DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to Almighty God, whose never ending love, care and grace saw me
through and providing for me in all my times of needs.

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly my utmost gratitude goes to God Almighty for the wisdom, and knowledge and
guidance throughout my studies and during this work, for without him, nothing would have
been accomplished.
My heartfelt gratitude goes to my supervisor Engr.(Mrs.) N. Ihimekpen for her love, patience,
guidance, throughout the course of this project. She gave me good knowledge and
understanding of my work and I really appreciate her supervision. Thank you Ma.
I would also like to extend my gratitude to Engr.(Dr.) J.O. Okovido, the Head of Civil
Engineering Department, University of Benin; Prof J.O Ehirobo, Prof. O.U Orie, Prof O.C
Izinyon, Dr. S.O Osuji, Dr. H.A.P Audu, Dr. Ilaboya and all other lecturers and staff of the
Department of Civil Engineering for their teachings and guidance and assistance directly and
indirectly throughout my study in the University of Benin
I am very greatful for the workers of the Ikpoba Slope abattoir for their receptive nature, and
for their time, attention and information they gave me.
My sincere gratitude goes to my parents and Mr. and Mrs. Ilalohkoin for their unfailing love
and support that built me into what I am. Thanks to my brother Mr. Peter Igaga whose advice
and insights helped me through some stages of this work. Thanks to my sisters, Mrs. Olayinka,
Miss Aimalohi Igaga, relatives, colleagues and friends, Mr. Aduba Precious, Mr. Inarumen
Israel Miss Abijah Jenson, Miss Moses Blessing, for their care, encouragement love.
Lastly I would like to thank all my classmates, especially Mr. Evawere, Mr. Inabor Treasure
Alex for their support and care; may God richly bless you all.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dedication i
Acknowledgement ii
Table of contents iii
List of tables vi
List of figures vii
Acronyms viii
Abstract ix
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Problems Definition 3
1.2 Aims and objective 5
1.3 Scope of work 5
1.4 Justification of study 6

CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Water classification by source 7
2.1.1 Groundwater 7
2.1.2 Surface water 7
2.2 Water pollution 8
2.2.1 Sources of water pollution 9
2.2.2 Categories of water pollution 10
2.2.3 Causes of water pollution 11
2.3 Water treatment 16
2.3.1 Water quality parameters 16
2.3.2 Modern conventional water treatment methods and processes 17
2.4 Wastewater recycling and reuse 20
2.4.1 Wastewater recycling 20
2.4.2 Wastewater reuse 21

iii
 2.4.3 Classification of water recycling and reuse 22
2.4.4 Wastewater reuse and limitation 26
2.5 Preliminary treatment methods 27
2.6 Primary treatment unit process 27
2.6.1 Sedimentation 27
2.6.2 Coagulation 28
2.6.3 Chemical phosphorus removal 28
2.7 Review of related study 29

CHAPTER THREE
3.0 METHODOLOGY 30
3.1 Background of study 30
3.2 Wastewater analysis 31
3.3 Wastewater treatment processes 44
3.3.1 Preliminary treatment unit 44
3.3.2 Primary treatment 44
3.3.3 primary treatment (primary sedimentation tanks) 46
3.3.4 Biological treatment (secondary treatment) 47
3.3.5 Advanced treatment 49

CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS 50
4.1 Results of wastewater analysis 50
4.1.1 Total suspended solids 51
4.1.2 Total dissolved solids 52
4.1.3 pH 52
4.1.4 Dissolved oxygen 53
4.1.5 Chemical oxygen demand, COD 54
4.1.6 Biological oxygen demand, BOD 55
4.2 Wastewater treatment plant design 55
4.3 Discussion of results 62

iv
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECONMENDATIONS 63
5.1 Conclusion 63
5.2 Recommendations 64
References 66
Appendix 72

v
 List of tables

Table 4.1 Physico-chemical Analysis of Abattoir Wastewater Samples from the

Ikpoba Slope Abattoir 50
Table 4.2 Solubility products for free metal ion concentration in equilibrium with
hydroxides . 58
Table 4.3 Effluent guidelines and their limits with sources (Umubyeyi, 2008) 73

Table 4.4 Removal of pathogens by various treatment process (Bureau of Safe

Drinking Water, Department of Environmental Protection, 2016) 73
Table 4.4 Equivalents, Formulae, and Symbols Equivalents 74

vi
 List of figures

Figure 2.1: Point-source and diffusion pollution (Marcos von Sperling, 2007) 10

Figure 2.2: The role of Engineered treatment, Reclamation, and Reuse Facilities

in the Cycling of Water Through the Hydrologic Cycle. (Asano, 1996) 22

Figure 2.3: Schematic diagram of the bench-scale recirculating cooling system with

fixed-film biofilter. (Adapted from Meesters, K.P.H. et al. 2003. Water

Research, 37(3), 525–532.) 25

Figure 2.4 Routes of water use and disposal (Marcos von Sperling, 2007). 26

Figure 3.1: Map of Edo state showing the geographic position of the study area 31
Figure 3.2 Schematic layout of an activated sludge system (Umubyeyi, 2008) 49

Figure 4.1: Variations of TSS concentration at the three points of sample collection. 51

Figure 4.2: Variations of TDS concentration at the three points of sample collection. 52

Figure 4.3: Variations of pH at the three points of sample collection. 53

Figure 4.4: Variations of DO at the three points of sample collection 54

Figure 4.5: Variations of COD at the three points of sample collection 54

Figure 4.6: Variations of BOD at the three points of sample collection 55

Figure 4.7: Typical BOD and TSS removal in primary sedimentation tanks (Greeley,
1938) 57
Figure 4.8 Chart showing wastewater treatments Processes 60
Figure 4.9 Flow chart of the wastewater treatment and Reuse 61

vii
 Acronyms

BOD - Biochemical Oxygen Demand

COD - Chemical Oxygen Demand
DO - Dissolved Oxygen
EHSG - Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
Mg/l - Milligrams per litre
MLA - Meat and Livestock in Australia
TSS - Total Suspended Solids
TDS - Total Dissolved Solids
WHO - World Health Organisation
NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
UN - United Nations
USGS - United State Geological Survey
HAG - Harmful Algae Bloom
PCBs - Polychlorinated biphenyls
ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials
IPR - Indirect Potable Reuse
DPR - Direct Potable Reuse
USEPA - United States Environmental protection Agency
WERF - Water Environmental Research Foundation
APHA - American Public Health Association
AWWA - American Water Works Association
WEF - Water Environment Federation
MO - microorganisms
HRT - Hydraulic Retention Time
WWTP - Wastewater Treatment Plant
EDTA - Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid, Edetic acid.
NTU - Nephelometric Turbidity Unit

viii
 Abstract

Abattoirs are known to pollute the environment from their processes. The Ikpoba slope

abattoir, the biggest in Benin City, Edo State, discharges its untreated effluent in the Ikpoba

River. This research aimed at designing a wastewater treatment plant for the Ikpoba Slope

abattoir for treatment of their wastewater to quality good enough for disposal or reuse.

This research quantified the amount of water used and the quantity of wastewater generated.

The overall water used and wastewater generated were estimated at 8000𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦, and

6000𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦 respectively. Samples were collected and a wastewater analysis was conducted

on the samples to determine the quality of the wastewater using Standard Methods.

The mean values of the parameters analysed were as follows: pH 2.39 𝑚𝑔/𝑙, BOD 132.9mg/l,

COD 128mg/l, DO 1.21 𝑚𝑔/𝑙, TSS 5.62mg/, Nitrate 36.1𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and Phosphate 37.42 𝑚𝑔/𝑙.

The wastewater was passed through several stages of treatment processes from the preliminary

stage to the tertiary stage which chlorine was the selected disinfectant among others such as

ozonation, ultraviolet radiation and microfiltration because it is easily obtainable and due to

its residual characteristics. The feed rate of chlorine was calculated to be 1.598 lb/day. A

storage tank of dimension 2m x 1m x 1m was designed and provided for storage of treated

effluent before distribution to non-potable reuse points and back to the influent channel to

complete the recycling process. Hence conservation of wastewater is achieved. The Ikpoba

slope abattoir generates large quantities of highly concentrated effluent which adversely

impacts the environment hence the government and other stakeholders should invest in

effluent treatment facilities to treat wastes from abattoirs in Ikpoba Slope as well as adoption

of cleaner technologies will go a long way to curb the environmental health risks posed by

these hazardous effluents from the abattoir

ix
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Water is a transparent, tasteless, odorless, and nearly colorless chemical substance that is the

main constituent of Earth's streams, lakes, and oceans, and the fluids of most

living organisms.

Water covers 71% of the Earth’s surface (CIA, 2008). It is vital for all known forms of life.

On Earth, 96.5% of the planet's crust water is found in seas and oceans, 1.7% in groundwater,

1.7% in glaciers and the ice caps of Antarctica and Greenland, a small fraction in other large

water bodies, and 0.001% in the air as vapor, clouds (formed of ice and liquid water

suspended in air), and precipitation (Gleick, 1993). Only 2.5% of this water is fresh water,

and 98.8% of that water is in ice (excepting ice in clouds) and groundwater. Less than 0.3%

of all freshwater is in rivers, lakes, and the atmosphere, and an even smaller amount of the

Earth's freshwater (0.003%) is contained within biological bodies and manufactured products

(Gleick, 1993). A greater quantity of water is found in the earth's interior (Crocket and

Christopher, 2015).

The water industry provides drinking water and wastewater services (including sewage

treatment) to households and industry. Water supply facilities include water

wells, cisterns for rainwater harvesting, water supply networks, and water

purification facilities, water tanks, water towers, water pipes including old aqueducts.

Both bodies of freshwater and saltwater are polluted every day by untreated wastewater. In

fact, the U.S. EPA estimates that almost 1.2 trillion gallons of sewage from household and

industrial sources is dumped into the nation’s water every single year, or about 3.28 billion

gallons a day.

1
Human activities contribute impurities in the form of industrial, domestic, agricultural and

chemical wastes to water bodies (Barker, 1996). The Ikpoba River which flows through Benin

City is a typical example of river with several waste - discharging activities (abattoir, rubber

factory, brewery industry, car wash depot, and hospital waste dumpsite) located along its

course. Meat processing and operational waste tends to be worrisome due to their high content

of putrescible organic matter, which can lead to the depletion of oxygen and cause water

supply impairment (Figueras, 2000).

One of the most critical problems of developing countries is improper management of the vast

amount of wastes generated by various anthropogenic activities. More challenging is the

unsafe disposal of these wastes into the ambient environment (Kanu and Achi, 2011). 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).

However, industrial effluent contamination of natural water bodies has emerged as a major

challenge in developing and densely populated countries like Nigeria.

Estuaries and inland water bodies, which are the primary sources of drinking water in Nigeria,

are often contaminated by the activities of the adjoining populations and industrial

establishments (Sangodoyin, 1995). River systems are the primary means for disposal of

waste, especially the effluents from industries that are near them. These effluents from

industries can alter the physical, chemical and biological nature of the receiving water body

(Sangodoyin, 1991).

In addition to the foregoing, increased industrial activities have led to

pollution stress on surface waters both from industrial, agricultural and domestic

sources (Kanu and Achi, 2011). Wastes entering these water bodies are both in

2
solid and liquid forms. These are mostly derived from industrial, agricultural and

domestic activities. As a result, water bodies that are major receptacles of treated

and untreated or partially treated industrial wastes have become highly polluted

(Osibanjo et al., 2011). The resultant effects of this on public health and the

environment are usually high in magnitude (Osibanjo et al., 2011). Additionally, industrial

wastewaters come with high biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) from

biodegradable wastes such as those from human sewage, pulp and paper

industries, slaughterhouses, tanneries and chemical industry. Others include those

from plating shops and textiles, which may be toxic and require on-site physicochemical pre-

treatment before discharge into municipal sewage system (Emongor

et al., 2005)

Unfortunately there are few studies on the nature and quality of industrial wastewater and its

effect on the environment. Treatment of wastewater before disposal as well as wastewater

recycling and reuse is not a common practice in the whole of Africa; therefore this project

aims to design a wastewater treatment plant for an abattoir located at the Ikpoba Slope axis to

a good enough quality for reuse by the industry.

1.1 PROBLEMS DEFINITION

In Nigeria, many abattoirs dispose of their effluents directly into streams and rivers without

any form of treatment, and slaughtered meats are washed by the same river water (Adelegan,

2002). Such is the situation in several private and government abattoirs in most parts of the

country. Reports have shown that indiscriminate disposal of slaughterhouse waste may

introduce enteric pathogens into surface and ground water (Ruiz et al., 1997) and the

3
pathogens isolated from abattoir wastewaters can survive in the environment and pose danger

to humans and animals (Coker et al., 2001).

One of the rivers affected in Benin City is the Ikpoba River. This river flows through a dense

rainforest and is subjected to pollution from storm run-off in all areas as it flows through Benin

City (Atuanya et al., 2012). The river serves as a source of water for domestic purpose

including drinking and cooking. Most of the activities around the river and its upper reaches

are agriculture, fishing, crop farming and car-washing activities. The government abattoir

managed by Local Government Administration (LGA) is sited on the bank of the Ikpoba River

together with other private abattoirs.

These abattoirs produce both solid and liquid wastes which affect the environment in one or

more ways. Some ways in which these slaughterhouses affect the environment are:

1. Slaughterhouse wastewater is very harmful to the environment. (Quinn and Mcfarlane,

1989) observed that effluent discharge from slaughterhouses has caused the

deoxygenation of rivers which in turn may lead to reduced levels of activity or even death

of aquatic life.

2. Solid waste that are not properly disposed will produce ill odour and leaching problems

may arise during decomposition

3. Improper disposal of wastewater may release volatile organic compounds into the

atmosphere that are harmful to the ecosystem or may lead to outbreak of diseases.

4. While the slaughtering of animals result in meat supply and useful by-products like

leather and skin, livestock waste spills can introduce enteric pathogens and excess

nutrients into surface waters and can also contaminate ground waters (Meadows, 1995).

4
5. Wastes from slaughterhouses typically contain fat, grease, hair, feathers, flesh, manure,

blood, bones and process water which is characterized with high organic level

(Nafarnda et al., 2006).

Therefore the need for proper management and treatment of slaughterhouse waste cannot be

over-emphasized

1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this project is to design a waste water treatment plant for an abattoir in Ikpoba

Slope, Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria.

The specific objectives are:

1. To investigate the constituents of abattoir waste.

2. To design a treatment plant for abattoir.

1.3 SCOPE OF WORK

The scope of this research covers:

1. Collection of the past and present data concerning the level of pollution In the Ikpoba Hill

community.

2. Investigation of the source of water supply into the abattoir and the mode of disposal of

waste water from the abattoir.

3. Obtaining samples of wastewater from the abattoir to be treated to carry out biological,

physical, and chemical test.

4. Design of the waste water treatment plant

5. Check for cost and efficiency ratio to determine suitability.

5
1.4 JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY

Abattoir wastewater treatment is not exactly given much attention to here in Nigeria as most

public and private abattoirs do not follow a wastewater treatment plan but dispose their waste

in water bodies and surrounding environment yet the importance of this subject cannot be

undermined.

This thesis solves the problem of pollution by properly treating influent to good enough

quality for reuse as well as disposal as the case may be and ensures clean water circulation in

the abattoir for non-potable use. This in turn produces a pollution free environment for the

residents of the Ikpoba Slope community and reduced cost of water and abattoir waste disposal

for the abattoir.

6
 CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 WATER CLASSIFICATION BY SOURCE

The type of treatment depends on the quality of the source of supply and the quality desired

in the finished product (Komolafe et al., 2013). The sources of water can be classified into

two general categories namely: Ground water sources, principally wells and Surface water

sources such as rivers, lakes, and impoundments on rivers and streams.

2.1.1 Ground water:

Ground water is water absorbed by the earth or water emerging from some deep. (Komolafe

et al., 2013) The water emerging from some deep ground water may have fallen as rain many

decades, hundreds, thousands or in some cases millions of years ago. Soil and rock layer

naturally filter the ground water to a high degree of clarity before it is pumped to the treatment

plant. Such water may emerge as springs, artesian springs, or may be extracted from boreholes

or wells. Deep ground water is generally of very high bacteriological quality (i.e. pathogenic

bacteria or pathogenic protozoa are typically absent), but the water typically is rich in

dissolved solids, especially carbonates and sulfates of calcium and magnesium (Komolafe et

al., 2013).

2.1.2 Surface water:

Surface water depends primarily on annual precipitation and melting of ice and snow. Too

much of it causes flood and shortage of it causes draught condition.

Surface water is typically located in the headwaters of river systems, upland reservoir are

usually sited above any human habitation and may be surrounded by a protective zone to

restrict the opportunities for contamination. Bacteria and pathogen levels are usually low, but

7
some bacteria, protozoa or algae will be present. Others include rivers, canals and low land

reservoirs (Komolafe et al., 2013)

2.2 WATER POLLUTION

Over two thirds of Earth's surface is covered by water; less than a third is taken up by land.

As Earth's population continues to grow, people are putting ever-increasing pressure on the

planet's water resources. In a sense, our oceans, rivers, and other inland waters are being

"squeezed" by human activities, so their quality is reduced (Woodford, 2006).

Water pollution is the contamination of water bodies, usually as a result of human activities.

Water bodies include lakes, rivers, oceans, aquifers and groundwater. Water pollution results

when contaminants are introduced into the natural environment. For example, releasing

inadequately treated wastewater into natural water bodies can lead to degradation of aquatic

ecosystems. In turn, this can lead to public health problems for people living downstream.

They may use the same polluted river water for drinking or bathing or irrigation. Water

pollution is the leading worldwide cause of death and disease, e.g. due to water-borne diseases

(West and Larry, 2006) and (Daniel, 2006).

The causes of water pollution include a wide range of chemicals and pathogens as well as

physical parameters. Contaminants may include organic and inorganic substances. Elevated

temperatures can also lead to polluted water. A common cause of thermal pollution is the use

of water as a coolant by power plants and industrial manufacturers. Elevated water

temperatures decrease oxygen levels, which can kill fish and alter food chain composition,

reduce species biodiversity, and foster invasion by new thermophilic species (Goel, 2006) and

(Laws and Edward, 2018).

8
Water pollution is measured by analyzing water samples. Physical, chemical and biological

tests can be done. Control of water pollution requires appropriate infrastructure and

management plans. The infrastructure may include wastewater treatment plants. Sewage

treatment plants and industrial wastewater treatment plants are usually required to protect

water bodies from untreated wastewater. (UN-Water, 2018).

2.2.1 SOURCES OF WATER POLLUTION

2.2.1.1 Point sources

Point source water pollution refers to contaminants that enter a waterway from a single,

identifiable source, such as a pipe or ditch. Examples of sources in this category include

discharges from a sewage treatment plant, a factory, or a city storm drain (United States

CWA). Other examples of point source pollution include an oil spill from a tanker, a discharge

from a smoke stack (factory chimney), or someone pouring oil from their car down a drain. A

great deal of water pollution happens not from one single source.

2.2.1.2 Non-point sources

Non-point source pollution refers to diffuse contamination that does not originate from a

single discrete source. This type of pollution is often the cumulative effect of small amounts

of contaminants gathered from a large area. A common example is the leaching out

of nitrogen compounds from fertilized agricultural lands (Moss and Brian, 2008).

Nutrient runoffs in storm water from "sheet flow" over an agricultural field or a forest is also

cited as examples of non-point source pollution.

9
Figure 2.1: Point-source and diffusion pollution (Sperling, 2007)

2.2.2 CATEGORIES OF WATER POLLUTION

2.2.2.1 Groundwater

When rain falls and seeps deep into the earth, filling the cracks, crevices, and porous spaces

of an aquifer (basically an underground storehouse of water), it becomes groundwater, one of

our least visible but most important natural resources. A large population of Nigerians relies

on groundwater, pumped to the earth’s surface, for drinking water. For some folks in rural

areas, it’s their only freshwater source. Groundwater gets polluted when contaminants from

pesticides and fertilizers to waste leached from landfills and septic systems make their way

into an aquifer, rendering it unsafe for human use. Once polluted, an aquifer may be unusable

for decades, or even thousands of years. Groundwater can also spread contamination far from

the original polluting source as it seeps into streams, lakes, and oceans. Consequently,

groundwater pollution, also referred to as groundwater contamination, is not as easily

classified as surface water pollution. By its very nature, groundwater aquifers are susceptible

10
to contamination from sources that may not directly affect surface water bodies. The

distinction of point vs. non-point source may be irrelevant (United States Geological Survey

(USGS), 1998).

2.2.2.1 Surface water

Covering about 70 percent of the earth, surface water is what fills our oceans, lakes, rivers,

and all those other blue bits on the world map. Surface water pollution includes pollution of

rivers, lakes and oceans. One common path of entry by contaminants to the sea is rivers. An

example is directly discharging sewage and industrial waste into the water. Pollution such as

this occurs particularly in developing nations.

Large gyres (vortexes) in the oceans trap floating plastic debris. Plastic debris can absorb

toxic chemicals from ocean pollution, potentially poisoning any creature that eats it. Many of

these long-lasting pieces end up in the stomachs of marine birds and animals. This results in

obstruction of digestive pathways, which leads to reduced appetite or even starvation (Zaikab

and Gwyneth, 2011).

2.2.3 CAUSES OF WATER POLLUTION

Most water pollution doesn't begin in the water itself. Take the oceans: around 80 percent of

ocean pollution enters our seas from the land. Virtually any human activity can have an effect

on the quality of our water environment. When farmers fertilize the fields, the chemicals they

use are gradually washed by rain into the groundwater or surface waters nearby. Sometimes

the causes of water pollution are quite surprising. Chemicals released by smokestacks

(chimneys) can enter the atmosphere and then fall back to earth as rain, entering seas, rivers,

and lakes and causing water pollution. That's called atmospheric deposition (Koplin, 1997).

11
Water pollution has many different causes and this is one of the reasons why it is such a

difficult problem to solve. Some of which are:

2.2.3.1 Sewage

With billions of people on the planet, disposing of sewage waste is a major problem.

According to 2015 and 2016 figures from the World Health Organization, some 663 million

people (9 percent of the world's population) don't have access to safe drinking water, while

2.4 billion (40 percent of the world's population) don't have proper sanitation (hygienic toilet

facilities); although there have been great improvements in securing access to clean water,

relatively little progress has been made on improving global sanitation in the last decade

(WHO, 2017).

Sewage disposal affects people's immediate environments and leads to water-related illnesses

such as diarrhea that kills 525,000 children under five each year. Back in 2002, the World

Health Organization estimated that water-related diseases could kill as many as 135 million

people by 2020.

In theory, sewage is a completely natural substance that should be broken down harmlessly in

the environment: 90 percent of sewage is water. In practice, sewage contains all kinds of other

chemicals, from the pharmaceutical drugs people take to the paper, plastic, and other wastes

they flush down their toilets. When people are sick with viruses, the sewage they produce

carries those viruses into the environment. It is possible to catch illnesses such as hepatitis,

typhoid, and cholera from river and sea water (Travis et al., 1993).

12
2.2.3.2 Nutrients

Suitably treated and used in moderate quantities, sewage can be a fertilizer: it returns

important nutrients to the environment, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, which plants and

animals need for growth. The trouble is, sewage is often released in much greater quantities

than the natural environment can cope with. Chemical fertilizers used by farmers also add

nutrients to the soil, which drain into rivers and seas and add to the fertilizing effect of the

sewage. Together, sewage and fertilizers can cause a massive increase in the growth of algae

or plankton that overwhelms huge areas of oceans, lakes, or rivers. This is known as a harmful

algal bloom (also known as an HAB or red tide, because it can turn the water red). It is harmful

because it removes oxygen from the water that kills other forms of life, leading to what is

known as a dead zone (NOAA, 2016).

2.2.3.3 Wastewater

A few statistics illustrate the scale of the problem that wastewater (chemicals washed down

drains and discharged from factories or establishments) can cause. Around half of all ocean

pollution is caused by sewage and waste water. Each year, the world generates perhaps 5–10

billion tons of industrial waste, much of which is pumped untreated into rivers, oceans, and

other waterways (EPA, 2016).

Factories and establishments such as the slaughterhouse (abattoir) are point sources of water

pollution, but quite a lot of water is polluted by ordinary people from nonpoint sources; this

is how ordinary water becomes waste water in the first place.

13
2.2.3.4 Chemical waste

Detergents are relatively mild substances. At the opposite end of the spectrum are highly toxic

chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). They were once widely used to

manufacture electronic circuit boards, but their harmful effects have now been recognized and

their use is highly restricted in many countries.

Another kind of toxic pollution comes from heavy metals, such as lead, cadmium, and

mercury. The best known example of heavy metal pollution in the oceans took place in 1938

when a Japanese factory discharged a significant amount of mercury metal into Minamata

Bay, contaminating the fish stocks there. It took a decade for the problem to come to light. By

that time, many local people had eaten the fish and around 2000 were poisoned. Hundreds of

people were left dead or disabled (Mishima, 1982)

2.2.3.5 Oil pollution

Oil pollution represents only a tiny fraction of all the pollution entering our oceans. Even

considering oil by itself, tanker spills are not as significant as they might seem: only 12 percent

of the oil that enters the oceans comes from tanker accidents; over 70 percent of oil pollution

at sea comes from routine shipping and from the oil people pour down drains on land (Michael,

2007). The biggest oil spill in recent years (and the biggest ever spill in US waters) occurred

when the tanker Exxon Valdez broke up in Prince William Sound in Alaska in 1989. Around

12 million gallons (44 million liters) of oil were released into the pristine wilderness enough

to fill your living room 800 times over! Estimates of the marine animals killed in the spill vary

from approximately 1000 sea otters and 34,000 birds to as many as 2800 sea otters and

250,000 sea birds. Several billion salmon and herring eggs are also believed to have been

destroyed (ASTM, 1995).

14
2.2.3.6 Plastics

During community clean ups, you'll notice that plastic is far and away the most common

substance that washes up with the waves. There are three reasons for this:

1. plastic is one of the most common materials, used for making virtually every kind of

manufactured object from clothing to automobile parts;

2. plastic is light and floats easily so it can travel enormous distances across the oceans;

3. Most plastics are not biodegradable (they do not break down naturally in the environment),

which means that things like plastic bottle tops can survive in the marine environment for

a long time. (A plastic bottle can survive an estimated 450 years in the ocean and plastic

fishing line can last up to 600 years.)

While plastics are not toxic in quite the same way as poisonous chemicals, they nevertheless

present a major hazard to seabirds, fish, and other marine creatures. For example, plastic

fishing lines and other debris can strangle or choke fish. (This is sometimes called ghost

fishing.) About half of the entire world's seabird species are known to have eaten plastic

residues. In one study of 450 shearwaters in the North Pacific, over 80 percent of the birds

were found to contain plastic residues in their stomachs (Benton et al., 1995).

2.2.3.7 Other forms of pollution

These are the most common forms of pollution but by no means the only ones.

1. Heat or thermal pollution from factories and power plants also causes problems in rivers.

2. Another type of pollution involves the disruption of sediments (fine-grained powders) that

flow from rivers into the sea.

15
2.3 WATER TREATMENT
More than a billion of people in the developing World lack access to potable water. Access

by households to sufficient and safe water combined with adequate sanitation and hygiene

could result in a substantial reduction of the 5million deaths due to diarrhea diseases that occur

each year (WHO, 1992). (WHO, 2008) Reported that 88% of the 4 billion annual cases of

diarrheal diseases are attributed to unsafe water and inadequate sanitation and hygiene and

1.8million million people die from diarrheal disease each year. When water with any resources

is abundant, there is relatively little attention to the rights, but with increasing scarcity and

competition for water, there has been growing attention to its conservation and the rights in

recent years (Mesinzen-Dick and Bakker, 2001).

Water treatment involves processes that alter the chemical composition or natural “behavior

of water”. Primary water availability includes surface or ground water. Most municipal or

public water comes from surface water while private water supplies usually consist of ground

water pumped from wells or boreholes. Water treatment originally focused on improving the

aesthetic qualities of drinking water. The three objectives of water treatment are:

I. Production of water safe for human consumption, production of water appealing to the

consumer and production of water using facilities reasonable with respect to capital

and operating costs.

II. Production of water that is clear and colourless, pleasant to the taste and cool to

discourage the consumer from turning to some other unsafe sources of water.

2.3.1 Water Quality Parameters

Water quality parameters based on present-day standards and guides are presented to assist in

the establishment of water system performance goals for any plant. Quality parameters are

expected to change as new information on the nature and behaviour of water is revealed. The

16
trend is toward production of water of higher quality. The substances in Nigeria standards for

drinking water quality are simply divided into physical/organoleptic, chemical organic and

inorganic constituents, disinfectants and disinfectants by-products, radionuclide and

microbiological parameters (WHO, 2008)

2.3.2 Modern Conventional Water Treatment Methods and Processes

2.3.2.1 Water Treatment Methods

Water treatment involves not only purification and removal of various unwanted and harmful

impurities, but also improvement on the natural properties of water by adding certain deficient

ingredients (Nikoladze, et al., 1989). All methods of water treatment can be divided into the

following main group:

i. those aimed at improving the organoleptic properties of water ( clarification,

decolouration, deodorization),

ii. those which ensure epidemiological safety (chlorination, ozonization, ultraviolet

irradiation) and

iii. those by which the mineral composition of water is conditioned (fluorination and

deflourination, deironing (dererrizatio), demanganisation, softening, desalination).

A particular method of water treatment is chosen upon preliminary examination of the

composition and properties of the water source to be used and comparison of these data with

the consumers’ requirements.

2.3.2.2 Water Treatment Processes

According to (Komolafe et al., 2013) Treatment plants have been classified according to raw-

water quality to assist consulting Engineers, regulatory agencies and others concerned with

17
water treatment. The following are the basic definition of processes involve in the modern

conventional water treatment plant.

2.3.2.2.1 Aeration:

As applied to water treatment, aeration may be defined as the process by which air and water

are brought in intimate contact for purpose of transferring volatile substances which may

include oxygen, carbondioxide, nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide, methane, and various unidentified

organic compounds responsible for taste and odour (Komolafe et al.).

2.3.2.2.2 Coagulation:

The word “coagulation” according to (Jiang and Jia-Qian, 2015) invloves the addition

of polymers that clump the small, destabilized particles together into larger aggregates so that

they can be easily separated from the water. Coagulation is a chemical process that involves

neutralization of charge. The positive charge of the coagulants neutralizes the negative charge

of dissolved and suspended particles in the water.

2.3.2.2.3 Flocculation:

The term flocculation refers to water treatment processes that assemble or combine or

“coagulate” small particles (Floc particles) which settle out of the water as sediment. Settling

or sedimentation occurs naturally as flocculated particles settle out of the water.

2.3.2.2.4 Sedimentation:

Sedimentation is physical water treatment process using gravity to remove suspended solids

from water (Omelia, 1998). Settling tanks (sedimentation tanks, sedimentation basins, settling

18
basins or clarifier), are used in water treatment to reduce the amount of settleable solids

suspended in water.

2.3.2.2.5 Filtration:

Water filtration is physical and chemical process for separating suspended and colloidal

impurities from water by passage through a porous medium, usually a bed of sand or other

granular material. Water fills the pores of the medium and the impurities are left behind in the

openings or upon the medium itself.

2.3.2.2.6 Chlorination and Disinfection

Water disinfection involves specialized treatment for the destruction of harmful and otherwise

objectionable organisms. Classically, disinfection has been practiced for the purpose of

destroying or inactivating disease producing (pathogenic) organisms more particularly,

bacteria, of intestinal origin. Pathogenic organisms other than bacteria that merit attention in

connection with water disinfection include a variety of viruses, intestinal protozoa and some

few macroorganisms.

Modern complexes for improving the quality of water are complicated enterprises which by

right may be called water-purification plants since their capacity in the final product (water of

proper quality) amounts to tens or hundreds thousands cubic metres per day. The general

structural features of modern water treatment plants include:

i. A number of units, departments and shops such as Inlet structure,

ii. Raw water chamber,

iii. Aerator,

iv. mixing and distribution structure,

19
 v. Clarifiers block,

vi. Filtration block and electromechanical building,

vii. Waste backwash tank and pumping station,

viii. Internal conveyance,

ix. Treated water reservoir,

x. Treated water pumping station,

xi. Treated water measurement chamber and pipelines interconnection,

xii. Chemical plant,

xiii. Chlorine gas plant,

xiv. Reagent shop,

xv. Repairshop,

xvi. Electric substation,

xvii. standby power station and fuel tank,

xviii. Laboratory,

xix. administrative and control building,

xx. Elevated water tank,

xxi. Gate house etc.

These structures sheltered highly sensitive modern equipment that are being used in the

control and operation of water treatment processes (Komolafe et al., 2013).

2.4 WASTEWATER RECYCLING AND REUSE

2.4.1 Wastewater Recycling

Recycled water (also called wastewater reuse or water reclamation) is the process of

converting wastewater into water that can be reused for other purposes. Reuse may

20
include irrigation of gardens and agricultural fields or replenishing surface

water and groundwater (i.e., groundwater recharge). Reused water may also be directed

toward fulfilling certain needs in residences (e.g. toilet flushing), businesses, and industry,

and could even be treated to reach drinking water standards. This last option is called either

"direct potable reuse" or "indirect potable" reuse, depending on the approach used.

Colloquially, the term "toilet to tap" also refers to potable reuse (Warsinger et al., 2018)

Water recycling is an onsite treatment of wastewater for allowing its use in the same process.

Total water recycling may lead to closed circuit. Such an approach is limited by the

accumulation of some components which are not effectively removed by the treatment stage.

2.4.2 Wastewater Reuse

This is the use of treated water for a different application, for instance municipal wastewater

might be upgraded for being used for some industrial applications like cooling or steam

generation; an industrial effluent may be treated and used in another part of the process or

outside the plant (R. Ben Aim).

Wastewater reuse is a long-established practice used for irrigation, especially

in arid countries. Reusing wastewater as part of sustainable water management allows water

to remain as an alternative water source for human activities. This can reduce scarcity and

alleviate pressures on groundwater and other natural water bodies.(Andersson et al., 2016)

21
Figure 2.2: The role of Engineered treatment, Reclamation, and Reuse Facilities in the Cycling

of Water Through the Hydrologic Cycle. (Asano, 1996)

2.4.3 CLASSIFICATION OF WATER RECYCLING AND REUSE

Wastewater recycling and reuse can be classified according to the approach used for recycling

and its potability:

1. Potable reuse of water

2. Non-potable reuse of water

22
2.4.3.1 POTABLE REUSE OF WATER

2.4.3.1.1 Planned Potable Reuse:

Planned potable reuse is publicly acknowledged as an intentional project to recycle water for

drinking water. There are two ways in which potable water can be delivered for reuse -

"Indirect Potable Reuse" (IPR) and "Direct Potable Reuse (DPR)". Both these forms of reuse

are described below, and commonly involve a more formal public process and public

consultation program than is the case with de facto or unacknowledged reuse. In ‘indirect’

potable reuse applications, the reclaimed wastewater is used directly or mixed with other

sources (Gerrity et al., 2016 )

2.4.3.1.2 Unplanned Potable Reuse

Unplanned potable reuse also known as De facto or unacknowledged potable reuse refers to a

situation where reuse of treated wastewater is, in fact, practiced but is not officially recognized

(USEPA, 2016). For a waste water treatment plant located in one which discharges its effluent

into a river used as drinking water supply for another city downstream. An example is the

Mississippi River which serves as both the destination of sewage treatment plant effluent and

the source of potable water.

2.4.3.2 NON-POTABLE REUSE OF WATER

According to (WERF, 2010), mostly, non-potable reuses of water are:

i. Agriculture/ Irrigation reuse

ii. Domestic reuse

iii. Industrial reuse

iv. Recreational reuse

v. Indirect reuse (e.g., aquifer recharge)

23
2.4.3.2.1 Agricultural Reuse

The main categories of irrigation reuse are agricultural irrigation (crop irrigation, commercial

nurseries) and landscape irrigation (parks, playgrounds, golf courses, freeway medians,

landscape areas around commercial areas, offices, industrial development, and residential

landscape areas). Restricted irrigation reuse is limited to crops that will not be directly

consumed by humans (fodder, fiber, and seed crops) and is appropriate for relatively small

flows. For this type of reuse, wastewater treatment must effectively remove pathogens and

organic matter in order to protect public health and eliminate odors (Singh et al., 2015).

2.4.3.2.2 Domestic Reuse

Domestic wastewater from sinks, showers, and washers (greywater) are treated and reused

within cooling towers to transfer heat in air conditioning systems. In order to check corrosion

and biological activities, office cooling system operators usually add anti-corrosion chemicals

to cooling water including tolyltriazole, glycols, alcohols, and organic acids. Due to the risk

of environmental harm (increased turbidity in water bodies, toxicity to humans, plants,

animals and microbes, heavy metal toxicity to aquatic organism) if discharged, heavy metal

based corrosion inhibitors are not widely used now (Singh et al., 2015).

2.4.3.2.3 Industrial Reuse

Several uses of treated wastewater for industrial purposes are available in the sector of power

supply, food processing, steel manufacturing, metal fnishing, chemistry, and textiles.

Industrial reuse of the used water is primarily for cooling system makeup water (replacing the

water lost to evaporation in arid climates), boiler-feed water, process water, and general wash

24
down (Figure ). It can also be used for concrete production on construction projects

(Visvanathan and Asano, 2007).

Figure 2.3: Schematic diagram of the bench-scale recirculating cooling system with fxed-flm

bioflter. (Adapted from Meesters, K.P.H. et al. 2003. Water Research, 37(3), 525–532.)

2.4.3.2.4 Recreational Reuse

Uses such as manufactured wetlands, enhanced natural wetlands, and sustaining stream flows

fall under environmental and recreational reuse. An impoundment of reclaimed water where

recreation is limited to fishing, boating, and other non-contact recreational activities

constitutes restricted recreational reuse while with unrestricted recreational reuse, reclaimed

water is used in an impoundment of water where no limitations are imposed on body-contact

recreational activities (Sams et al., 2010).

2.4.3.2.5 Indirect Reuse (aquifer recharge)

25
An attractive option for indirect potable reuse consists of artificial recharge through the

wastewater in urban areas. This has been considered attractive for years and has already been

implemented in several countries. The recharge should not degrade the quality of the

groundwater nor impose any additional treatment after pumping. In practice, the recharge

water reaching the saturated zones of the aquifer should have previously acquired the quality

acceptable for drinking purposes (Brissaud, F., 2003).

Figure 2.4 Routes of water use and disposal (Sperling, 2007).

2.4.4 Wastewater Reuse and Limitations

The benefits of reusing the wastewater intending to augment water supplies and manage

nutrients in treated effluents are the motivators of installation of such reuse programs. Such

26
benefits are reduced nutrient loads to receiving waters due to reuse of the treated wastewater.

These drivers center around three categories:

1. Addressing urbanization and water supply scarcity

2. Achieving efcient resource use

3. Environmental and public health protection

Some of issues of wastewater reuse are stated below

1. Perception on Health

2. Societal acceptance and Sustainability

3. Economic Feasibility

4. Cost of Wastewater reuse Product

2.5 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT PROCESS

2.5.1 Screens
Screening separates solid materials from wastewater, using gravity, water action, and
mechanical forces. Screens are robust and low maintenance. Vibrating screens less easily
blocked by solids, but are susceptible to mechanical failure. The screens require periodic
cleaning, and are not suitable for fat-laden material (MLA, 2005)

2.5.2 Aerated Grit Chambers

It is used to remove dust, bone chips, coffee grounds, seeds, eggshells, and other materials in
wastewater that are non-putrescible and higher than organic matter.

2.6 PRIMARY TREATMENT UNIT PROCESS

2.6.1 Sedimentation
Performance data for the removal of BOD and TSS applied in the primary sedimentation
tanks as a function of the detention time and constituent concentration presented in the
figure below. The curves shown in the figure are derived from observations of the

27
performance of actual sedimentation tanks (Metcalf and Eddy, 2003). The curvilinear
relationship uses the following relationship
t
R = a+bt………………………………………… (2.1)

Where:
R = expected removal efficiency, a, b = empirical constants, t = nominal detention time

With chemical precipitation, it is possible to remove 80 to 90 percent of the total suspended

solids (TSS) including some colloidal particles, 50 to 80 percent of the BOD, and 80 to 90
percent of the bacteria. Comparable removal values for well-designed and well-operated
primary sedimentation tanks without the addition of chemicals are 50 to 70 percent of the
TSS, 25 to 40 percent of the BOD, and 25 to 75 percent of the bacteria (Metcalf and Eddy,
2003).

2.6.2 Coagulation
Coagulation involves the addition of chemicals to alter the physical state of dissolved and
suspended solids and facilitate their removal by sedimentation. The coagulant used in this
case is the Alum with molecular formular Al2 (SO4 )3 . 18H2 O
When calcium is added to wastewater containing calciumbicarbonate alkalinity, a precipitate
of Aluminium hydroxide will form (Metcalf and Eddy, 2003).

2.6.3 Chemical Phosphorus Removal

Phosphorus in the wastewater results from the blood products in the water and any phosphate

chemicals used in the plant. Biological systems, whether anaerobic or aerobic require some

phosphorus to ensure biomass growth. Phosphorus exists in three main forms in waste water;

ortho-phosphate, polyphosphate and organic phosphate. During aerobic treatment, the latter

two forms are converted to ortho phosphate which is the easiest form to precipitate using

chemical addition (EPA, 1997). Metal salts are generally used for the precipitation of

phosphate according to the reaction:

M 3+ + PO3−
4 → MPO4

28
2.7 REVIEW OF RELATED STUDY
In view of this study, there have also been related studies some of which is a study on the

evaluation of slaughterhouse wastes in south-west Nigeria carried out by D.O. Omole and

A.S. Ogbiye from the department of Civil Engineering, Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State,

Nigeria.

The study was carried out at ten randomly selected slaughterhouses situated in Lagos and

Ogun States, Nigeria. The aim was to evaluate the current waste generation and waste

handling practices while exploring the possibility of reducing to the barest minimum the

percentage of live weight cow that is considered as waste. This was achieved through

questionnaire application, live interviews, literature review and physical inspection. It was

shown that just 5 % of the total slaughtered animal weight, arising from bovine blood, dung

and undigested paunch contents, coupled with the large volume of water required to wash off

this small percentage of animal parts constituted the greatest proportion of environmental

problems associated with slaughterhouse operations.

Another study was by Umubyeyi Naila on the Environmental Impact of Abattoirs on Water

Bodies a Case of Nyabugogo Abattoir Facility in Kigali City, Rwanda.

The research aimed at studying environmental impacts caused by the abattoir on

its receiving water body and its users. It quantified the amount of water used and

wastewater generated, identified and characterized the impacts, determined their significance

and proposed mitigation measures for disposal of abbatoir waste to greatly reduce

environmental pollution.

29
 CHAPTER THREE

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY

The study area is an abattoir situated at Ikpoba Slope, located at latitude 6°21'0.5" longitude

5°38'34.98", Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria.

Ikpoba Slope is a community close to the Ikpoba River, a fourth stream situated within the

rainforest belt of Edo state, Southern Nigeria. The River rises from the Ishan Plateau in the

Northern part and flowing in the south western direction in a steeply incised valley and

through sandy areas before passing through Benin City and merging with the Ossiomo River.

The Ikpoba River which is located around the study area is highly disturbed while passing

through Benin City due to the high population density and the dependence on the stream.

(Victor and Dickson, 1985) reported that in the upper reaches of the stream, it flows through

a dense rainforest where surface run-off and organic matter from the surrounding vegetation

contribute to organic input. The river is particularly important to the people of Benin City.

Etiosa Uyigue and Matthew Agho in participation in the 2006 world water monitoring day

reported that the water is in bad condition due to human activities and the activities of the

abattoir at this location, affecting the water which is dangerous to riparian communities and

the aquatic fauna and flora. This research sets to provide an alternative and largely reduce

pollution of the environment and water bodies.

30
Figure 3.1: Map of Edo state showing the geographic position of the study area

3.2 WASTEWATER ANALYSIS

Wastewater analyses are done by several methods. The most common type of measurements

are gravimetric (weighing), electrochemical (using meters with electrodes) and optical

(including visual).

The analytical methods used for the determination of the parameters except for nitrate were

from the American Public Health Association (APHA/AWWA/WEF, 2005), series of

standard methods of examination of water and effluent.

31
Objectives of wastewater analysis:
1. To design the appropriate wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) for specific area

2. To monitor and evaluate efficiency of treatment processes in wastewater treatment plant

(WWTP).

3. To study the reuse of treated wastewater in industry application

Sample collection:
A total of three (3) wastewater samples labeled A, B, C were collected at the area of the last

operation of the slaughterhouse. The wastewater samples were collected in the morning during

the peak activities between 08:00 am and 09:00 am using a properly cleaned plastic bottle

with tight screw stoppers. Wastewater samples were collected at the abattoir from a point

where it was thoroughly mixed and closed to the discharging point.

3.2.1 DETERMINATION OF TEMPERATURE

Temperature measurements were made with good mercury-filled Celsius thermometer.

3.2.2 DETERMINATION OF TURBIDITY (Nephelometric Method)

The turbidimeter consists of a nephelometer with light source for illuminating the sample and

one or more photo-electric detectors with a readout device to indicate the intensity of light

scattered at right angles to the path of the incident light.

Apparatus

I. The turbidimeter.

II. Sample tubes

Procedure

I. The trubidimeter was then caliberated to zero(0) NTU using distilled water and by

adjusting the caliberation knob

32
 II. The sample was shaken to thoroughly disperse the solids.

III. The sample is poured into the turbidimeter after the air bubbles disappears.

IV. The turbidity was read directly from the instrument’s scale.

3.2.3 DETERMINATION OF CONDUCTIVITY

Conductivity, k, is a measure of the ability of an aqueous solution to carry an electric

current. This ability depends on the presence of ions; on their total concentration, mobility,

and valence; and on the temperature of measurement.

Apparatus required

I. Conductivity Meter with Electrode/ATC probe

II. Magnetic stirrer with stirring bead

III. Standard flask

IV. Measuring jar

V. Beaker 250ml

VI. Funnel

VII. Tissue paper

Chemicals required

I. Potassium chloride

II. Distilled water

Procedure

I. The conductivity meter was switched on (atleast 30min before the test)

II. The electronic balance was switched on, the weighing pan kept and the reading set to

zero

III. 50ml of distilled water is measured and transferred to the beaker

33
 IV. 0.74456g of potassium chloride is weighed

V. The weighed potassium chloride is transferred to the beaker containing the potassium

chloride and mixed using the glass rod until it dissolves thoroughly

VI. The content is transferred to the 100ml standard flask

VII. The volume is made up to 100ml by adding distilled water and mixed well

VIII. The solution is then used to caliberate the conductivity meter.

IX. The electrode is rinsed thoroughly with deionized water and carefully wiped with a

tissue paper

X. 200ml of the water sample is measured and transferred to a beaker and place it on a

magnetyic stirrer

XI. The electrode is dipped into the sample solution taken in a beaker

XII. The readings in the display is noted down directly expressed in millisiemens after

ensuring that the readings are stable

Procedure is discussed in brief regarding the procedure stated in APHA Standard Methods

for the Examination of Water and Wastewater – 20th Edition. Method 2510

3.2.4 DETERMINATION OF COLOUR

Colour was determined by visual inspection and comparison of samples with known

concentration of coloured solution

3.2.5 DETERMINATION OF ODOUR

Odour is determined by smelling the representative sample.

3.2.6 DETERMINATION OF TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS

Apparatus

I. Aluminum weighing dishes

34
 II. Desiccator

III. Analytical balance, capable of weighing to 0.1 mg.

IV. Magnetic stirrer

V. Graduated cylinder.

VI. Filtration apparatus

VII. Drying oven for operation at 103-105°C

Procedure

I. The filter paper was washed and dried

II. The filter paper was then cooled and weighed and the weight of the filter paper was

recorded.

III. The filtration apparatus was assembled

IV. The filter paper was wet with distilled water and the sample stirred thoroughly

V. 50ml of the sample was pipetted while stirring

VI. The sample was filtered and washed three times

VII. Then the filter was transferred to the evaporating dish to be dried

VIII. The filter is cooled in the desiccator to an ambient temperature and re-weighed

IX. The TSS was calculated in mg/lit using the formula

(A−B)x103
Total suspended solid, TSS (mg/L) = sample volume,mL ………………….. (3.1)

Where:

A = weight of filter + dried residue, mg

B = weight of filter, mg

3.2.7 DETERMINATION OF TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS

Apparatus

35
VIII. Glass evaporating dish

IX. Drying Oven

X. Desiccator

XI. Analytical balance, capable of weighing to 0.1 mg.

XII. Magnetic stirrer

XIII. Graduated cylinder.

XIV. Filtration apparatus

Procedure

I. The sample was shaken thoroughly and a representative sample drawn for testing.

II. The weight of the evaporating dish was measured and recorded

III. The representative sample was then transferred to the evaporating dish and evaporated

to dryness in an oven at 180°C

IV. The dish is cooled in the desiccator to an ambient temperature and re-weighed

V. The TDS was calculated in mg/lit using the formular

(A−B)x103
Total dissolved solids, TDS (mg/lit) = sample volum,mL ………………… (3.2)

Where:

A = weight of dried residue + dish, mg, and

B = weight of dish, mg

VI. The measurements and the results are recorded.

3.2.8 DETERMINATION OF pH
Apparatus

I. Acetate buffer (pH = 4)

II. Ammonium buffer (pH = 10)

36
 III. pH meter

IV. tissue paper

Procedure

I. the pH meter was switched on

II. the electrodes were removed from the storage solution and rinsed with distilled water

and bloated with soaked tissue paper

III. The instrument is standardized with electrodes immersed in buffer solution (Acetate

buffer pH = 4) then rinsed, bloated and dried.

IV. The instrument is then again standardized with electrodes immersed in buffer solution

(ammonium buffer pH = 10) then rinsed, bloated, and dried.

V. The pH is then checked on the pH meter (pH = 7)

VI. The pH electrode is then dipped in the beaker containing the wastewater sample to be

tested and recorded

VII. The electrodes are then replaced in the storage solution.

3.2.9 DETERMINATION OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN

Apparatus and Equipments

I. BOD bottles, capacity 300mL

II. Sampling device for collection of samples

Reagents

I. Manganese sulphate

II. Alkali iodize-azide reagent

III. Sulphuric acid

IV. Starch indicator

37
 V. Stock sodium thiosulphate, 0.025N

Procedure

I. Sample is collected in a BOD bottle using Do sampler

II. 1mL MnSO4 followed by 1mL of alkali-iodide-azide reagent was added to a sample

collected in 250 to 300mL bottle up to the brim.

III. The pipettes were rinsed before putting them to reagent bottles.

IV. The sample is mixed well by inverting the bottle 2-3 times and allowing the precipitate

to settle leaving 150mL clear supernatant.

V. 1mL of conc. H2 SO4 is added, the stopper is replaced and the solution is mixed well

till the precipitate goes into solution.

VI. 201mL of the solution is taken in a conical flask and titrated against standard Na2 S2 O3

solution using starch (2mL) as an indicator.

3.2.10 DETERMINATION OF COD

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) test determines the oxygen requirement equivalent of

organic matter that is susceptible to oxidation with the help of a strong chemical oxidant.

Apparatus and Equipment

I. 250 or 500mL Erlenmeyer flask with standard (24/40) tapered glass joints

II. Friedrich’s reflux condenser

III. Electric hot plate or six-unit heating shelf

IV. Volumetric pipettes (10, 25, and 50mL capacity)

V. Burette,

VI. Burette stand and clamp

VII. Analytical balance, accuracy 0.001g

38
 VIII. Spatula

IX. Volumetric flasks (1000mL capacity)

X. Boiling beads, glass

XI. Magnetic stirrer and stirring bars

Reagents used

I. Standard potassium dichromate solution, 0.25N (0.04167 M)

II. Sulphuric acid reagent:

III. Standard ferrous ammonium sulphate approx. 0.25N (0.25M

IV. Ferroin indicator

V. Mercuric Sulphates

VI. Potassium hydrogen phthalate (KHP).

Procedure

I. 20mL of sample was pipetted in 250mL of refluxing flask.

II. Approximately 400mg of mercuric sulphate was added

III. 10ml of potassium dichromate was added by pipette

IV. 30ml of conc. Sulphuric acid reagent was added by measuring cylinder. Acids were

added in a controlled manner with the mixing of samples through the condenser and

reflux for a minimum period of 2hrs at 150°C

V. The reflux flask was connected

VI. 80ml of distilled water was added through condenser and cooled at room temperature

and titrated with standard sulphate using 2 to 4 drops of ferroin indicator.

VII. The endpoint is the sharp colour change from blue-green to brick red even though

blue-green reappear within minutes.

39
VIII. A blank is then refluxed with 20ml distilled water in the same manner

The COD is calculated using the formular below

COD as mg/L = (a - b) x N x 8000/ mL sample …………………………. (3.3)

Where:

a = ml titrant used for blank

b = ml titrant used for sample

N = normality of FAS

8000 = Milieq. Wt. of O2 x 1000

3.2.11 DETERMINATION OF CHLORIDE (IODOMETRIC METHOD)

The iodometric method is suitable for measuring total chlorine concentrations greater than 1

mg/L. All acidic iodometric methods suffer from interferences, generally in proportion to the

quantity of potassium iodine (Kl) and H+ added.

Reagents and Standards

I. Acetic acid, conc. (glacial)

II. Potassium iodide, Kl, crystals

III. Standard sodium thiosulphate, 0.1N

IV. Starch indicator solution

V. Standard iodine, 0.1N

VI. Dilute standard iodine, 0.0282N

Procedure

I. A volume that will require not more than 20mL 0.01N Na2 S2 O3 and not less than

0.2mL for the starch-iodide end point was selected.

40
 II. Preparation for titration: acetic acid, enough to reduce the pH between 3.0 and 4.0,

was placed in a flask or white porcelain casserole. About 1g Kl estimated on a spatula.

Was added, sample was poured in and mixed with a stirring rod.

III. Titration: The solution was titrated away from direct sunlight. 0.025N or 0.01N

Na2 S2 O3 was added from a burette until the yellow colour of the liberated iodine

almost is discharged.

IV. 1mL starch solution is added and Na2 S2 O3 titrated instead of 0.01N,

Calculation

Mg CL as Cl2 /mL = (A±B) x N x 35.45 / mL sample …………………. (3.4)

For determining total available residual chlorine in a water sample

Mg CL as Cl2 /mL = (A±B) x N x 35450 / mL sample ………………… (3.5)

Where:

A = mL titration for sample

B = mL titration for blank

N = normality for Na2 S2 O3

3.2.12 DETERMINATION OF HARDNESS

Water hardness is a traditional measure of the capacity of water to precipitate soap

Apparatus

I. Conical flask 100mL

II. Burette

III. Pipette

IV. Spatula

Procedure

41
 I. 50mL well mixed sample is taken in a conical flask

II. 1-2mL of buffer solution is added followed by 1mL inhibitor

III. A pinch of Eriochrome black T was added and titrated with standard EDTA (0.01M)

till wine red colour changes to blue, the volume of EDTA required was noted down.

IV. The volume of EDTA was noted

V. The volume of EDTA required by sample, C = (A-B) was calculated

3.2.13 DETERMINATION OF NITRATE

UV spectrophotometer method

Nitrate is determined by measuring the absorbance at 220nm in sample containing 1mL of

hydrochloric acid (1N) in 100mL sample.

Apparatus

I. Spectrophotometer

II. Filter paper

III. Nessler tubes, 50mL

Reagents

I. Redistilled water

II. Stock nitrate solution

III. Standard nitrate solution

IV. Hydrochloric acid solution

V. Aluminium hydroxide suspension

Procedure

I. The spectrophotometer is turned on

II. About 0.25ml of the sample is pipetted into a 50-mL Erlenmyer flask

42
III. It is mixed thoroughly with 0.8 mL of 5% (w/v) salicylic acid in conc. H2 SO4

IV. 19 mL of 2 N NaOH is added after 20 minutes at room temperature to raise the pH

above 12

V. Samples is cooled to room temperature

VI. Absorbance is measured at 275 nm

3.2.14 DETERMINATION OF SULPHATE

Turbidimetric method

This method is used for the determination of sulphate ions. Sulphate ion (SO4--) is

precipitated in an acetic acid medium with Barium chloride (BaCl2) so as to form Barium

sulphate (BaSO4 )

crystals of uniform size. The reaction involved is given below:

Ba++ + SO4 — BaSO4 (White suspension)

Apparatus

I. Magnetic stirrer

II. Colorimeter for use at 420mm or turbidimeter/nephelometer

III. Stopwatch

IV. Nessler tubes, 100mL

V. Measuring spoon 0.2 to 0.3mL

Procedure

I. Suitable volume of sample was taken and diluted to 100mL into a 250mL Erlenmeyer

flask

II. 20mL buffer solution was added and mixed well

III. The flask was kept constantly stirred with the help of stirrer.

43
IV. 1 spatula BaCl2 crystals was added with stirring. Stirring continued for 1 minute after

addition of BaCl2

V. Suspension was poured into an absorption cell of photometer an measure turbidity at

5±0.5 min

3.3 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESSES

3.3.1 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT UNITS

It includes unit operations such as:

a. Screens:

The general purpose of screens is to remove large objects such as rags, paper, plastics, metals,

and the like. these objects , if not removed may damage the pumping and sludge- removal

equipment, hangover wires, and block valves, thus creating serious plant operation and

maintenance problems.

b. Aerated Grit champers:

It is used remove dust, bone chips, coffee grounds, seeds, eggshells, and other materials in

wastewater that are non-putrescible and higher than organic matter. By the air, wastewater is

freshened, thus reduction in odors and additional BOD5 Removal may be achieved.

3.3.2 PRIMARY TREATMENT:

3.3.2.1 Coagulation and Flocculation

Coagulation consist of adding a floc forming chemical reagent to a water to combine with

non-settleable colloidal solids so they can stick together.

Flocculation is the slow stirring or gentle agitation to aggregate the destabilized particles and

form a rapid settling floc.

44
3.3.2.2 Factors that affected the coagulation process

i. Coagulant dosage: The applied coagulant is the Aluminium

sulphate, Al2 (SO4 )3 . 18H2 O. The coagulant concentration is 1% - 3% of amount of

wastewater.

ii. Adjustment of pH: pH for Alum has to be 5.5 – 7.5 (Optimum pH ≈ 7.0)

iii. Turbidity: Particles are of different sizes hence easier to coagulate than uniform

sized particles

3.3.2.3 Jar Test

The Jar test is used to determine the optimum coagulant dosage. The jar test involves exposing

same volume samples of the water to be treated to different doses of the coagulant and then

simultaneously mixing the samples at a constant rapid mixing time (Aragonés-Beltrán et al.,

2015). It is used to determine the quality of coagulant used in the water treatment plant.

Procedure

1. Fill four to six beakers with 1 litre raw water sample

2. Add various coagulant dose into each beaker

3. Mix rapidly for 30 to 60 seconds

4. Mix slowly for 15 minutes

5. Stop mixing and let flocs settle. Determine the optimum dosage by observation

6. To determine the optimum pH, repeat step 5 but vary the pH in each beaker.

3.3.2.4 Sedimentation

45
It is including primary sedimentation, the purpose of this unit is to remove the settle able

organic solids. Normally a primary sedimentation will remove 50-70 percent total suspended

solids and 30-40 percent 𝐁𝐎𝐃𝟓 (Spellman, 1999).

3.3.3 PRIMARY TREATMENT (Primary Sedimentation Tanks):

Primary sedimentation (or clarification) is achieved in large basins under relatively quiescent

conditions. The settled solids are collected by mechanical scrapers into hopper, from which

they are pumped to sludge processing area (Spellman, 1999). oil, grease, and other floating

materials are skimmed from the surface. The effluent is discharged over weirs into a collection

trough.

3.3.3.1 Types of clarifiers:

In general, the design of most of the clarifiers falls into three categories:

i. Horizontal flow,

ii. Solids contact, and

iii. Inclined surface.

The common types of horizontal flow clarifiers are rectangular, square, or circular . On the

other hand the types of include surface are tube settler and parallel plate settler.

3.3.3.2 Sludge collection :

Bottom slope : The floor of the rectangular and circular tanks are sloped toward the hopper.

The slope made to facilitate draining of the tank and to move the sludge the hopper.

Rectangular tanks have a slope of 1-2 percent. In circular tanks, the slope is approximately

40-100 mm/m diameter.

3.3.3.3 Sludge removal :

46
The sludge is removal from the hopper by means of a pump .

3.3.3.4 Scum removal:

Scum that forms on the surface of the primary clarifiers is generally pushed off the surface to

a collection sump.

3.3.4 Biological Treatment (secondary treatment):

The purpose of secondary treatment is to remove the soluble organics that escape the primary

treatment and to provide further removal of suspended solids. Although secondary treatment

may remove than 85 percent of the BOD5 and suspended solids, it does not remove significant

amount of nitrogen, phosphor heavy metals, no degradable organics, bacteria and viruses.

These pollutants may require further removal (advanced one).

Biological waste treatment involves bringing the active microbial growth in contact with

wastewater so that they can consume the impurities as food. A great variety of microorganisms

come into play that include bacteria, protozoa, rotifers, fungi, algae, and so forth.

3.3.4.2 Biological Treatment Process:

Biological treatment process can be achieved by two types of growth:

a. Suspended Growth Biological Treatment

b. Attached Growth Biological Treatment

3.3.4.3 Activated sludge process:

In the activated sludge process microorganisms (MO) are mixed thoroughly with the organics

so that they can grow and stabilize the organics. As the microorganisms grow and are mixed

by the agitation of the air, the individual organisms clump together (flocculate) to from an

active mass of microbial floc called " activated sludge" the mixture of the activated sludge

47
and wastewater in the aeration basin is called " mixed liquor " the mixed liquor flows from

the aeration basin to a secondary clarifier where the activated sludge is settled. A portion of

the settled sludge is returned to the aeration basin to maintain the proper food-to- MO ratio

permit rapid breakdown of the organic matter. Because more activated sludge is produced

than can be used in the process, some of it is wasted from the aeration basin or from the

returned sludge line to the sludge – handling systems for treatment and disposal. Air is

introduced into the aeration basin either by diffusers or by mechanical mixers (Benefield and

Randall, 1980).

3.3.4.4 Methods of aeration:

Two major types of aeration systems are used in the activated sludge process. These are :

I. Diffused aeration: air is supplied through porous diffusers or through air nozzles near

the bottom of the tank.

II. Mechanical aeration: in the mechanical aeration, the oxygen is entrained from the

atmosphere. The aerators consist of submerged or partially submerged impellers that

are attached to motors mounted on floats or o fixed structure.

3.3.4.5 Sludge Treatment

The principal sources of sludge at municipal wastewater treatment plants are the primary

sedimentation basin and the secondary deifiers. Additional sludge may also come from

chemical precipitation, nitrification, denitrification facilities, screening and grinder, and

filtration devices if the plant has these processes. Many times the sludge produced in these

processes treatment systems so that the sludge is removal as either primary or secondary

sludge. In some cases, secondary sludge is returned to the primary setting tank, ultimately

48
giving a single stream consisting of combined sludge. Sludge contains large volume of water.

Common sludge management processes include:

a. Sludge Thickening

b. Sludge Conditioning

c. Sludge Dewatering

d. Drying Beds

Figure 3.2 Schematic layout of an activated sludge system (Umubyeyi, 2008)

3.3.5 ADVANCED TREATMENT:

It is an additional treatment process, such as filtration, carbon adsorption, chemical

precipitation of phosphorus, to remove those constituents that are not adequately removed in

the secondary treatment plant. These include nitrogen, phosphorus, and other soluble organic

and inorganic compounds.

49
 CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

4.1 RESULT OF WASTEWATER ANALYSIS

The physico-chemical parameters shown in table measured in this study showed to a large

extent the quality and types of pollutants present as a result of the abattoir effluent from the

slaughterhouse.

Table 4.1 Physico-chemical Analysis of Abattoir Wastewater Samples from the Ikpoba
Slope Abattoir
Test Description Unit Recommended Sample A Sample B Sample C
Limit (WHO)
o
1. Temperature C Ambient 28.7 28.6 28.9
2. Turbidity NTU 0.5-5 12.34 12.67 11.22
3. Conductivity µs/cm 0-1000 2023 2034 2017
4. Resistivity Ω.m 0-1 0.000494 0.000492 0.000496
5. Colour/Clearity Nil Colourless Dark Brown Dark Brown Dark Brown
6. Odour Nil Odourless Bad Bad Bad
7. Total Suspended Mg/l 0.00 6.10 5.08 5.67
Solids
8. Total Dissolved Solids Mg/l 0-500 1335.18 1342.44 1331.22
9. pH Mg/l 6.5-7.5 2.02 2.18 2.96
10. Dissolved Oxygen Mg/l 5-10 1.27 1.08 1.29
11. COD Mg/l Nil 127.6 133.7 122.7
12. BOD Mg/l Nil 130.5 138.3 129.8
13. Chloride Mg/l 0-250 188.6 123.4 118.7
14. Hardness Mg/l 0-200 167.5 177.8 159.2
15. Nitrate Mg/l 0-50 34.8 33.8 39.8
16. Sulphate Mg/l 0-250 88.90 79.2 89.1
17. Phosphate Mg/l 0-0.3 33.56 36.4 42.3

50
18. Iron Mg/l 0.2-1.0 1.88 1.42 1.36
19. Copper Mg/l 0-2.0 2.31 1.96 2.28
20. Lead Mg/l 0-0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
21. Zinc Mg/l 0-3.0 3.49 3.07 2.89
22. Arsenic Mg/l 0-0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
23. Chromium Mg/l 0-0.05 0.26 0.33 0.42

Most of this parameters analyzed exceed the limits for effluent discharge into perennial

streams and rivers. Table 4.2 below shows different parameters and their limits from different

sources.

4.1.1 Total Suspended Solids

The concentration of Total Suspended Solid in sample A, B, and C is 5.08mg/l,

6.10mg/l, and 5.67 mg/l respectively. TSS Concentration is higher in sample B since it’s the

point where the last operation of the abattoir was carried out. Figure shows the concentration

of TSS in the samples.

TSS
7

6
TSS concentration in mg/l

4 sample A
sample B
3
sample C
2

0
Sample A Sample B Sample C

Figure 4.1: Variations of TSS concentration at the three points of sample collection.
51
4.1.2 Total Dissolved Solids
The concentration of the Total Dissolved Solid in the three samples are relatively high and are

summarized in the figure below

TDS
1344
1342
1340
TDS concentration in mg/l

1338
1336
sample A
1334
sample B
1332
sample C
1330
1328
1326
1324
Sample A Sample B Sample C

Figure 4.2: Variations of TDS concentration at the three points of sample collection.

4.1.3 pH
The pH is the measure of acidity of the wastewater sample. Figure shows the variation of pH

values at the various points of sample collection.

52
 pH
3.5

2.5
pH values

2 sample A

1.5 sample B
sample C
1

0.5

0
sample A Sample B Sample C

Figure 4.3: Variations of pH at the three points of sample collection.

4.1.4 Dissolved Oxygen

The average DO concentration of the three samples were 1.27mg/l , 1.08 mg/l, and 1.29 mg/l

for samples A, B, and C respectively. According to effluent guidelines in table , the DO of

the effluent before discharge into perennial streams should be less than 75 mg/l, and WHO

sets its limits at 5-10 mg/l. Hence DO is in considerable small amount. The table bellows

shows the variation of DO in the three samples

53
 DO
1.35

1.3
DO concentration in mg/l

1.25

1.2
sample A
1.15
sample B
1.1 sample C
1.05

0.95
sample A Sample B Sample C

Figure 4.4: Variations of DO at the three points of sample collection

4.1.5 Chemical Oxygen Demand, COD

COD is the amount of oxygen required to oxidize the organic matter in an acid solution

and to convert it to carbon dioxide and water. The figure below shows the variations of COD

at different points of sample collection.

COD
140
138
COD concentration in mg/l

136
134
sample A
132
sample B
130
sample C
128
126
124
sample A Sample B Sample C

Figure 4.5: Variations of COD at the three points of sample collection

54
4.1.6 Biological Oxygen Demand, BOD
BOD5 is the amount of oxygen used over a five-day period by microorganisms as they

decompose the organic matter in sewage at a temperature of 20° C. BOD serves to determine

the relative oxygen requirements of wastewater, effluent and polluted water (WQM, 2007).

BOD
136
134
132
BOD concentration in mg/l

130
128
sample A
126
sample B
124
sample C
122
120
118
116
sample A Sample B Sample C

Figure 4.6: Variations of BOD at the three points of sample collection

4.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DESIGN

Introduction

This project includes designing of a wastewater treatment plant for an abattoir located at

Ikpoba Slope. The abattoir slaughters an average of 8 cows per day.

a. Daily water demand According to FAO “design of model slaughter houses for rural

areas” section 2.4:

I. For large animals – 1000lpd

II. For small ruminant animals – 100lpd

III. For pigs – 450lpd

55
 b. Total daily demand = 8 x 1000 = 8000 lpd.

c. Assuming daily demand per person = 100-150 lpd (EPA, 1997)

8000lpd
d. Daily demand per capital = = 53.33 persons; aprox. 54 persons
150lpd

e. Assuming return amount of wastewater = 75%

Amount of wastewater flow = 8000 x 0.75 = 6000 lpd
6000 x 54
f. Average flow = = 324m3 /day
1000

4.2.1 Coagulation
The reaction that forms when alum is added to the wastewater is illustrated as follows:

3Ca(HCO3 )2 + Al2 (SO4 )3 . 18H2 O → 2Al(OH)3 + 3CaSO4 + 6CO2 + 18H2 O

Mol. 3(100g/mol) 666.5g/mol 2(78g/mol) 3(136 g/mol) ↓
18(18g/mol)
Wt. ( as CaCO3 ) 6(44g/mol)

With a average pH of 2.39, the alkalinity in the wastewater sample supplied in terms of
calcium carbonate CaCO3 the molecular weight of which is 100g/mol. The quantity of
alkalinity required to react 10 mg/L of Alum in 1000ml of wastewater is:
3(100g/mol)
= (10 mg/L)((666.5g/mol)) = 4.5 mg/L

56
4.2.2 Sedimentation

Figure 4.7: Typical BOD and TSS removal in primary sedimentation tanks (Greeley, 1938)

a) BOD of wastewater sample range = 100 – 200 mg/L

b) At detention time of 5hrs yields about 42% removal
c) TSS in wastewater sample range = 1 - 10mg/L
This is almost completely removed during the sedimentation process.

4.2.3 Removal of Heavy Metals by Chemical Precipitation

Solubility products for free metal concentrations in equilibrium with hydroxides precipitates
are reported in table below

57
Table 4.2: Solubility products for free metal ion concentration in equilibrium with
hrdroxides.
Disinfectant Half Reaction p𝐊 𝐬𝐩
Iron (Ⅱ) hydroxide Fe(OH)2 ↔ Fe2+ + 2OH − 14.66
Copper hydroxide Cu(OH)2 ↔ Cu2+ + 2OH − 19.66
Lead hydroxide Pb(OH)2 ↔ Pb2+ + 2OH − 14.93
Zinc hydroxide Zn(OH)2 ↔ Zn2+ + 2OH − 16.7
Chromium hydroxide Cr(OH)3 ↔ Cr 3+ + 3OH − 30.2

4.2.4 Tertiary treatment

4.2.4.1 Chlorination:
Chlorination is the addition of chlorine gas or sodium hypochlorite to kill microorganisms,
particularly bacteria. Is simple and cost-effective, but produces some toxic by-products, and
is temperature and pH dependent (MLA, 2005b)
Cl2 + H2 O → HOCl + H + Cl−
Molecular weight: 71g/mol 18 g/mol 52.5 g/mol 36.5 g/mol

Determination of the Chlorine Feed rate

𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 (𝑙𝑏/𝑑𝑎𝑦) = 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 (𝑀𝐺𝐷)𝑥 𝐷𝑜𝑠𝑎𝑔𝑒 (𝑚𝑔/𝑙) 𝑥 8.34 (𝑙𝑏/𝑔𝑎𝑙) …….... (4.1)
Volume or flow of wastewater = 6000𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦
According toBritish Standard,
1gal = 4.5litres (Aprox.)
6000𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦
6000𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦 is equivalent to = 1333.3 𝑔𝑎𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦
4.5

= 1333 gal/day(aprox.)
1334𝑔𝑎𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦
= = 1.334 𝑥 10−3 𝑀𝐺𝐷
106

Average Chlorine concentration in wastewater = ((188.6 + 123.4 + 118.7 )/3)𝑚𝑔/𝑙

from analysis = 143.6 𝑚𝑔/𝑙
Feed rate = 1.334𝑥10−3 𝑥 143.6 𝑥 8.34

58
 = 1.598 lb/day

4.2.4.2 Determination of tank volume

Average wastewater consumed = 6000𝑙𝑝𝑑
6000𝑙𝑝𝑑
Volume of effluent = 24

= 250𝑙/ℎ𝑟
According to several studies, the hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 10hrs is accurate to
calculate the volume of the tank needed
Therefore, volume, V = 𝑄 𝑥 𝐻𝑅𝑇……………………… (4.2)
Where:
Q = waste water flowrate
HRT = Hydraulic Retention Time
V = 250𝑙/ℎ𝑟 𝑥 10ℎ𝑟𝑠
V = 2500litres
V = 2.5 𝑚3
In order to account for any changes in population or increase in usage, a minimum of 45%
factor of safety will be used.
Volume of tank 𝑉 = 2.5𝑚3 + 0.45(2.5𝑚3 )
V = 3.625𝑚3
Estimated volume V V = 4𝑚3
Provide 1 tanks of V = 4𝑚3
Assume depth of tank = 2𝑚
Area of tank, A = 2𝑚2
(where A = l x b and l = 2b)
Therefore 2b x b = 2𝑚2
𝑏2 = 1
𝑏 = √1
𝑏 = 1𝑚
𝑙 =2𝑥1
𝑙 = 2𝑚
Area of the tank A, = 2𝑚 𝑥 1𝑚

59
 Collection Networks

Pretreatment works

Primary Sedimentations

RAS Sludge treatment/

storage
Biological Treatments
Recycle process

Secondary Settlements/
clarification

Nutrient Removal
Final Efluent

Sludge disposal

Water storage for Reuse Wastewater

Sludge

Figure 4.8: Chart showing wastewater treatment Process

60
Figure 4.9: Flow chart of the wastewater treatment and Reuse

61
4.3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The treatment plant receives influent from a single stream flow, only slight marginal

fluctuation is observed in influent characteristics as a result of wastewater samples from

different point of BOD, COD, and TSS concentration. The influent BOD concentration was

ranged from 129.8mg/l – 138.3mg/l, COD from 122.7mg/l – 133.7mg/l, TSS from 5.08mg/l

– 6.10mg/l with mean values of 132.9mg/l, 128mg/l, 5.62mg/l respectively. From table 4.2

above, effluent guidelines for discharge should not exceed 50mg/l, the mean BOD of

132.9mg/l indicates the presence of organic biological constituent contained mostly in blood.

The influent concentration of nitrate ranged from 33.8𝑚𝑔/𝑙 – 39.8𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and for phosphate,

the concentration ranged from 33.56 𝑚𝑔/𝑙,- 42.3 𝑚𝑔/𝑙. The mean influent concentration

stood at 36.1 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 and 37.42 𝑚𝑔/𝑙 respectively. Also according to effluent guidelines,

Nitrates should not exceed 2mg/l, high concentration of nitrates means more nutrients

deposited in the river which will lead to eutrophication of the river if not treated.

The wastewater was subjected to primary treatment (screening and primary sedimentation)

before being transferred to the secondary stage (aeration and clarification) then the tertiary

filter, before disinfection is carried out using chlorine disinfectant.

The maximum amount of BOD, and TSS removal was achieved in the sedimentation (with

chemical precipitation) stage having about 80 – 90% TSS removal and 50 – 80% BOD

removal and according to table 4.5, disinfection completes the water treatment process.

Therefore the amount of chlorine required to treat 6000l/day was calculated to be 1.598lb/day.

For the stream flow rate of 250l/hr, a single tank was provided for storage of effluent before

distribution to supply point. The volume and area of the tank was designed to be 4𝑚3 and

2𝑚2 respectively having a length to breadth ratio of 2:1 meters.

62
 CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

5.1 CONCLUSION
From the analysis of the results obtained by this study the following conclusions can be

drawn:

1. There is no doubt that the pollution generated by Ikpoba Slope abattoir effluent is a clear

evidence that the meat processing industry in Ikpoba has a potential for generating large

quantities of concentrated effluent which would worsen scarcity of clean water availability

to the generality of the population.

2. Large amounts of water are used and generate a lot of wastewater at the Ikpoba Slope

abattoir. This study estimated 8000l/day and 6000l/day of water and waste water

respectively.

3. The effluent from Ikpoba Slope abattoir is highly concentrated and it is discharged in the

Ikpoba River without treatment. Significant pollution of Ikpoba River through the

wastewater accumulated and discharged was observed for COD, BOD, nutrients and total

suspended solids.

4. The wastewater treatment plant was designed and the quantity of alkalinity required for

the coagulation process was calculated to be 4.5mg/l while the chlorine feed rate for the

disinfection process calculated to be 1.598 lb/day.

5. The process charts above illustrates the treatment plant design as well as wastewater reuse

system ensuring availability of properly treated effluent for reuse and minimizes risk of

pollution by treating polluted wastewater that initially used to be discarded into the

environment and water bodies.

63
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. During collection of samples, I was harshly warned not to take pictures for the fear of

reporting about the abattoir on any media because of the unpleasant and horrifying nature

of the abattoir and the meat washing process. This is one aspect the government need to

give thorough attention to in order to ensure a neat and contamination free abattoir.

2. Swift intervention by the government and other stakeholders by putting in place effluent

treatment facilities to treat wastes from abattoirs in Ikpoba Slope as well as adoption of

cleaner technologies will go a long way to curb the environmental health risks posed by

these hazardous effluents from the abattoir.

3. Blood should not be mixed with other wastewater because it has the highest COD of any

effluent from abattoir processing operations and highly contributes to the pollution load

in the Ikpoba River. It should be collected separately and recovered into other useful by-

products such as pet food.

4. Reduction of the amount of water used by dry cleaning and use of high pressure hose

pipes, as one of the cleaner production methods will reduce the amount of waste water

generated and also the cost of water.

5. Considering the high concentrations of COD, and nutrients, an appropriate wastewater

treatment should be used to treat the effluent before disposal which projects like this

should be properly funded by the Government for Government owned abattoirs and

policies should be put in place for private owned abattoirs as standard requirements.

6. Integrate an environmental and resource monitoring into Ikpoba Slope Abattoir

framework as well as every abattoir in Edo State.

7. Abattoir staff should be trained in environmentally safe practices as well as occupational

health. This will assist in improving the present situation.

64
8. The government should put in place an awareness raising programme for the people’s

knowledge on the quality of water they use and sensitize the public on the reuse benefits

and economic effects wastewater recycling.

65
 REFERENCES

1. Barker, J.C. (1996). Lagoon Design & Management for Livestock. Waste Treatment and

Storage; water quality and management for North Carolina Cooperative Extension, North

Carolina, U.S.A.

2. 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.

3. Fakayode, S. O. (2005). Impact assessment of industrial effluent on water quality of the

receiving Alaro River in Ibadan Nigeria. AJEAM-RAGEE.

4. Figueras, J.J. (2000). Monitoring Bathing waters; a practical Guide to the Design and

Implementation of Assessment and Monitoring program for WHO.

5. Sangodoyin, A.Y. (1991). Groundwater and Surface Water Pollution by Open Refuse

Dump in Ibadan, Nigeria. Journal of Discovery and Innovations.

6. Sangodoyin, A.Y. (1995). Characteristics of control of industrial effluents generated

pollution, Enviromental Management and Health.

7. Sangodoyin, A.Y. & Agbawhe, M.O. (1992). Environmental study on surface and ground

water pollutants from abattoir effluent. Bioresource Technology.

8. Osibanjo, O., Daso, A. P. & Gbadebo, A. M. (2011). The impact of industries on surface

water quality of River Ona and River Alaro in Oluyole Industrial Estate, Ibadan, Nigeria.

9. Afr. J. Biotechno., Otokunefor, T. V. & Obiukwu, C. (2005). Impact of refinery effluent

on the physic-chemical properties of a water body in the Niger Delta. Appl. Ecology Env,.

Res.

66
10. Phiri, O., Mumba, P., Moyo, B.H.Z. & Kadewa, W. (2005). Assessment of the impact of

industrial effluents on water quality of receiving rivers in urban areas of Malawi. Int. J.

Environmental Science Technology.

11. Emongor, V., Nkegbe, E., Kealotswe, B., Koorapetse, I., Sankwase, S. Keikanetswe, S.

(2005). Pollution indicators in Gaborone industrial effluent. Journal of Applied Science.

12. Victor, R. and Dickson, D. T. (1985). Macrobenthic invertebrates of a perturbed stream in

southern Nigeria. Environmental Pollution (Series A)

13. Joyce Odigie, (2015). Harmful effect of wastewater disposal into water bodies; a case

review of the ikpoba River, Benin City, Edo State. Department of Animal and

Environmental Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences.

14. Nafarnda, W.D., Yayi, A. and Kubkomawa, H.I. (2006). Impact of abattoir waste on

aquatic life: A case study of yola abattoir. Global J. Pure Applied Science.

15. Coker, A.O., B.O. Olugasa and A.O. Adeyemi, (2001). Abattoir wastewater quality in

South Western Nigeria. Proceedings of the 27th WEDC Conference, Lusaka, Zambia.

16. Dana Koplin, (1997). Agricultural Chemicals in Iowa's Ground Water, US Geological

Survey.

17. Zaikab, Gwyneth Dickey (2011). Marine microbes digest plastic. Nature. Macmillan.

18. World Health Organization (WHO), (2017). Diarrhoeal disease, In Our Backyard, Fact

sheet Number 330

19. Travis, P.W John, W. and Sons, 1993. A Guide to Understanding Pollution and Its Effects

p.26

20. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), (2016). Average ‘dead zone’

for gulf of mexico predicted.

67
21. Environmental Protection Agency, (2016). Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 2012 Report

to Congress.

22. Michael J. Kennish, (2007). Pollution Impacts on Marine Biotic Communities

International Maritime Organization: Marine Environmental Awareness, 2011 Edition.

23. ASTM International, (1995). Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Fate and Effects in Alaskan Waters,

ASTM symposium.

24. Daniel J. Lebbin, (2010). The American Bird Conservancy Guide to Bird Conservation,

University of Chicago Press, p.340.

25. Carol Lalli. Elsevier, (1993). Biological Oceanography: An Introduction. p.253.

26. T.G. Benton et al, (1995). The Pitcairn Islands: Biogeography, Ecology and Prehistory.

Linnean Society of London.

27. Prafull Singh, et al., (2015) Water Reuse Products in Urban Areas, Amity University.

28. Wade, T.J., Sams, E. et al., (2010). Rapidly measured indicators of recreational water

quality and swimming-associated illness at marine beaches: A prospective cohort study.

Environmental Health, 9(66), 1–14.

29. Adelegan J.A., (2002), “Policy and Slaughterhouse Waste in Nigeria”, Proceedings of the

28th WEDC Conference, Kolkata (Calcutta) India. pp. 3-6

30. Quinn J.M. and P.N. McFarlane (1989), Effects of slaughterhouse and dairy factory

wastewaters on epilithon: A comparison in laboratory streams. Water Research 23:1267-

1273

31. Nikoladze, G; Mints,D. and Kastalsky, A.(1989). Water Treatment for Public and

Industrial Supply. MIR Publishers, Moscow. pp 39-51.

68
32. Komolafe, C.A., Agboola, B.S., Adejumo A.O.D., and Areola J.B., (2013) Modern

Conventional Water Treatment Technologies and Challenges for Optimal Utilization in

Nigeria.

33. WHO (2008). Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality. Third Edition incorporating the first

and second Addenda.vol.1(Geneva World Health Organisation.)

34. Visvanathan, C. and Asano, T. (2007). The Potential for Industrial Wastewater Reuse,

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California at Davis,

California

35. APHA, AWWA and WEF, (2005). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and

Wastewater; 21st Edition.

36. Mesinzen-Dick, R. and Bakker,M.(2001). Water Rights and Multiple water users.

Irrigation and Drainage system,15.129-143.

37. Ogedengbe, K. and Akinbile, C.O. (2004). Determination of Consumptive Water use of

Corhorus Olitorius (Ewedu) using Balaney Morin Nigeria simulation model, Journal of

Science, Engineering and Technology.

38. Akinbile, C.O. (2004). Public Health and Sanitation Implications of Hawked water in

Akure Metropolis, Journal of Applied Science.

39. Fatima Hussein Abd Ali, (2011). Design of Wastewater Treatment Plant, Republic of Iraq,

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research University of Technology Building

and Construction Eng. Dep.

40. Andersson, K., Rosemarin, A., Lamizana, B., Kvarnström, E., McConville, J., Seidu, R.,

Dickin, S. and Trimmer, C. (2016). Sanitation, Wastewater Management and

69
 Sustainability: from Waste Disposal to Resource Recovery. Nairobi and Stockholm:

United Nations Environment Programme and Stockholm Environment Institute. ISBN

41. Warsinger, David M.; Chakraborty, Sudip; Tow, Emily W.; Plumlee, Megan H.; Bellona,

Christopher; Loutatidou, Savvina; Karimi, Leila; Mikelonis, Anne M.; Achilli, Andrea;

Ghassemi, Abbas; Padhye, Lokesh P.; Snyder, Shane A.; Curcio, Stefano; Vecitis, Chad

D.; Arafat, Hassan A.; Lienhard, John H. (2018). A review of polymeric membranes and

processes for potable water reuse. Progress in Polymer Science. ISSN 0079-6700

42. USEPA. Retrieved 29 July 2016

43. Aragonés-Beltrán, P.; Mendoza-Roca, J. A.; Bes-Piá, A.; García-Melón, M.; Parra-Ruiz,

E. (2015). “Application of multicriteria decision analysis to jar-test results for chemicals

selection in the physical–chemical treatment of textile wastewater". Journal of Hazardous

Materials. 164 (1): 288–295.

44. Gerrity, D; Pecson, B; Trussell, R.S.; Trussell, R.R. (2016) "Potable reuse treatment trains

throughout the world" J. Water Supply Res. Technol.-AQUA. 62: 321–338.

45. Chris Woodford, (2006) UK Rivers Network.

46. West, Larry (2006). "World Water Day: A Billion People Worldwide Lack Safe Drinking

Water". About.com.

47. Pink, Daniel H. (2006). "Investing in Tomorrow's Liquid Gold". Yahoo.

48. Goel, P.K. (2006). Water Pollution - Causes, Effects and Control. New Age International.

New Delhi: p. 179.

49. Benefield , L.D., And C.W. Randall, (1980) "Biological Process Design Of Waste Water

Treatment", Prentice - Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

70
50. N.J. Laws, Edward A., (2018). Aquatic Pollution: An Introductory Text (4th ed.).

Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

51. UN-Water (2018) World Water Development Report: Nature-based Solutions for Water,

Geneva, Switzerland

52. Frank R. Spellman, (1999). Spellman’s Standard Handbook for Wastewater Operators,

intermediate level. Technomic publishing co., inc. Lancaster, Basel

53. Moss, Brian (2008). "Water Pollution by Agriculture". Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London.

B. 363: 659–666.

54. Akio Mishima, (1982). Bitter Sea: The Human Cost of Minamata Disease, Kosei Pub.

55. Jiang, Jia-Qian (2015). The role of coagulation in water treatment. Current Opinion in

Chemical Engineering. Nanotechnology, Separation engineering. P: 36–44.

56. Omelia, C (1998). "Coagulation and sedimentation in lakes, reservoirs and water treatment

plants". Water Science and Technology. 37 (2): 129.

57. Marcoss von Sperling, (2007) Wastewater Characteristics, Treatment and Disposal. IWA

Publishing, London, UK

58. US EPA, (1992). Guide lines for Water Reuse. Municipal Wastewater Reuse: Selected

Readings on Water Reuse. Office of Technology Transfer and Regulatory Support.

59. Fane, AG; Abdul, J; D’Souza ND; Madaeni, S; Parameshwaran, K; Ye, (2005). Membrane

technologies for meat processing waste streams. Published by MLA.

60. Layperson (1992). Layperson’s Guide to Water Recycling and Reuse, published by the

Water Education Foundation, Sacramento, California

71
61. Metcalf and Eddy, (2003). Wastewater Engineering, Treatment and Reuse, Metcalf &

Eddy, Inc.; Fourth Edition, revised by George Tchobanoglous, Professor Emeritus of Civil

and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis.

62. Bureau of Safe Drinking Water, (2016). Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator Training.

Department of Environmental Protection.

72
 APPENDIX

Table 4.3 Effluent guidelines and their limits with sources

Parameters Limits Sources

pH 6-9 EHSG, 2007

Chemical Oxygen Demand 250 mg/l EHSG, 2007

Biochemical Oxygen Demand 50 mg/l EHSG, 2007

Dissolved Oxygen 75 mg/l WHO, 1984

Nitrate 2 mg/l WHO, 1984

Phosphate 1.5 mg/l WHO, 1984

Total Suspended solids 50 mg/l EHSG, 2007

Source: (Umubyeyi, 2008)

Table 4.4: Removal of pathogens by various treatment process

Treatment Process Microorganism type
Removal
Screening 10-20% Physical Removal
Grit Removal 10-25% Physical Removal
Primary Sedimentation 25-75% Physical Removal
Chemical precipitation 40-80% Physical Removal
Trickling Filters 90-95% Physical Removal
Activated Sludge 90-98% Physical Removal
Chlorination 98-99% Disinfection
Source: Bureau of Safe Drinking Water, Department of Environmental Protection, 2016

73
Table 4.5 Equivalents, Formulae, and Symbols Equivalents
12 in. = 1 ft
36 in. = 1 yd
144 in.2 = 1 ft2
9 ft2 = 1 yd2
43,560 ft2 = 1 ac
1 ft3 = 1728 in.3
1 ft3 H20 = 7.48 gal
1 ft3 H20 = 62.4 lb
1 gal of H20 = 8.34 lb
1L = 1.000 mL
1g = 1.000 mg
1 MGD (million gal[MG]/d) = 694 gal/min, 1.545 ft3/sec
average BOD/capita/day = 0.17 lb
average SS/capita/day = 0.20
average daily flow = assume 6000l/day

74