Skip to main content
Log in

Effluent characterization and different modes of reuse in agriculture—a model case study

  • AREA 8.1 • ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF AGRICULTURAL AND POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROGRAMS • RESEARCH ARTICLE
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background, aim, and scope

High-quality waters are steadily retreating worldwide. Discharge of industrial effluent in the environment again declines soil/water quality to a great extent. On the other hand, effluent reuse in agriculture could be a means to conserve natural resources by providing assured water supply for growing crops. But industrial effluents are highly variable in nature, containing a variety of substances, and all are not favorable for farming. Appraisal and developing modes of effluent reuse is therefore a prerequisite to enable its proper use in agriculture. Effluents of various industries were assessed and approaches for their use in farming were developed for a particular region in this study. As per availability of effluents, the same could be implemented in other water-scarce areas.

Materials and methods

Effluents of 20 different industrial units were characterized by 24 attributes. Comparing these with corresponding irrigation water quality standards, the probability of their reuse was interpreted in the first approach. On the basis of relevant properties of major soil types dominated in a particular region, the soil-based usability of effluent was worked out in the second approach. By emphasizing the limitation of groundwater development where it went beyond 50% exploitation level, the land form and major soil type were then identified by applying a soil-based effluent reuse approach; the area-specific suitability of its use was perceived in the third approach.

Results

On the basis of irrigation water quality standards, the irrigation potentials of paper mill, fermentation (breweries and distilleries), and sugar factory effluents were recognized. In a soil-based approach, the compatibility of effluent with soil type was marked with A (preferred) and B (moderately preferred) classes and, compiling their recurring presence, the unanimous preference for paper mill effluent followed by rubber goods manufacturing industries/marine shrimp processing units, fermentation, and sugar mills was noted. Usability of these was also evident from a groundwater exploitation status-based approach.

Discussion

The approaches of assessing industrial effluents differing in compositions systematically reflected the ability and applicability of certain effluents in agriculture. The context-specific assessment of effluent offers options to compare effluent from a range of viewpoints and enhances its reasonability of use for growing crops.

Conclusions

Chemical characterization of various industrial effluents first disclosed their potential of reuse. The soil-properties-based compatibility of effluent focused their prospects of use and groundwater-exploitation-status-based portrayed its area of use in a specific region. Assessment of effluent through these enhances reliability and appropriateness of its reuse in agriculture.

Recommendations and perspectives

Options of industrial effluent (prospective) reuse in agriculture provide ways to combat freshwater crisis without degrading environmental quality. It may be applied for assessing effluent before its reuse in several water-starved countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AICRP–ICAR (1990) All India coordinated research project on the management of salt affected soils and use of saline water in agriculture. Annual Report. CSSRI, Karnal

    Google Scholar 

  • APHA (American Public-Health Association) (1995) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater analysis, 19th edn. APHA, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayers RS, Westcot DW (1985) Water quality for agriculture. Irrigation and Drainage paper 29 Rev, 1, FAO, Rome, 174 pp

  • BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) (1986) Guidelines for quality of irrigation water. 15:116–124

  • CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) (2000) Status of water and wastewater generation, collection, treatment and disposal in class I and II towns. March, 2000, Ministry of Environment and Forests

  • Das M (1998) Appraisal of quality of irrigation water of canning blocks of West Bengal. Indian J Agr Sc 68(2):92–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Directorate of groundwater survey and investigation of Orissa (2001) Groundwater resources of Orissa. 24 pp

  • EPA (1986) The Environment Protection Rules. In: Pollution control acts, rules and notifications used thereunder. Central Pollution Control Board, India 2001

  • FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) (2005) Review of agricultural water use per country. Online publication, FAO, Rome, http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/water_use/index.stm

  • Gangopadhyay S (1991) Orissa. In: Ghosh SP (ed) Agro-climatic zone specific research, Indian perspective under NARP. ICAR, New Delhi, pp 280–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerba CP, Rose JB (2003) International guidelines for water recycling and microbiological considerations. Water Sci Technol 3(4):311–316

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta IC (1983) Irrigation water quality and boron toxicity. Curr Agr 7:1–12

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta IC (1984) Reassessment of irrigation water quality criteria and standards. Curr Agr 8:109–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta IC (1990) Use of saline water in agriculture. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, p 308

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta IC (2001) Saline water resources of Rajasthan. In: Somani LL, Totawat KL (eds), Souvenir—2001, Published in 66th Annual convention of ISSS. Udaipur chapter, RAU, pp 71–91

  • Manchanda HR (1990) Significance of the type of salinity for growing pulses under saline conditions. Paper presented at the Indo-Pak Workshop on Soil Salinity and Water Management, Feb. 10–14, 1990, 3 pp

  • Minas PS, Gupta RK (1992) Poor quality water—a review. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, p 123

    Google Scholar 

  • NBSS & LUP (National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning) (1998) Soils of Orissa for optimizing land use. Publication, No. 49, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, pp 1–64

  • Rhoades JD, Kandiah A, Mashali AM (1992) The use of saline waters for crop production, Irrigation and drainage paper 48. FAO, Rome, p 133

    Google Scholar 

  • Salgot M, Verges C, Angelikis AN (2003) Risk assessment in wastewater recycling and reuse. Water Sci Technol 3(4):301–309

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scott C, Faruqui NI, Rashid-Sally L (2004) Wastewater use in irrigated agriculture: management challenges in developing countries. In: Scott CA, Faruqui NI, Raschid-Sally L (eds), Wastewater use in irrigated agriculture: confronting the livelihood and environmental realities. IDRC Publication, http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-31595-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html

  • Suarez DL (1981) Relation between pH and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) and an alternative method of estimation of SAR of soil or drainage water. Soil Sci Soc Am J 45(3):469–475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • USSL (United States Salinity Laboratory) (1954) Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils, USDA Handbook No. 60, Washington DC, 160 pp

  • USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (2002) National recommended Water Quality Criteria: 2002. EPA/822/R-02/047. Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • UN (2003) World water development report. UNESCO, Paris ISBN:92-3-103881-8

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Madhumita Das.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Das, M., Kumar, A. Effluent characterization and different modes of reuse in agriculture—a model case study. Environ Sci Pollut Res 16, 466–473 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-009-0102-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-009-0102-z

Keywords

Navigation