishali and
Punita, 2010).
2.5.6 Biochemical oxygen demand (𝑩𝑶𝑫 𝟓)
The most widely used parameter of organic pollution measurement applied to both
wastewater and surface water is the 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (𝐵𝑂𝐷5) (Attiogbe et al.,
2005). The (five-day) 𝐵𝑂𝐷5 of water is the amount of dissolved oxygen taken up by aerobic
bacteria in degrading oxidizable matter in the sample, measured after 5 days’ incubation in the
dark at 20°C (EPA, 2001; Vaishali and Punita, 2010; Imoobe and Koye, 2010). This technique is
the basis of 𝐵𝑂𝐷5 analysis for all types of sample even though considerable extensions of
procedure are necessary in dealing with wastewaters and polluted surface waters. In this test,
microorganisms consume organic compounds for food while consuming oxygen at the same time
(EPA, 2001). The biochemical oxygen demand is widely used to determine the pollution due to

organic loading and the quality of receiving surface water. High concentration of DO supports a
greater number of species of organisms in aquatic ecosystem. Oxygen depletion due to waste
discharge has the effect of increasing the numbers of decomposer organisms in anaerobic condition
and results in the formation of foul smelling volatile organic acids and gases such as hydrogen
sulphide and methane (Walakira, 2011). The 𝐵𝑂𝐷5 test is carried out by diluting the sample with
oxygen saturated de-ionized water, inoculating it with a fixed aliquot of seed, measuring the
dissolved oxygen (DO) and then sealing the sample to prevent further oxygen dissolving in. The
sample is kept at 20°C in the dark to prevent photosynthesis for five days, and the dissolved oxygen
is measured again. The difference between the final DO and initial DO is the 𝐵𝑂𝐷5. The apparent
𝐵𝑂𝐷5 for the control is subtracted from the control result to provide the corrected value. The loss
of dissolved oxygen in the sample, once corrections have been made for the degree of dilution, is
called the 𝐵𝑂𝐷5 (Metcalf and Eddy, 1995). Manometer method is limited to the measurement of
the oxygen consumption due only to carbonaceous oxidation. Ammonia oxidation is inhibited. The
sample is kept in a sealed container fitted with a pressure sensor. A substance that absorbs carbon
dioxide (typically lithium hydroxide) is added in the container above the sample level. The sample
is stored in conditions identical to the dilution method. Oxygen is consumed and, as ammonia
oxidation is inhibited, carbon dioxide is released. The total amount of gas, and thus the pressure,
decreases because carbon dioxide is absorbed. From the drop of pressure, the sensor electronics
computes and displays the consumed quantity of oxygen (Sawyer et al., 1994). The EPA (2002)
permissible limits for 𝐵𝑂𝐷5 in drinking water are 5 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and 6 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 respectively, while that of
industrial effluents are 40 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and 30 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 respectively. High 𝐵𝑂𝐷5 has undesirable
consequence on aquatic life such as leading to the production of ammonia and hydrogen sulphide
which affect fish negatively in various ways. The biodegradation of organic materials exerts

oxygen tension in the water and increases the biochemical oxygen demand. This implies that it is
dangerous to discharge the effluent directly into water without aeration, as this would deplete
dissolved oxygen that is needed by aquatic animals for respiration. This is because high 𝐵𝑂𝐷5
leads to less dissolved oxygen, which is detrimental to aquatic lives (Imoobe and Koye, 2010). If
water of high organic matter content or biochemical oxygen demand (𝐵𝑂𝐷5) value flows into a
river, the bacteria in the river will oxidize the organic matter consuming oxygen from the water
faster than it dissolves back in from the air. If this happens, fish will die from lack of oxygen, a
consequence known as fish kill. A stream must have a minimum of about 2 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 of dissolved
oxygen to maintain higher life forms. In addition to this life-sustaining aspect, oxygen is important
because the end products of chemical and biochemical reactions in anaerobic systems often
produce aesthetically displeasing colour, tastes and odours in water (Attiogbe et al., 2002).
2.5.7 Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Chemical oxygen demand is the amount of oxygen required to decompose the organic and
inorganic matter (Vermaet et al., 2011). Chemical oxygen demand is commonly used to indirectly
measure the amount of organic compounds in water. This makes COD useful as an indicator of
organic pollution in surface water. COD indicates a deterioration of the water quality caused by
the discharge of industrial effluent (Vaishali and Punita, 2010). Oxygen demand is determined by
measuring the amount of oxidant consumed using titrimetric or photometric methods. The COD
test uses a strong chemical oxidant in an acid solution and heat to oxidize organic carbon to carbon
dioxide and water. The test is not adversely affected by toxic substances, and test data is available
in 1.5 to 3 hours, providing faster water quality assessment and process control. The dichromate
reflux method has been preferred over procedures using other oxidants because of superior
oxidizing ability with a wide variety of samples, and ease of manipulation (Attiogbe et al., 2002).

The EPA (2002) standard for COD in drinking water is 1.5 to 15 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 while (EPA, 2002) of
industrial effluent are 120 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and 60 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 respectively (Attiogbe, 2005).
2.5.8 Heavy metals
Trace metals, such as arsenic, zinc, copper and selenium, are naturally found in water.
Some human activities like mining, industry, and agriculture can lead to an increase in the
mobilization of these trace metals out of soils or waste products into fresh water. Even at extremely
low concentrations of trace elements can be toxic to aquatic organisms or can impair human
reproductive and other metabolic functions (Palaniappan, 2010). Heavy metals are measured by a
range of methods such as ion chromatography,
colorimetry, ICPMS, ICP-AES, flame ASS, graphite furnace ASS, or cold vapor generation AAS
methods (SWSMA, 2009).
Zinc and copper are essential elements for human health but over exposure can lead to adverse
health consequences. For drinking water EPA set maximum acceptable concentrations of 5
𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and 1.3 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 for 𝑍𝑛2+
and 𝐶𝑢2+
, respectively. Zinc is essential element for humans, animal
and plants. It is also an important cell component in several metalloenzymes. However, heavy
doses of Zn salt (165 mg) for 26 days in humans causes vomiting, renal damage, cramps and others.
It is a component of blood cells and liveral metalloenzymes. However, more than 10 mg per kg of
body weight causes rapid respiration and pulse rates, congestion of blood vessels, hypertension
and drowsiness (Trivedi, 2008). Copper concentrations in drinking-water vary widely as a result
of variations in water characteristics, such as pH and hardness. Copper concentrations can be
increased when water is distributed in systems with an acid pH or high-carbonate waters with an
alkaline pH (WHO, 2005). Excess amount of copper in human body is toxic, may cause

hypertension, sporadic fever, uremia, coma. Copper also produces pathological changes in brain
tissue. However, Cu is an important cell component in several metalloenzymes. Lack of copper
causes anaemia, growth inhibition and blood circulation problem (Azizullah et al., 2010). Iron (Fe)
is one of the most abundant metals on earth and is an essential element for the normal physiology
of living organisms. In drinking water, the desirable concentration of iron set by EPA is 0.3 𝑚𝑔/𝑙.
For industrial effluents, the EPA maximum permissible standards are 2 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and 5 𝑚𝑔/𝑙. Iron
deficiency and overload can be harmful for both animals and plants. High concentrations of iron
increase hazard of pathogenic organisms, as many of them require Fe for their growth (Azizullah
et al., 2010).

CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHOD
3.0 STUDY AREA
3.0.1 Location of the study area
 Ikeja Plant and Ikeja Lagoon
NBC has been operating Ikeja Plant since 1978 and is located in the capital city of Ikeja,
Lagos State in Southwest Nigeria. The Ikeja plant is responsible for the production of Coca-
Cola, Coca-Cola Light, Fanta, Sprite, Schweppes, Cappy, Five Alive and Eva and
distribution of all product categories. Ikeja is the largest Coca- cola Plant in West Africa
with 12 production lines. They discharge their effluent into Ikeja Lagoon beside the plant
located at Ikeja.
 Ilorin plant and Asa River
NBC has been operating Ilorin Plant since 1979 and is located in the capital city of Ilorin,
Kwara State in Northcentral Nigeria. The Ilorin plant is responsible for the production of
Coca-Cola, Fanta, Sprite, Schweppes and Five Alive and distribution of all product
categories. Ilorin plant is the smallest of all Coca-Cola Plants with just two production
lines. They discharge their effluent into Asa river which is situated in Ilorin, Kwara State,
Northcentral, Nigeria.
 Asejire plant
NBC operates the Asejire Plant since 1983 and is located in the Asejire community of
Oyo State in Southwest Nigeria. The Asejire Plant is responsible for the production of
Coca-Cola, Fanta, Sprite and Schweppes and distribution of all product categories.
Asejire Plant has just 5 production lines, and they discharge their waste into Asejire river.

3.1 STUDY DESIGN
This study involved sampling of effluents from Nigeria Bottling Company; it also involves
sampling of water from their selected points along receiving rivers. The study area was selected to
coincide with where industrial pollution was evident. This was done throughout the three Plants.
The collection of samples which was collected upstream of each river to know the quality of water
before industrial pollution, industrial effluent discharge points and downstream of each river. The
discharge points of Nigeria Bottling Company were selected as sampling points. River sampling
points were located. The points downstream of industries was located as close as possible to the
downstream side of the discharge points. This study also involved flow (discharge) measurement
from the effluent discharge channels so as to evaluate the pollutant loading rate from these
industries.
3.2 SAMPLING PROCEDURES
Water and wastewater samples were collected from Ilorin plant and Asa river on 28th
August 2015, Ikeja plant and nearby stream on 30th
September 2015, Asejire plant and Asejire
river on 9th
October 2015. Both water and wastewater (effluent) samples were collected using 500
ml plastic bottle. Samples were collected with the assistance of a fisherman into plastic bottles,
which were previously soaked in 3% nitric acid and washed with distilled water (Hanson, 1973).
Samples for the determination of dissolved oxygen were collected in dark glass containers and
fixed on the spot with Winkler reagent. Finally, the bottles were rinsed well with deionized water.
At the sampling points, bottles were rinsed three times with sample before samples were collected
in order to prevent carryover from previous samples. Water samples from river were collected near
the middle of the river from well-mixed sections, 20 to 30 cm under its surface while pointing the
sample bottle upstream. Wastewater samples were collected direct from the effluent discharge

points. Sample bottles were clearly labelled using marker pen and each labelled sample was
recorded in a field book. Samples were stored in cool box while in the field and immediately
transported to Nigeria Bottling Company Effluent Treatment Plant Laboratory for analysis
therefore no preservatives were added to the samples.
3.3 SAMPLE MEASUREMENT
3.3.1 In-situ measurement
Parameters such as pH, dissolved oxygen, temperature, electrical conductivity and TDS
were measured immediately in the field using portable equipment.
3.3.1.1 pH measurement
The pH was determined using a pH meter (model E512). 50ml of water samples from the
three sampling points were transferred into a beaker for pH measurements. The pH meter was
standardized by buffer of pH 7 and 9 just before use, each time it was engaged in pH determinations
(A.P.H.A, 1985).
3.3.1.2 DO measurement
This was determined by the method of (A.P.H.A, 1985). Water samples were collected in
300 𝑚𝑙 reagent bottles. Two milliliters (2 𝑚𝑙) each of manganese sulphate solution and alkali
iodide-oxide solution were added to each sample below the surface and the bottles were stoppered
carefully to prevent air bubbles. The content of the bottle was mixed by rapidly inverting it twenty
times. The bottle was allowed to stand until a precipitate settles to the bottom half of the bottle.
This was mixed again by inverting the bottle several times and the precipitate allowed settling.
Two milliliters (2 𝑚𝑙) of concentrated sulphuric acid was added. The bottle was stoppered and
inverted several times to dissolve the precipitate. One hundred milliliters (100 𝑚𝑙) of the resulting

solution was measured into a 250 𝑚𝑙 conical flask and titrated with standard sodium thiosulphate
solution to a pale straw colour. Eight drop of starch indicator solution were added to the solution
and titrated until the blue colour disappeared. The volume of the thiosulphate used was recorded.
The dissolved oxygen content was calculated using the formula of Boyd (1981) i.e.
100
(1000)(8)Ntitrant(ml
)(mglOxygenDissolved 1-

3.3.1.3 Electrical Conductivity (E.C) measurement
Water samples from the sampling points were collected in 250 𝑚𝑙 reagent bottles, out of
which 50 ml was transferred into a beaker for conductivity measurements. This was achieved with
a conductometer (model cm 25) that had been previously standardized by dipping the electrode
into distilled water. (WHO, 1988).
3.3.1.4 Temperature measurement
Temperature of the sampling points was determined using a mercury-in-glass thermometer
calibrated in 0
C. The thermometer was immersed in water at a horizontal position of about 10-
15cm below air-water interface. It was left in that position for 2-5 minutes for the thermometer to
.be stable. The thermometer was then taken out and read to obtain temperature values. In order
to reduce variability, three readings were made and the mean taken as the final value.
3.3.1.5 TDS measurement
TDS was measured in-situ both in the effluent channel and in the river using a conductivity
meter (sension 5). The E.C meter was turned on and its electrode dipped direct in the river. For
wastewater, the electrode was dipped in the effluent channel. The TDS was read directly and
recorded in mg/l.

3.3.2 Laboratory measurement
3.3.2.1 Determination of Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Pre weighed filter papers were placed on a holder and washed with distilled water. 100ml
of each water sample were filtered and dried through the filter papers. The filter papers were
subsequently dried to constant weight for one hour at 1050
C. They were then cooled in a dessicator
and weighed (WHO 1988). The TSS values were calculated using the formula:
fitteredsampleofVolume
paperfitteronsolidsofMass
)(mglTSS 1-

3.3.2.2 Determination of Sulphate (𝑺𝑶 𝟒
𝟐−
)
To 2 𝑚𝑙 of sample, the same volume of 0.02 N HCl solution was added that was equal to
the volume of 0.02 N H2SO4 used, followed by 5 𝑚𝑙 0.02M BaCl2 while boiling. The mixture was
cooled to room temperature, to which was then added 1 𝑚𝑙 0.02 M Mg Cl2 +2 to 4 𝑚𝑙 ammonia-
ammonium chloride buffer pH 10(67.5g NH4Cl in 570 𝑚𝑙 concentrated NH4OH and diluted to 1
litre) and a few drops of Eriochrome Black – T (EBT) indicator and titrated against 0.01M EDTA
until colour changed from red to violet blue.
Black containing only 25 𝑚𝑙 distilled water instead of sample without adding HCl was also
titrated against EDTA. The net EDTA volume (z) was calculated as follows:
Z = B – H – A
Where, B is volume of EDTA used as blank
H is volume of EDTA used as total hardness

A is volume of EDTA used for sample
The sulphate concentration was calculated as follows:
SO4
2-1
(mglh) = Z x M x 96 x 1000
Sample volume (mL)
3.3.2.3 Determination of Total Hardness
Total hardness was determined through EDTA titrimetric method. Reagents used were
Buffer solution, Eriochrome Black T sodium salt indicator, Standard EDTA as titrant and Standard
Calcium Solution. To 50 𝑚𝑙 sample 1 to 2 𝑚𝑙 buffer was added to give a pH of 10.0 to 10.1. Then
to sample 1 to 2 drops of indicator solution was also added and titrated with EDTA until the colour
changed from reddish tinge to blue. Buffer was added to a sample and titrations proceed for five
minutes to complete titration.
3.3.2.3 Heavy Metal Analysis
Heavy metals like lead, zinc, magnesium, manganese, copper, cadmium and arsenic were
determined in both water and sediment samples. Water sample (100 𝑚𝑙) and 1g sediment sample
in 250 𝑚𝑙 volumetric flask was acidified with 5ml of HNO3 (55%) and evaporated on hot plate to
about 20 𝑚𝑙. 5 𝑚𝑙 additional HNO3 (55%), 10ml perchloric acid (70%) and a few glass heads
were added to prevent bumping. The mixture was evaporated until brown fumes change into dense
white fumes of perchloric acid (HCLO4). The sample were removed from the hot plate, cooled to
room temperature and diluted to 100ml with distilled water in a 100 𝑚𝑙 volumetric flask. The
solution was then aspirated into flame atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS) for the
determination of heavy metals.

3.3.2.4 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (𝑩𝑶𝑫 𝟓)
This was determined to measure the dissolved oxygen consumed by microorganisms. Two
reagent bottles were used for the BOD analysis. 250 cm3
of distilled water was measured and
250cm3
of the water samples were poured into each reagent bottle and titrated with 10ml of 1.4 ml
tetraoxosulphate (vi) acid and 10 ml of 0.1 potassium permanganate was also added. The solutions
were incubated for 5 days after which they were titrated with 0.0125M sodium thioshuphate
solution with starch as indicator (WHO, 1988).
BOD = a – b x 4ppm where:
a = Titration of distilled water
b = Titration of water samples
PPM = Parts Per Million
3.3.2.5 Nitrate (N03)
Ten millimeters (10 ml) of water samples from each sampling site were measured into
Nessler tubes. 10 𝑚𝑙 of distilled water was also measured into another Nessler tubes. 0.5𝑚𝑙 of
brucine and 10 𝑚𝑙 of concentrated H2SO4 were then added to each tube. Drops of potassium
nitrate was added to the Nessler tubes with distilled water until its colour match with the colour of
the water samples in the Nessler tube (WHO 1988). The concentration of nitrate was then
calculated as:
sampleofml
1000.10KNOofml
)(mglNO 31-
3



3.3.2.6 Phosphate (𝑃𝑂4
3−
)
Phosphate determination was done by using HACH Dr 2000 spectrophotometer. The stored
program number for phosphate powder pillows was entered. 490 read/enter button was pressed for
units of 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 𝑃𝑂4
3−
.The wavelength dial was rotated until the display showed 890 nm. The
read/enter button was pressed again and display showed 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 𝑃𝑂4
3−
. To 25 mls of sample
contained in a sample-cell, content of one phosver 3 phosphate powder pillow was added and
shook for 15 seconds. Another sample-cell was filled with 25 𝑚𝑙𝑠 of the sample (the blank) and
placed in the spectrophotometer. The display showed 0.0 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 𝑃𝑂4
3−
. Then the mixed sample was
placed into the spectrophotometer and the light shield was closed then the concentration of
phosphate in 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 was recorded.
3.3.2.7 Iron (𝑭𝒆 𝟐+
)
The analysis was done using HACH Dr 2000 spectrophotometer. The stored program number for
iron was entered. The wavelength dial was rotated to display 510 nm. Read/enter button was
pressed and displayed 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 𝐹𝑒2+
. A sample-cell was filled with 25 𝑚𝑙 of sample. The contents
of one Ferrous Iron Reagent Powder Pillow was added to the sample cell and swirled to mix.
Another sample-cell was filled with 25 𝑚𝑙 of sample as a blank. The blank was placed into the
cell holder to zero an instrument. The blank was removed from the cell holder and then the mixed
sample was placed into the cell holder. The light shield was closed and then the concentration of
iron in 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 was recorded.

3.4 DATA STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Physico - chemical data was collected and entered in excel and then exported to SPSS Version 17
for statistical analysis. Correlation test was done.

Result Interpretation
Appearance for Asejire and Ilorin Plant effluent are brownish, while Ilorin plant effluent
was clear and colorless (Table 1). Only Ilorin plant effluent was within the FEPA (1991) effluent
permissible limits. Colour of the effluent from Asejire and Ilorin Plant3 was 8 Lovibund unit, while
Ilorin plant effluent is 7 Lovibund which within the FEPA (1991) effluent permissible limits (7
Lovibund Unit). The pH of Asejire Plant effluent was 7.55, Ilorin Plant Effluent was 6.50 and Ikeja
Plant effluent was 7.85. All the pH of effluent from all the Plant was within the FEPA (1991)
effluent permissible limits (6-9). The temperature of all the 3 Plants effluent was 30°C, which was
within the FEPA (1991) effluent permissible limits (<40). The Conductivity of Asejire Plant
effluent was 505 𝜇/𝑐𝑚, Ilorin Plant effluent was 500 𝜇/𝑐𝑚 while Ikeja Plant effluent was
505 𝜇/𝑐𝑚, within the same range though, FEPA (1991) do not have any permissible limits. Odour
of Asejire and Ikeja Plant effluent unpleasant while Ilorin Plant effluent was odorless, which match
the FEPA (1991) standard. Total suspended in all the Plant was below standard in all the Plant and
Ilorin Plant still had the least (undetectable). The same trend was observed in total dissolved solids
(𝑚𝑔/𝑙), where all analyzed effluent data was below the normal standard. Ikeja Plant had the
highest Total hardness (167 𝑚𝑔/𝑙) and Ilorin Plant had the least (157 𝑚𝑔/𝑙). Though, no standard
was set for effluent total hardness by FEPA.
All chemical composition of effluent discharge from all the Plants was greatly lower the
FEPA standard (Table 2). Though, Ikeja plant had higher chemical composition (0.64 𝑚𝑔/𝑙, 3
𝑚𝑔/𝑙 , 0.75 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and 8 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 for iron, nitrate, chloride and sulphate respectively).

Biochemical Oxygen demand for all the 3 Plants was 10 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and which was
below FEPA (1991) effluent permissible limits (15 𝑚𝑔/𝑙) (Table 3). Chemical Oxygen demand
for Asejire Plant and Ilorin Plant Effluent was 29𝑚𝑔/𝑙, while Ikeja Plant effluent had higher COD
of 42 𝑚𝑔/𝑙. All recorded parameters for Chemical Oxygen demand was within FEPA (1991)
effluent permissible limits (80 𝑚𝑔/𝑙). Dissolved Oxygen for Asejire Plant effluent was 4.1 𝑚𝑔/𝑙,
Ilorin Plant effluent was 2.0 𝑚𝑔/𝑙, while the Dissolved oxygen for Ikeja Plant effluent was
4.8 𝑚𝑔/𝑙. Only Ilorin Plant effluent was within the FEPA (1991) effluent permissible limits
(<2.0).
Almost all the parameters of appearance and odour of the 3 rivers, both the upstream and
downstream was brownish and unpleasant, only the upstream of Asa river was clear and odorless
respectively (Table 4). All the colors for all the 3 rivers are within the same range. Only the
downstream of Asa river and Ikeja lagoon (upstream and downstream) recorded high pH (10.3,
10.4) respectively. Asa river recorded high temperature at upstream (30°C) while Ikeja lagoon
recorded low temperature at upstream (24°C). There was variation in conductivity of all the 3
rivers both upstream and downstream. The TSS of downstream for Asa river and Ikeja lagoon was
both high. Asa river and Ikeja Lagoon has high total hardness in both upstream and downstream
(72 respectively).
The Alkalinity of Asejire river was relatively high at upstream and was low at downstream
of Asa river (1120 and 954 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 respectively) (Table 5). All the parameters of lead were all below
<0.1 at all the 3 rivers. Phosphate of all the 3 rivers are all in the same variation. Chloride was
recorded high at Ikeja lagoon 65.0 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and was low at upstream of Asa river 56.5 𝑚𝑔/𝑙. Iron
and Nitrate was in the same variations in all the 3 rivers. Sulphate was recorded high at both the

upstream of Asejire river and Ikeja lagoon, while both downstream of the same rivers were low in
sulphate.
The BOD of the downstream of Ikeja lagoon was recorded high (180 𝑚𝑔/𝑙), while BOD
was recorded low at upstream of Asa river (120 𝑚𝑔/𝑙) (Table 6). The COD of Ikeja lagoon was
high at upstream (400 𝑚𝑔/𝑙) and was recorded low at upstream of Asa river (300 𝑚𝑔/𝑙). The DO
of Asa river was recorded high at downstream (1.22 𝑚𝑔/𝑙) and was low at upstream (0.4 𝑚𝑔/𝑙).
The Total plant count of Asejire river was high at downstream (124 𝐶𝐹𝑈/𝑚𝑙) and was
low at upstream of Asa river (95 𝐶𝐹𝑈/𝑚𝑙) (Table 7). Total coliforms were high at downstream of
Asejire river (51 𝐶𝐹/𝑚𝑙) and was low at upstream of Asa river (30 𝐶𝐹/𝑚𝑙). E coli was high at
upstream of Asejire river (16) and was relatively low at downstream of Asa river (3).
BOD and Nitrate was positively correlated (0.006) highly negatively with Fe (-0.003). Cl
was positively correlated with DO and P (0.049 respectively) (Table 8). COD was highly
correlated with Nitrate (0.003) and negatively correlated with O (-0.032). E coli and P also are
positively correlated (0.024). Fe content was highly positively correlated with 0.010 and are
negatively correlated with TC (-0.027). Nitrogen content was negatively correlated with TC (-
0.027), pH and TPC was correlated positively (0.054).

Table1: Physical characteristics of effluent discharge from different Coca-Cola Plant
Parameters Asejire Ilorin Ikeja FEPA
Appearance in situ Brownish Clear and Colorless Brownish Clear and Colorless
Colour (Lovibund units) 8 7 8 7
pH (in situ) 7.55 6.50 7.85 6-9
Temperature ℃ (𝑖𝑛 𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑢) 30 30 30 <40
Conductivity 𝜇/𝑐𝑚 (in situ) 505 500 505 NS
Odour (in situ) Unpleasant Odorless Unpleasant Odorless
Total Suspended Solids 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 10 - 11 15
Total Dissolved Solids 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 128 100 133 2000
Total Hardness 162 157 167 NS

Table 2: Chemical characteristics of effluent discharge from different Coca-Cola Plant
Lead 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1
Iron 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 0.64 0.56 0.64 20
Nitrate 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 2 2 3 20
Chloride 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 0.75 0.67 0.75 600
Sulphate (as 𝑆𝑂4
2−
)
𝑚𝑔/𝑙
7 7 8 500
Phosphate (as 𝑃𝑂4
3−
)
𝑚𝑔/𝑙
2 2 2 5

Table 3: Organic characteristics of effluent discharge from different Coca-Cola Plant
𝑩𝑶𝑫 𝟓 𝐀𝐓 𝟐𝟎℃, 𝒎𝒈/
𝒍
10 10 10 15
COD 𝒎𝒈/𝒍 29 29 42 80
Dissolved Oxygen
(DO) 𝒎𝒈/𝒍
4.1 2.0 4.8 <2.0

Table 4: Physical characteristics of receiving rivers
Parameters Asejire river (Asejire) Asa river (Ilorin) Ikeja Lagoon (Ikeja)
Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream
Appearance in
situ
Brownish Brownish Clear Brownish Brownish Brownish
Colour (Lovibund
Units)
8.2 8.0 8.0 7.9 8.0 7.9
pH (in situ) 9.68 9.81 9.12 10.3 10.0 10.4
Temperature
℃ (𝒊𝒏 𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒖)
26 28 27 30 24 28
Conductivity 𝝁/
𝒄𝒎 (in situ)
2366 2397 2366 2453 2463 2500
Odour (in situ) Unpleasant Unpleasant Odorless Unpleasant Unpleasant Unpleasant
Total Suspended
Solids 𝒎𝒈/𝒍
705 790 750 810 760 820
Total Dissolved
Solids 𝒎𝒈/𝒍
1490 1521 1501 1536 1550 1580
Total Hardness 58 65 60 72 60 72

Table 5: Chemical characteristics of receiving rivers
Alkalinity
(𝑪𝒂𝑪𝑶 𝟑, 𝒎𝒈/𝒍)
1120 996 990 954 1022 987
Lead 𝒎𝒈/𝒍 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Iron 𝒎𝒈/𝒍 0.90 0.65 0.87 0.73 0.90 0.75
Nitrate 𝒎𝒈/𝒍 0.61 0.69 0.56 0.72 0.5 0.7
Chloride 𝒎𝒈/𝒍 60.0 61.8 56.5 61.5 60 65.0
Sulphate (as
𝑺𝑶 𝟒
𝟐−
) 𝒎𝒈/𝒍
142 110 143 112 142 110
Phosphate (as
𝑷𝑶 𝟒
𝟑−
) 𝒎𝒈/𝒍
7.5 7.0 7.8 7.0 7.5 7.0

Table 6: Organic characteristics of receiving rivers
𝑩𝑶𝑫 𝟓 𝐀𝐓 𝟐𝟎℃, 𝒎𝒈/
𝒍
155 157 120 150 160 180
COD 𝒎𝒈/𝒍 350 365 300 312 400 416
Dissolved Oxygen
(DO) 𝒎𝒈/𝒍
0.8 0.9 0.4 1.22 0.5 1.25

Table 7: Biological characteristics of receiving rivers
Total Plate count
(CFU/ml)
120 124 98 95 102 100
Total Coliforms
(CF/100ml)
50 51 30 33 34 36
E.coli 16 9 5 3 8 5

Table 7: Correlation of Physio-chemical parameters
BOD Cl COD Con DO E.Coli Fe N PH P S TDS Temp TC TH TPC Colour
BOD 1.000 0.767 0.853 0.327 0.233 0.304 -0.003** 0.006* 0.465 -0.358 -0.144 0.164 0.006 0.437 0.064 0.294 0.024*
Cl 1.000 0.655 0.703 0.049* 0.360 0.348 -0.217 0.121 0.049* 0.342 0.711 -0.587 0.745 -0.163 0.709 0.146
COD 1.000 0.470 0.241 0.574 0.232 0.003** 0.291 -0.032* 0.134 0.274 -0.146 0.328 -0.165 0.316 0.067
Con 1.000 -0.089 0.320 0.854 -0.417 -0.119 0.705 0.878 0.863 -0.872 0.334 -0.336 0.495 0.792
DO 1.000 -0.148 0.207 0.636 0.827 -0.124 -0.124 0.068 0.215 -0.092 -0.405 -0.160 0.135
E.Coli 1.000 0.084 -0.189 -0.147 0.024* 0.242 0.261 -0.369 0.610 -0.203 0.703 0.434
Fe 1.000 -0.244 0.010** 0.882 0.923 0.786 -0.753 -0.027* -0.443 0.183 0.339
N 1.000 0.590 -0.377 -0.399 -0.284 0.421 -0.109 -0.626 -0.221 0.624
PH 1.000 -0.401 -0.329 -0.158 0.367 -0.035* -0.227 -0.194 0.119
P 1.000 0.934 0.645 -0.717 -0.217 -0.328 0.054* 0.229
S 1.000 0.831 -0.902 0.119 -0.426 0.371 0.383
TDS 1.000 -0.934 0.521 -0.444 0.668 -0.208
Temp 1.000 -0.510 0.408 -0.703 0.224
TC 1.000 -0.196 0.955 -0.481
TH 1.000 -0.292 0.251
TPC 1.000 0.934
Colour 1.000

Discussion
The study revealed that the pH value of the water downstream of all the three plants are
slightly acidic (Asejire river 10.3, Asa river 9.81, Ikeja Lagoon 10.4) this is due to the continuous
discharge of effluent which has an impact on the river. Low value of BOD below FEPA (1991)
standards were also observed in effluents from all the three Plants (Ikeja, Ilorin and Asejire). This
shows the indication of low biodegradable organic pollutant in the effluent from the industry. The
high value in both the Upstream and Downstream could be due to the vegetation cover and
presence of decaying plant debris. The upstream and downstream is observed to have high COD.
This indicate heavy load of organic and inorganic pollution that require more oxygen to oxidize
under increased thermal conditions (Koushik and Saksena, 1999).
Only the Colour of Ilorin plant effluent was similar to FEPA (1991) standards for effluent
discharge (7 Lovibund unit) but was higher in the effluent of other Plants (Asejire and Ikeja). The
high value of colour at Ikeja and Asejire is probably due to the use of colored cleaning agents
which is carried by the effluent from the industry or there is not proper treatment of the effluent
before discharge. For the temperature, all the measured values complied with the FEPA (1991)
maximum permissible standards (40°𝑐) limits for wastewater discharge into surface water thus it
will not have any significant effects on the receiving river water. Increase in temperature values
reported at receiving rivers can be attributed to the discharge of warm effluent and the increased
organic load that might have caused an increase in absorption of heat. Conductivity in runoff from
industries was not exceeding the permissible limits FEPA (1991) because it was not stated (NS).
The high value of Conductivity in the effluent was attributed to the high content of ions in
sodium hydroxide chemicals used a cleaning detergent in this industry. The high value of

Conductivity in the receiving water is as a result of continuous effluent loading into the river. Only
the DO values of Ilorin Plant effluent is within FEPA (1991) permissible limits and have little or
no effect on Asa river. The DO of both Ikeja and Asejire Plant is high and did not meet the
permissible limits of FEPA (1991) so it will not cause any significant effect to the receiving river
in a short term. Nonetheless, the continuous and long term discharge of industrial effluent to
receiving Ikeja Lagoon and Asejire river should be done with care since they have high levels of
DO.
The nitrate measured from all the three plant effluent was below FEPA (1991) maximum
permissible standard so it will not cause any significant effect to the receiving river in a short term
or long term. The major routes of entry of nitrogen into bodies of water are municipal and industrial
wastewater, private sewage disposal systems, decaying plant debris and discharge from car
exhausts (USEPA, 1986). The results show that the waste waters released by Nigeria bottling
Company into the streams have no heavy metal concentrations above those recommended and this
poses little or no risk to the environment. Phosphate levels were generally below the FEMA (1991)
permissible limits (5 𝑚𝑔/𝑙) at all effluent discharging sampling sites. However, Phosphate is
highly present in the receiving water bodies. Phosphates enter waterways from human and animal
waste, phosphate rich bedrock, wastes from laundry cleaning and industrial processes, and
fertilizer runoff (Mosley, 2004). If too much phosphate is present, algae and water weeds grow
wildly, choke the water way and use up large amount of oxygen resulting into death of aquatic
organisms. According to Perry and (Green, 2007), it is not possible to find a high phosphate
reading if the algae are already blooming, as the phosphates will already be in the algae but not in
water. This explains the high levels of phosphate observed along the streams because algae were
not observed at some sections along the stream. All the recorded concentrations for sulphate, iron

and sulphate in both industries were within the maximum FEPA (1991) permissible limits
therefore will not have any significant effects in the receiving river.
The total hardness of all the Plant are within the assumed required standard. FEPA (1991)
did not give a permissible standard for total hardness. Only Ilorin plant effluent was within the
FEPA (1991) permissible standard for Odour and Appearance. Discharge of Ilorin Plant effluent
into the receiving river has no significant effect on Asa river. Ikeja Plant effluent and Asejire Plant
effluent was not within the FEPA (1991) permissible standard. If the effluent is discharged
continuously for a long period of time, it will have a significant effect on the receiving rivers (Ikeja
Lagoon and Asejire River). The Brownish appearance and Unpleasant odour maybe due to
improper treatment or storage of effluent for a long period of time before being discharge. TSS
was not detected in the effluent from Ilorin Plant and the TSS of Ikeja Plant and Asejire Plant is
within the FEPA (1991) permissible standard of effluent discharge, thus effluent may not have a
significant effect on the Asa river. The presence of coliforms and E. coli is an indication of faecial
pollution. That shows that at Asa river there is high faecial contamination of the river and since
Total Plate Count, Total coliform and E. coli is absent in the effluent discharge, this mean the
faecial pollution do not come from the Industry.

CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 CONCLUSION
Overall, the study has shown that the quality of effluents from the discharge point is
unsatisfactory in terms of dissolved oxygen at Ilorin Plant, appearance, dissolved oxygen and
colour at Ikeja plant and appearance, dissolved oxygen and odour at Asejire Plant. This has shown
that Nigeria Bottling Company have a big impact on the water quality of the receiving streams.
This is depicted by the fact that there is a general increase in concentration of the parameters
analyzed downstream as opposed to up stream. Although the values in some cases were lower than
the maximum allowable limits by FEPA (1991), the continued discharge of un-treated effluents in
the stream may result in severe accumulation of the contaminants.
The stream had high levels of TSS, BOD, COD, and low level of DO. The presence of
coliforms and E.coli is an indication of faecial pollution. The impact of the effluent on the stream
is camouflaged by the poor state of the stream water before it received the plant’s effluent, which
had a minor effect on already polluted stream.
5.1 RECOMENDATIONS
The results suggest that the effluents being discharged continuously into the streams have
considerable negative effects on the water quality in the receiving streams. With increased
industrial activities in Nigeria Bottling Company, the load of nutrients and pollutants entering the
receiving streams will continue to increase and further diminish the quality of water. Introduction

of cost-effective cleaner production technologies must be enforced, such as on-site waste
separation and reduction, and effluent recycling.
There should be proper checking of the Effluent before it is being released i.e. bodies like
NESREA, FEPA, should ensure that the effluent released by the companies is of standard. Laws
and policies should be enforced against those that go against environmental rules and regulations.
There should Standardize the equipment of treatment plants This type of research should be done
time to time i.e to be able to know what kind of damage has been done to the environment and
what extent of repair is required.

REFERENCES
Adekunle A. S. and Eniola I. T. K. (2008). Industrial effluents on quality of segment of Asa River
within an industrial estate in Ilorin, Nigeria. New York Science Journal. 2008, 1, 17-21.
Absar A. K. (2005). Water and Wastewater Properties and Characteristics. In water Encyclopedia:
Domestic, Municipal and Industrial Water Supply and Waste Disposal. Lehr JH, Keeley J
(eds). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New Jersey, pp. 903-905.
Ajayi S. O. and Osibanji O. (1981). Pollution Studies on Nigerian Rivers, water quality of some
Nigeria Rivers. Environmental Pollution Series 2:87-95.
Akali N. M., Nyongesa N., Destaings N. E. M. and Miima J. (2011). Effluent Discharge by Mumias
Sugar Company in Kenya: An Empirical Investigation of the Pollution of River Nzoia.
Sacha Journal of Environmental Studies.1:1-301.
Akpata T. V. I. (1990). Pollution Flora of Some Wetlands in Nigeria. Nigerian Wetlands. Emmi
Press, Ibadan, pp 130–137.
APHA (2001). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th edition.
APHA, Washington D.C.
Authman M. M. N. (1998). A study on freshwater pollution and its effects on zooplankton and fish
Oreochromis niloticus in Shanawan drainage canal at Almay, Al-Menoufeya Province,
Egypt. Ph.D Thesis. Faculty of Science, Al-Menoufeya University, Egypt.
Azizullah A., Khattak M. N. K., Richter P. and Häder D. (2010). Water pollution in Pakistan and
its impact on public health — A review on Environment International. 37: 479–497.

Baloch M. K., Ashfaq M., Shah J. and Ashur S. T. (2001). Environmental impact of industrial
effluents with reference to the quality of water. Pakistani Journal anal, Chemistry, 2: 48-
52.
CDC (1997). Outbreaks of Escherica coli O157:H7 infection associated with eating alfalfa sprouts
– Michigan and Virginia,June-July, 1997. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
46(32):74
Chambers P. A. and Mills T. (1996). Dissolved Oxygen Conditions and Fish Requirements in the
Athabasca, Peace and Slave Rivers: Assessment of Present Conditions and Future Trends.
Northern River Basins Study Synthesis Report No. 5. Environment Canada/Alberta
Environmental Protection, Edmonton, AB.
Chikogu V., Caleb A. I. and Lekwot V. E. (2012). Public Health Effects of Effluent Discharge of
Kaduna Refinery into River Romi. Greener Journal of Medical Sciences. 2(3): 064-069.
Corcoran E., Nellemann C., Baker E., Bos R., Osborn D. and Savelli H. (editors). (2010). Sick
Water: The central role of wastewater management in sustainable development. A Rapid
Response Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme, UN-HABITAT, GRID-
Arendal.
Cornish G. and Mensahh A. (1999). Water quality and peri-urban irrigation. Report OD/TN95 HR
Wallingford, Wallingford, UK.
Environmental Canada (1997). Review of the impacts of municipal wastewater effluents on
Canadian waters and human health. Ecosystem Science Directorate, Environmental
Conservation Service, Environmental Canada, p. 25.

Environmental impact of sugar industry - a case study on Kushtia Sugar Mills in Bangladesh:
Khulna: Green World Foundation
EPA (2000). Nutrient criteria technical guidance manual-rivers and streams. EPA-822-B-00-002.
Washington DC.
Eruola A. O., Ufoegbune G. C., Awomeso J. A., Adeofun C. O., Idowu O. and Abhulimen S. I.
(2011). An assessment of the effect of industrial pollution on Ibese river, Lagos, Nigeria.
African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 5(8): 608-615.
Eynard F., Mez K. and Walther J. L. (2000). Risk of cyanobacterial toxins in Riga waters
(LATVIA). Water Res. 30(11): 2979-2988.
Ezeronye O.U. and Amogu N. Q. (1998). Microbiological studies of Effluents from Nigeria
Fertilizer and paper Mill Plants. International Journal of Environmental Studies. 54:213-
228.
Fakayode S. O. (2005). Impact Assessment of Industrial Effluent on Water Quality of Receiving
Alaro River in Ibadan, Nigeria. AJEM-RAGGEE. 10: 1-13.
Federal Environment Protection Agency (FEPA). (1991). Guidelines and standards for
environment pollution in Nigeria.
Galadima A., Garba Z. N., Leke L., Almustapha M. N. and Adam I. K. (2011). Domestic Water
Pollution among Local Communities in Nigeria - Causes and Consequences. European
Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.52 No.4 (2011), pp.592-603.
Hanson N. W. (1973). Official, Standardized and Recommended methods of Analysis, 323p.

Hammer M. J. (2004). Water and Wastewater Technology, 5th ed.; Practice-Hall Inc.: Upper
Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2004; pp. 139-141.
Imoobe T. O. and Koye P. I. (2010). Assessment of the impact of effluent from a soft drink
processing factory on the physico-chemical parameters of Eruvbi stream Benin City,
Nigeria. Bayero Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 4(1): 126 – 134.
Jain C. K. (2002). A hydro-chemical study of a mountainous watershed: The Ganga. India, Water
Research, 36, pp 1262–1274.
Kanu I. and Achi O. K. (2011). Industrial Effluents and Their Impact on Water Quality of
Receiving Rivers in Nigeria. Journal of Applied Technology in Environmental
Sanitation.1: 7 5 - 8 6.
Kayima J. and Kyakula M. (2008). A study of the degree of pollution in Nakivubo Channel,
Kampala, Uganda.
Kosaric N. (1992). Treatment of industrial waste waters by anaerobic processes- new
developments in Recent Advances in Biotechnology Vardar-Sukan, F.and Sukan, S.S.
(eds.). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
Koushik S. and Saksena D. (1999). Physical-chemical limnology of certain fresh water
bodies of central India.
Kris M. (2007). Wastewater pollution in China. Available from http: www.dbc.uci/wsu
stain/suscoasts/krismin.html. Accessed 16/06/2008.

Kuzhali S. S., Manikandan N. and Kumuthakalavalli R. (2012). Physico chemical and biological
parameters of paper industry effluent, CODEN (USA)
Mathuthu A. S., Mwanga K. and Simoro A. (1997): Impact Assessment of Industrial and Sewage
Effluents on Water Quality of receiving Marimba River in Harare.
Metcalf and Eddy Inc. (1995). Wastewater Engineering: Treatment, disposal and reuse, 3rd
edition. (G. Tchobanoglous and F. L. Burton, edition.) Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company Ltd, New Delhi.
Mkuula, S. S. (2004). Pollution of wetlands in Tanzania: National Environment Management
Council. Assessed on 18th August 2012 from
http://www.oceandocs.org/bitstream/1834/529/1/Wetlands8593.pdf
Mohammed F. A. S. (2009). Histopathological studies on Tilapia zilliand Solea vulgarisfrom lake
Quran, Egypt. World Journal Fish Marine Science. 1, 29-39. 7
Mosley L., Sarabjeet S. and Aalbersberg B. (2004). Water quality monitoring in Pacific Island
countries. Handbook for water quality managers & laboratories, Public Health officers,
water engineers and suppliers, Environmental Protection Agencies and all those
organizations involved in water quality monitoring (1st Edition). 43 p; 30 cm, ISSN: 1605-
4377: SOPAC, The University of the South Africa
Nadia M. A. (2006). Study on effluents from selected sugar mills in Pakistan: Potential
environmental, health, and economic consequences of an excessive pollution load:
Sustainable Development Policy Institute. Islamabad, Pakistan Pacific. Suva - Fiji Islands

Okoh A. T., Odjadjare E. E., Igbinosa E. O. and Osode A. N. (2007). Wastewater treatment plants
as a source of microbial pathogens in receiving water sheds. African Journal of
Biotechnology. 6(25): 2932-2944.
Olayemi A. B. (1994). Bacteriological water assessment of an urban river in Nigeria. International
Journal of Environment Health Recourses. 4:156-164.
Paillard D., Dubois V., Thiebaut R., Nathier F., Hogland E., Caumette P. and Quentine C. (2005).
Occurrence of Listeria spp. In effluents of French urban wastewater treatment plants.
Applied Environmental Microbiology. 71(11): 7562-7566
Patil P. N., Sawant D. V. and Deshmukh R. N. (2012). Physico-chemical parameters for testing of
water – A review. International journal of environmental sciences. Department of
Engineering Chemistry, Bharati Vidyapeeth’s College of Engineering, Near Chitranagari,
Kolhapur, Maharashtra, 416013 (INDIA) pnpatil_chem@rediffmail.com. 3(3): 1194-
1202.
Perry R. H., Green D. W., and Maloney J. O. (2007). Perry’s chemical engineers’handbook. —
7th ed. McGraw-Hill: New York
Peters N. E. and Meybeck M. (2000). ‘Water Quality Degradation Effects on Freshwater
Availability: Impacts of Human Activities’, Water International. 25: (2) 185193.
Phiri O., Mumba P., Moyo B. H. Z. and Kadewa W. (2005). Assessment of the impact of industrial
effluents on water quality of receiving rivers in urban areas of Malawi. International
Journal of Environmental Science. 2(3): 237-244.
Pink D. H. (April 19, 2006). "Investing in Tomorrow's Liquid Gold". Yahoo.

Resource Quality Services (2004). Eutrophication and toxic cyanobacteria. Department of Water
Affairs and Forestry, South Africa. Available from www.dwaf.gov.za/WQ
S/eutrophication/toxalga.html. Accessed 14/03/2007.
Rosegrant M. (2001). “Dealing With Water Scarcity in the 21st Century in the Unfinished
Agenda”. (Per pinstrup Andersen and Rajul Pandya-Lorch, Eds), 1st edition, International
Food Policy Research Institute, IPFRI, Washington, 145-150.
Roya M. (2013). European Journal of Experimental Biology, 3(4):254-256
Sandoyin A. Y. (1995). Characteristics of Control Industrial Effluents – generated Pollution.
Environmental Management and Health 6:15-18.
Sandoyin A. Y. (1991). Ground water and surface water pollution by open refuse dump in Ibadan,
Nigeria. Journal of discovery and innovations. 3(1): 24-31.
Sawyer., McCarty and Parkin. (1994). Chemistry for Environmental Engineering, McGraw-Hill,
New York
Sikoki F. D. and Kolo R. J. (1993). Perspective in water pollution and their implications for the
conservation of aquatic resources. Proceedings of the national conference of aquatic
resources. Organized by National advisory committee on conservation of renewable
resources. In cooperation with federal ministry of fisheries, Abuja and Nigeria institute for
oceanography and marine research, Lagos, 184-192pp.
Suflita J. M., Robinson J. M. and Tiedje J. M. (1983). Kinetics of Microbial dehalogenation of
Haloaromatic substrates in methanogenic Environment Applied and Environmental
Microbiology 45(5) 1466- 1473

Tariq M., Ali M. and Shah Z. (2006). Characteristics of industrial effluents and their possible
impacts on quality of underground water; Soil Science Society of Pakistan Department of
Soil & Environmental Sciences, NWFP Agricultural University, Peshawar
Thornton J. A. (1986). Nutrients in African Lake Ecosystems. Do we know all? J. Limnol.
Sociology South Africa. 12: 6 – 21.
Toze S. (1997). Microbial pathogens in wastewater. CSIRO Land and Water Technical Report
1/97.
United Nations Environment Programme Global Environment Monitoring System (GEMS)/Water
Programme (UNEP GEMS/Water). (2007). Water Quality Outlook. Retrieved January
22nd, 2013, from http://esa.un.org/iys/docs/san_lib_docs/water_quality_outlook.pdf.
UNEP/WHO. (1988). Global Environmental Monitoring System: Assessment of freshwater
Quality. Nairobi, United Nations Environmental Programme, Geneva, World Health
Organization
Vaishali P. and Punita P. (2010). Assessment of monthly variation in water quality of River Mini,
at Sindhrot, Vadodara. International Journal of Environmental Sciences. 3(5): 1425-
1432
Walakira P. (2011). Impact of industrial effluents on water quality of receiving streams in Nakawa-
Ntinda, Uganda. Published master’s dissertation, Makerere University, Uganda
Welch EB (1992). Ecological effects of wastewater. Applied Limnology and Pollutant Effects,
2nd edition. Chapman and Hall, New York, p. 45.

West L. (2006). "World Water Day: A Billion People Worldwide Lack Safe Drinking Water".
Wikipedia 2006
WHO (2006). Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greater, vol. 3. World
Health Organization Press, Geneva, Switzerland.
WHO (1997). Nitrogen oxides. Environmental Health Criteria 2nd edn No. 54. Geneva,
Switzerland.
WHO (2004). www.who.int/water_sanitationhealth/publications/facts2004/en/index.html.
www.2.coca-cola.com (2006).
WWAP. (2009). The United Nations World Water Development Report 3: Water in a changing
world. Paris: UNESCO, and London: Earthscan.http://unesdoc.unesco. Org/images
/0018/001819/181993e.pdf //www.ippmedia.com accessed on 17/2/2012 at 20 hours.

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF EFFLUENT QUALITY FROM NIGERIA BOTTLING COMPANY ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (8)

Ähnlich wie ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF EFFLUENT QUALITY FROM NIGERIA BOTTLING COMPANY ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH

Ähnlich wie ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF EFFLUENT QUALITY FROM NIGERIA BOTTLING COMPANY ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH (20)

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF EFFLUENT QUALITY FROM NIGERIA BOTTLING COMPANY ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH