Western Water: A limited survey of the purity and purification techniques of water

This topic submitted by Cameron Berner, Jon Grubb, Shawn Kogge, Patrick McCarthy, Andrew Newman ( mccartpk@muohio.edu ) on 10/22/05. [Section: Winnubst]

Natural Systems 1 Syllabus---Western Program---Miami University

Western Water: A limited survey of the purity and purification techniques of water sources in and around Peabody Hall.
Cameron Berner
Jon Grubb
Shawn Kogge
Patrick McCarthy
Andrew Newman

Introduction
The purpose of this lab is two pronged. First, it is to determine the water quality of various water sources in and around Peabody Hall. Secondly, it is an evaluation of the effect of filtration methods on these samples of water. Through the course of our experimentation, we will test four sources of water; water from the Peabody drinking fountains, Western Pond, Pfeffer Creek, and the bottled water, Aquafina, which is dispensed from the vending machines inside Peabody Hall. We will also compare the filtration abilities of evaporation chambers against the abilities of Brita Water Filters. Because of AquafinaÕs guarantee that it is Òpure waterÓ we will use it as our control. Our research questions are: of these four different sources, which one is the most pure, and, with initial purity established, which method of filtration is the most effective? We hypothesize that the water from the Peabody water fountains will be closer to the standard of purity set by our control when compared with the two natural water sources in the area, and that the Brita Water Filter will be a more effective filter.

The idea for this project was formulated after hearing the rumors about the impurities of the Peabody drinking water. The rumor is that the Peabody water fountains yield a "drinkable" water source that is, in reality, poisonous. Thus, students are encouraged to avoid consuming the water from these sources. Originally, we wanted to test the drinking ability of these four water sources, but due to cost restraints, we had to revise our focus. We will test the pH, total alkalinity, total chlorine, free chlorine, and the hardness of each water source (all results available from the same test strip from the AquaChek Select Pool & Spa Test Strips), which only limitedly assesses the purity of the water sources. Once we developed the basis of our project, we had to find and decide what readily-available water sources we could test that would compare to the purity of Aquafina bottled water, which we are using as the control, since it is marketed as being pure drinking water. Since we wanted to test sources in the vicinity of Peabody Hall, we chose Western Pond and Pfeffer Creek as sources we could test the purity of, because it is highly probable that the water found in the drinking fountains, at one time, could have been flowing through the creek or residing in the pond prior to being treated in the Oxford Water Treatment plant, after which is introduced into the drinking supply. To test the purity of each source and the efficiency of the filters, we are utilizing two testing methods: Bacterial Growth Culture and the aforementioned test strips from AquaChek Select.

Upon completing our experimentation, we plan on proving the rumors about the Peabody water fountains as invalid. Based on our findings, we plan on showing that the water from the drinking fountains is purer than is currently believed.

Relevance
These water sources surround our every day life, and as active members of the Western community, we wish to know, to the best of our ability, the purity of such water sources. For example, the Oxford Water Treatment plant tests the water supply every three years in order to check for safe levels of contaminants and to meet EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) standards. Treated water must maintain a certain water quality for community and environmental health reasons. However, natural bodies of water have no standards that need be met unless they are used for consumption or recreation. These natural bodies of water are affected by the areas surrounding them such as agriculture and urbanization. These factors, due to runoff and drainage, can contaminate local water sources. Western Pond and Pfeffer Creek are good examples of possible contamination due to these factors. Western Pond is surrounded by impervious surfaces and residential sectors which could directly influence the quality of water. Pfeffer Creek passes through agriculture and industrial areas that, with runoff, could affect the creek's water quality.

Previous student-generated labs have also researched and monitored the water quality in and around Miami University. In 2002, a lab called "Dirty Water??!!" checked the amount of contamination in the water from fertilization runoff Two of their water sources were Western Pond and Pfeffer Creek; however, they tested for different substances than what we are interested in. The prior year, a lab titled "Water Quality in and around Miami University and Oxford" attempted to determine the effects of the school and community on the local watershed. Finally, last year, a group submitted a project titled "Water Quality around Miami University" tested multiple bodies of water around Miami University for a number of components that we are interested in including pH and total bacteria count. With the many recent studies of water quality in this area, it is clearly an environmental issue that needs to be addressed.

We hope to debunk the myth that Peabody drinking water is unsafe for human consumption by comparing it with purified and unpurified water. Our research will provide an updated look at the overall water quality in the Western community. The Western community is an integral part of Miami University and thus, the city of Oxford. With our findings, the Western community's knowledge about its water quality will be enriched.

Materials and Methods
Our experimental design is focused around testing each of our water sources multiple times, and testing our two filtration processes. Experimenting with different filtration processes allows us to determine which is the most efficient purifier. Our design is statistically sound because we can quantitatively measure and test each sample for similar information which then can be compared. The different testing methods establish the initial purity of the water and the effectiveness of the purification procedure. Also, we are testing a set amount of water for each filtration process; this amount will equal fifty milliliters. It is too expensive to test each water source for every measure of purity, so we have limited our experiments and tests to simple means. After consulting with a manager of the Oxford water treatment plant, "there is no scientific way for a homeowner to determine water qualities" and "only a few fourth-year chemistry majors would be able to perform some of the tests."

Each test (filtration and water purity) is run three times for each source. Measurements of filtration and purity are comparative at most in relation to the results of the tests on the control.

Store the water sources in large containers, such as one-gallon jugs. Each jug, and every object that will be subjected to the sources, must be thoroughly cleaned using water and a minimal amount of detergent. Make sure to remove all of the detergent before proceeding. At the suggestion of our instructor, we are using Peabody tap water for cleaning purposes. This is to limit the cost of this project (note that washing with our control, Aquafina, with the multiple tests and trials would be a high expenditure.) By using the same sample of water from the same jug, there will less variability within the water samples itself as it occurs in nature.

One filtration test is to pass the water sample through a Brita water filter. A separate filter for each sample is used to avoid risk of contamination. Before filtering each sample, mass the dry filter. After water has been filtered, immediately seal the filter in a Ziploc bag and place it in a freezer. This is to prevent bacterial growth on the filter before a proper measurement can be taken of the filter. At the first available time, utilize a drying oven to remove excess water from the filter. Mass the filter after this process. The difference of the filters mass is the mass of the contaminants that Brita successfully filtered out of the water sample. The mass of the contaminants is the measure of the efficiency of the filter.

The second filtering process is an evaporation chamber. As with the Brita filters, one chamber must be devoted to each source of water (a total of four chambers). To make these, cut twenty ounce plastic bottles in half, suspending the bottom half with fishing line inside of a plastic liter bottle. Then pour the set amount of water (50 ml) into the suspended container and seal the outside container with hot glue. With use of a light source such as a lamp, the water will evaporate to the sides of the container and then trickle down to the bottom. Whatever is left in the original container, after evaporation is completed, is a contaminant that this filtration process has successfully filtered out. Mass the contaminant to measure the efficiency of the filter.

Conduct each test of water purity a total of three times on each filtered and unfiltered sample. There should be a total of 24 trials on the unfiltered sample and a total of 48 trials on the filtered samples, for a total of 72 trials in this lab. Test the pH of each water sample, as well as the total alkalinity, total chlorine, free chlorine, and hardness, with the AquaChek Select strips. For these tests, dip the strip into the sample and compare the resulting color with the color index provided in the AquaChek Select package. Bacteria Cultures can be obtained (pre-made) from the Microbiology Department of Miami University. Test each sample in 3-5 day periods, checking and photographing the growth daily. At the conclusion of the trial, calculate the bacterial growth area, which is the measure of the purity of the water, using graph paper with centimeter measurements. (Note that when counting the number of squares with growth, a square with any growth, however minimal in it is counted as a full square).

Time line
Week ending in:
10-23-05 Collect all water samples and dry run experiments
10-30-05 Perform all unfiltered water tests as well as first trials of filtering
11-06-05 Second trials of filtering
11-13-05 Complete filtering trials
11-20-05 Extra week to solidify all results. Begin final lab report
11-27-05 Thanksgiving
12-06-05 Final lab report due

Results
Because we have not gathered data yet, we have no results at the moment.

Discussion & Conclusions
Because our lab is not complete, we can not discuss results or outcomes at the moment.

Literature Cited
Journals
Thurman, Robert B., et al. ÒBottle wars: England versus Scotland versus France.Ó
International Journal of Food Sciences & Nutrition Volume 53. Issue 3 (May 2002): p209, 8p. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=6366509
-This journal describes the testing of four samples of bottled water from across Europe. While all four did not test positive for E. Coli, they did vary in other respects, including a number of values which we are testing, such as pH and bacterial count.
Becker, Hank. ÒCoping with Swine Water.Ó
Agricultural Research 0002-161X, Volume 49. Issue 7 (July 1, 2001): Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=4874994
-The journal discusses methods for the cleanup and disposal of wastewater from swine-production, which includes a current method for removing ammonia from polluted water sources.
Durham, Sharon. ÒDesigning the Best Possible Conservation Buffers.Ó
Agricultural Research 0002-161X, Vol. 51. Issue 12 (December 1, 2003): p4, 4p, 6c. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=11697539
-The journal describes methods for creating vegetative buffers in agricultural, and attempts to find the best design for such buffers. Since the buffers create cleaner soil and water, this shows that natural methods exist to purify water for human usage.
Welland, Diane. ÒDonÕt Take Your Drinking Water for Granted, Experts Caution.Ó
Environmental Nutrition Volume 27. Issue 1 (January 2001): p1, 2p. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=11864092
-The article describes how the tap water in the United States is safe for human consumption, but can still be made even safer for individuals. This shows that, as we are attempting to test, even purified water is not as ÒpureÓ as it can be.
Crump, J. A., et al. ÒEffect of point-of-use disinfection, flocculation and combined flocculationÐdisinfection on drinking water quality in western Kenya.Ó
Journal of Applied Microbiology Volume 97. Issue 1 (July 2004): p225, 7p. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=13308183
-The journal describes how point-of-use drinking water disinfection in Kenya can improve water quality and reduce diarrhea-causing bacteria, but may become less effective due to the high demand for chlorine. This is another analysis of current purification methods that are used for consumable water.
ÒImproved Land-Management Practices Protect Watershed Lakes.Ó
Agricultural Research Volume 50. Issue 10 (October 2002): p20, 3p, 4c. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=7600619
-The journal describes how wetland areas within the Mississippi River water network help to improve the environment.
Turner, R. Eugene. ÒLinking Landscape and Water Quality in the Mississippi River Basin for 200 Years.Ó
Bioscience Volume 53. Issue 6 (June 2003): p563, 10p, 5 graphs, 1 map, 6bw. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=9988980
-The article describes how land usage over the last two centuries has affected the overall quality of the Mississippi River. It concludes that changes are not occurring as fast as they should because of the buffering capacity of the soil.
ÒMaking Manure-borne Pathogens Stay Put.Ó
Agricultural Research, Volume 50. Issue 10 (October 2002): p9, 1p, 1c. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=7600603
-The journal describes how the pathogens in manure are spread throughout the environment. A number of these pathogens move through runoff water and contaminate local water sources.
ÒPredicted intake of trace elements and minerals via household drinking water by 6-year-old children from Krak—w (Poland).Ó
Food Additives & Contaminants Volume 19. Issue 10 (October 2002): p906, 10p. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=7686379
-The journal describes a study of the intake of contaminants by children in Poland via household water sources. The study concludes that contamination of water within plumbing systems is common. This directly relates to the hypothesis about the water in Peabody hall.
Webb, Bruce L., et al. ÒA Pressurized Hot Water Extraction Method for BoronÓ
Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis Volume 33. Issue 1/2 (2002): p31, 9p. Academic Search Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=8696613
-The journal describes a method for removing boron from water sources using pressurized hot water as opposed to simply boiling. Although the new method simplifies that extraction process, it does not make testing for boron any easier. This demonstrates that boiling is one method to extract certain components from water for testing purposes.
Nakaji, Shigeyuki, et al. ÒRelationship Between Mineral and Trace Element Concentrations in Drinking Water and Gastric Cancer Mortality in Japan.Ó
Nutrition & Cancer Volume 40. Issue 2 (2001): p99, 4p. Academic Research Premier. 10/4/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=6356360
-The journal describes a study in which a correlation between trace element ingestion and death due to gastric cancer was attempted to be explained. This study ties into the hypothesis that drinking Peabody water is harmful for an individual.
Schardt, David. ÒWater, Water EverywhereÉÓ
Nutrition Action Health Letter 0885-7792, Volume 27. Issue 5 (June 1, 2000): Academic Search Premier. 10/22/2005 http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=3145893
-The article describes the status of water quality in the United States, stating that there is more than just hydrogen and oxygen present. This again ties into the hypothesis that the water around Western campus does not meet quality expectations.

Internet Sources
http://www.oasisdesign.net/water/treatment/slowsandfilter.htm
http://www.cityofoxford.org/SectionIndex.asp?SectionID=66
http://www.freedrinkingwater.com/water-education/quality-water-filtration-method.htm
http://www.gaiam.com/retail/gai_content/learn/gai_learnArticle.asp?article_id=1990
http://www.brita.com/benefits/greatvalue.shtml

Previous Student-Generated Labs
http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu/nsfall02/FinalArticles/Final.DirtyWater.html
http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu/nsfall04/FinalArticles/WaterQualityAroundMiamiUn.html
http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu/nsfall01/FinalArticles/Final1.WaterQualityInandA.html

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu