1.0. INTRODUCTION - Gujarat

SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF IMPACTS ON THE WATER QUALITY DUE TO IMMERSION OF PoP MADE IDOLS

Environmental Engineering Department, L D College of Engineering , Ahmedabad

July 2016

Page 1 of 40

Asso. Prof. of Env. Engg.

1.0. INTRODUCTION

Forest and Environment Department of Government of Gujarat issued directions under Section 5 of the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986 vide No. ENV-10-2010-1004-E dated on 23rd January 2012, indicating the use of traditional clay for idol making and banning the use of baked clay and Plaster of Paris (PoP) along with other recommendations related to painting of idols, managing the work ship materials, identifying idol immersion points, as well as formation of coordination committees etc. The directions also include provision for removal of left over material at idol immersion points on the Bank of Rivers, Lakes, Beaches etc, within 48 hours of the immersion of idols by the local bodies for suitable disposal.

Subsequent to this Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city issued a Notification dated 22nd May 2012 under section 144(4) of Criminal Procedure Code.

Ganapati Murti Sarjak Yuwa Bavari Samaj Sewa Samiti approached Honorable Gujarat High Court for setting aside the Notification issued by Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city where the State of Gujarat through Secretary and Commissioner of Police were made respondent. The petition was admitted as Special Civil Application Number 11600 of 2012.

Subsequent to the hearing an oral order was issued by Honorable Chief Justice Mr. Bhaskar Bhattacharya on 14th September 2012.

The Honorable National Green Tribunal issued directions to Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) through its order dated 9th May 2013 to undertake scientific study about the impact of Plaster of Paris made idols. The Para 46 have been reproduced as below:

“We direct the GPCB and all the other Pollution Control Boards which are covered by the Water Act to undertake the scientific study of the impact of PoP made idols on immersion thereof, in relation to water quality of rivers, ponds, sea or other sources and examine whether it is an environment pollutant”

Under these directions, Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) constituted an expert committee to address the issue. The expert committee decided to get a detailed scientific study carried out by an established reputed institute to satisfy the requirement of National Green Tribunal. For this purpose GPCB invited Environmental Engineering Department of L. D. College of Engineering, Ahmedabad to carry out the detailed scientific study to establish the extent of water quality changes due to the immersion of idols made up of Plaster of Paris.



July 2016

Page 2 of 40


2.0. AIM OF THE PROJECT

The primary aim of the present study is to evaluate the impacts on quality of receiving water bodies mainly Ponds, Rivers and Sea due to the immersion of idols made up of PoP. 2.1 Terms of Reference of the present study:

The Terms of Reference, as proposed by Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) ,has been reproduced here under:

1. A study to be carried out to quantify the amount of pollutants affecting the water quality of different water bodies due to immersion of idols made of Plaster of Paris using colors for the painting.

2. The Idols, on which the scientific study is to be carried out, shall be purchased from different local markets.

3. Study should be carried out in such a manner that result indicates the factual picture about solubility, reaction and other Physico-chemical phenomenon occurring in natural environment due to Plaster of Paris made Idols and Paint used idol mainly.

4. Sampling of the water body shall be done at regular interval of time as decided by Institute.

5. The physical and chemical analysis of the water used for the experiment purpose shall be carried out regular interval so as to capture the actual picture of immediate impacts, Short term Impacts and Long term Impacts due to Plaster of Paris made Idol Immersion on water Bodies and Natural Environment.

6. The parameters to be sampled & analyzed will be pH, CaSO4 , BOD, COD, DO, TDS, SS, O & G, and heavy metals. Institute can add other parameters as may be required during the course of study.

7. Expenses for this whole scientific study will be borne by Gujarat Pollution Control Board.



July 2016

Page 3 of 40


3.0. APPROACH TOWARDS THE STUDY Attempt has been made to study the effects of idol immersion on water quality of receiving water bodies, by simulating conditions of Rivers, Lakes and Sea in the laboratory as given hereunder: 1. Lake: The Lake is a stagnant water body where quiescent conditions prevail without

considerable mixing. In order to simulate the conditions in a lake, the study has been carried out by immersing idols purchased from the local market in tanks of suitable size. The arrangement has been shown at Plate no. 1.

2. River: The river simulating model has been developed considering the flow velocity of 0.3-0.4 m/s and the size of the idol to be immersed in it. The arrangement has been shown at Plate no. 2.

3. Sea: The Sea is a dynamic water body subjected to mixing due to waves caused by ebb and tides depending upon the size of incoming and outgoing waves. The intensity of mixing is different at different locations. It was not possible to create the intensity of mixing in the tank to simulate the actual conditions. Therefore the study has been carried out by immersing idols purchased from the local market in tanks of suitable size. The sea water was collected from sea coast of Jamnagar. The arrangement has been shown at Plate no. 3.



July 2016

Page 4 of 40


Plate no 3 Sea Immersion Model



July 2016

Page 5 of 40


3.1. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

The study has been carried out in a systematic manner as shown in the Figure no. 1.

Figure no.1: Flow chart of Methodology



July 2016

Page 6 of 40


3.2. IDOL MAKING PROCESS:

3.2.1. PROCESS TO MAKE AN ECO (GANESHA) IDOL:

The basic raw materials required to make Eco Idol are listed here under:

a) Natural Clay b) Mould for the Idol (Front and Back) c) Talcum Powder d) Natural Paints

The Process:

Natural Clay is mixed with water to form Dough, such that water is in adequate proportion to form a homogeneous mixture. Now take the required mould of POP, and sprinkle its inner surface with Talcum powder, for lubrication purpose. Fill the front mould with the Clay Dough, simultaneously applying uniform pressure at all points. This ensures precision in the features of the idol. Repeat the above step for the Back mould as well. Now put the two moulds together and fill the visible voids with Clay, if any. Press the two moulds against each for a small amount of time. Be gentle in doing so, as excess pressure can weaken the strength of the idol. Now, remove the top mould carefully and any excess Clay visible using a knife. Thus, an Eco-friendly Ganesha is ready.

Then after, paints made of natural materials like China Clay (diluted-can be used as a primer coat), Natural Blue (extracted from Indigo Plant), Natural Yellow (extracted from Turmeric), Orange (extracted from Marigold), Natural Gum (used as a Binder), Brown (extracted from Katha), Black (extracted from Charcoal), Violet (extracted from Jamoon), etc. The Idol takes at least a day or two to dry, depending on its size.

3.2.2. PROCESS TO MAKE A PLASTER OF PARIS (PoP)(GANESHA) IDOL :

The basic raw materials required to make POP Idol are listed here under:

a) Clay b) Kaatho c) Plaster of Paris d) Water e) Bamboos f) Rubber dye g) Natural and Synthetic Paints



July 2016

Page 7 of 40


The Process:

(Ganesha) Idols are made using above listed raw materials. Plaster Of Paris plays a vital role and is one of the major components of Idol. Bamboos are used as a means of support.

First of all, moulds of Idols are made of Clay. These moulds are perfectly shaped, taking into consideration the posture of the Idol, gesture of hands and feet, features and expression of the face, etc. Then after Rubber-dye is poured on the Clay Idol to form a Rubber mould. This Rubber-dye sets at a faster rate and can be easily separated from the Clay Idol. After separation Clay idols are demolished and the Rubber mould is used for constructing the POP Idols. The Plaster of Paris powder is mixed along with adequate proportion of water to form a uniform paste.

Now, the Rubber mould, POP-water paste, Kaatho and Bamboos altogether contribute to the formation of Idols. The paste made up of POP and water is mixed with Kaatha. The Kaatha thereby absorbs the paste as per its absorption capacity. This Kaatha is applied on to the Rubber mould to form a thick layer on it. The amount/ quantity of Kaatha depends upon the size of the Idols. Workers with their experience easily judge the proportion of kaatha. When required thickness is achieved, the Idol is kept for drying. Bamboos are used to support the Rubber mould when Idols with large heights are to be constructed. After this, Rubber-dye is removed and the Idols are polished using screen. The polishing process gives beautiful effect to the Idols. Later the Idols are painted using Water-colors or Oil-paints as per the customer’s requirement. In this way Idols are made.

The Idol making process has been depicted pictorially at Annexure 1.



July 2016

Page 8 of 40


4.0. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP FOR LAKE, RIVER AND SEA

The study has been carried out to analyze the changes in the water quality which are likely to occur due to immersion of idols purchased from local market in three identified water bodies. As discussed at section 3, the study has been carried out with idol immersion in lake water, river water and sea water. Attempt has been made to create the conditions in the tanks to simulate the actual conditions as far as possible. For this purpose the tanks of suitable size have been used to study the water quality changes in lake and sea water while a model has been developed to simulate the river conditions.

The idols of different sizes were immersed in case of sea and lake water while in case of river model considering the size constraint of model , the idol of one size only was used.

4.1. EXPERIMENTAL SET UP FOR LAKE

The lake conditions have been simulated using five tanks in which the idols of different sizes have been immersed. The details regarding the size of idols and tanks are given at Table no.1 while the figures are given at Plate no. 4.

Table no. 1: Size of Idols and Tanks for Lake Model

Tank no.

I II III IV V

Dimensions of Tank (mm)

900 x 430 x 450

900 x 430 x 450

900 x 430 x 450

900 x 430 x 450

900 x 430 x 450

Volume of Tank (L)

116 116 116 116 116

Size of Idol (m) 0.6 0.3960 0.3048 0.3048 0.3048

Weight of Idol (kg)

4.5 2.02 1.7 1.52 1.75



July 2016

Page 9 of 40


Plate No. 4: Idols Immersed in Models of Lake

Tank 1 Tank 2 Tank 3

Tank 4 Tank 5



July 2016

Page 10 of 40


4.1.1 Sampling Program For Lake Model:

The water samples have been collected at regular intervals as per the sampling program, developed to monitor the changes in the water quality after the immersion of idols. The sampling program has been presented in Table no. 2

Table no 2: The Water Sampling Program for Lake Model

Routine Parameters Routine Parameters & Heavy Metals

2/8/2013 2/8/2013 7/8/2013 7/8/2013 12/8/2013 ------- 17/8/2013 17/8/2013 22/8/2013 22/8/2013 27/8/2013 ------- 31/8/2013 31/8/2013 5/9/2013 5/9/2013 10/9/2013 ------- 16/9/2013 16/9/2013 20/9/2013 -------



July 2016

Page 11 of 40


4.1.2 Water Quality Parameters Analysed For Lake Model

Considering the raw materials used in making of idols (both, with paint and without paint) and with reference to Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) guidelines for idol immersions, the samples have been analyzed for the identified water quality parameters are presented in Table no. 3.

Table no 3: Water Quality Parameters Analyzed for Lake Model

Sr. No. Parameters 1 pH 2 Turbidity (NTU) 3 Color (CU) 4 COD (mg/L) 5 DO (mg/L) 6 Chloride (mg/L) 7 Total Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 8 Calcium Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 9 Magnesium Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3)

10 Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 11 Sulphate (mg/L) 12 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 13 Total Solids (mg/L) 14 Total Suspended Solids(mg/L) 15 Copper (µg/L) 16 Zinc (µg/L) 17 Chromium (µg/L)

4.1.3 Results of Lake Model

The samples have been analyzed by adopting the procedures prescribed by Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater published by APHA, AWWA and WER. The results obtained are presented in Table no. 4 through 8.



July 2016

Page 12 of 40


Table no. 4: Results of analysis of Water Samples for Tank No.1 for Lake Model.

Date Of Sampling

Values



July 2016

Page 13 of 40


Table no. 5: Results of analysis of Water Samples for Tank No.2 for Lake Model

Date Of Sampling

Values

PARAMETERS (UNIT) RAW WATER

27/72013

2/8/2013 7/8/2013 12/8/2013 17/8/2013 22/8/2013 27/8/2013 31/8/2013 5/9/2013 10/9/2013 16/9/2013 20/9/2013

pH 7.6 7.7 7.9 7.6 7.1 7.7 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.6 7.9 7.8

Turbidity (NTU) 1 0.34 0.76 1.98 3.79 4.79 5.16 8.55 2.87 1.31 0.38 3.29

Color(Cu) Colorless 0.25 0.6 0.8 0.8 2.7 4 6.5 2.1 3.1 1 3.3

COD (mg/ L) 8 30 68 86.4 64 48 0 0 50 0 0 73.6

DO (mg/L) 6.8 6 5.8 7.4 7.3

Chloride (mg/L) 288 308 232 236 222 222 227 238

Total Hardness (mg/L as

CaCO3) 225 676 580 770 884 1068 1656 1600 2030 2212 2628 2382

Calcium Hardness (mg/L

as CaCO3) 120 300 460 680 728 796 1400 1360 1861 1995 2249 2217

Magnesium Hardness

(mg/L as CaCO3) 105 376 120 90 156 272 256 240 169 217 379 165

Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 392 160 168 184 208 192 220 160 169 134 151 165

Sulphate (mg/L) 42 288 441 740 698 764 1344 1568 1309 1485 1427 1423

Potassium (mg/L) 0.6 6.05 7.3 10.14 9.7 10 15 17 18.8 19 20.2 22

Silica (mg/L) 0.8 7.5 9.1 12.67 12.1 12.5 19 21 23.5 23.5 25.2 27

Sodium (mg/L) 280 105 170 236 167 107 130 243 204 116 33.4 231

Lead (mg/L) Nil 1.8 1.1 2.266 1.24 0.672

Zinc (mg/L) Nil 17.702 25.9828 21.8 24.08

copper (µg/L) Nil < 10 <10 <10 <10 <10

cromium (µg/L) Nil Nil Nil Nil BDL BDLTDS (mg/L) 1080 1022 1240 1713 1645 1710 2576 2877 3200 3183 3427 3668



July 2016

Page 14 of 40



Date Of Sampling

Values PARAMETERS (UNIT) RAW WATER

27/72013

2/8/2013 7/8/2013 12/8/2013 17/8/2013 22/8/2013 27/8/2013 31/8/2013 5/9/2013 10/9/2013 16/9/2013 20/9/2013

pH 7.6 7.7 7.9 7.7 7.8 7.7 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.5 7.9 7.8

Turbidity (NTU) 1 0.26 0.39 0.22 0.22 0.26 3.83 3.72 3.5 1.33 0.9 2.6

Color(Cu) Colorless 1.9 3.5 5.6 7.5 8.3 11.9 17.4 9.7 19.6 9.6 6.1

COD (mg/ L) 8 28 72 64.8 48 48 0 0 30 0 0 82.8

DO (mg/L) 6.8 6.5 5.2 6.2 6.4

Chloride (mg/L) 288 300 272 260 222 241 269 257


CaCO3) 225 568 530 750 1136 968 1370 1364 1986 2181 2420 2475


as CaCO3) 120 280 400 670 608 742 1180 1292 1798 1933 2169 2217

Magnesium Hardness

(mg/L as CaCO3) 105 288 130 80 528 220 170 72 188 248 251 258


Sulphate (mg/L) 42 288 384 772 583 684 1133 1336 1334 1443 1473 1505

Potassium (mg/L) 0.6 6.2 7.8 10.6 8.3 9.5 14 15 19.5 19 22 22.5

Silica (mg/L) 0.8 7.8 9.8 13.3 10.4 11.87 17.5 19 24.36 23.5 28 28.3

Sodium (mg/L) 280 158 225 275 1.64 126 197 245 268 133.5 270 242

Lead (mg/L) Nil 0.896 7.818 1.18 0.572

Zinc (mg/L) Nil 15.06 24.1 23.7 19.94

copper (µg/L) Nil < 10 <10 <10 <10 <10

cromium (µg/L) Nil Nil Nil Nil BDL BDL

TDS (mg/L) 1080 1056 1330 1798 1415 1621 2363 2576 3317 3178 3751 3814



July 2016

Page 15 of 40



Date Of Sampling

Values


27/72013

2/8/2013 7/8/2013 12/8/2013 17/8/2013 22/8/2013 27/8/2013 31/8/2013 5/9/2013 10/9/2013 16/9/2013 20/9/2013

pH 7.6 7.8 7.9 7.8 7.7 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.8 7.7 7.8 7.7

Turbidity (NTU) 1 0.5 1.67 1.5 2.75 2.06 2.15 3.43 7.81 0.59 0.86 0.74

Color(Cu) Colorless 0.62 0.9 1.5 2.8 4 10.5 5.6 4.7 20 5.8 0.3

COD (mg/ L) 8 32 78 90 32 32 0 0 20 50 0 36.8

DO (mg/L) 6.8 6.5 6.5 7.1 7.2

Chloride (mg/L) 288 300 240 248 227 230 246 252


CaCO3) 225 504 390 680 1084 980 1632 1456 1938 2098 2572 2351


as CaCO3) 120 268 290 590 564 784 1528 1324 1706 1830 2169 2196

Magnesium Hardness

(mg/L as CaCO3) 105 236 100 90 520 196 104 132 232 268 403 155


Sulphate (mg/L) 42 284 416 660 544 800 1612 1444 1319 1423 1397 1402

Potassium (mg/L) 0.6 6.1 6.2 9.5 9.1 10.4 17.5 16 19.07 18.3 20.2 22.3

Silica (mg/L) 0.8 7.6 7.8 12 11.4 13 22 20 23.85 23.2 25.3 28.3

Sodium (mg/L) 280 174 246 246 217 164 260 255 269 139.4 71 339

Lead (mg/L) Nil 0.809 0.933 1.556 1.08 0.51

Zinc (mg/L) Nil 9.04 23.72 18.4 17.31

copper (µg/L) Nil < 10 <10 <10 <10 <10


TDS (mg/L) 1080 1036 1056 1614 1545 1768 2965 2725 3241 3088 3440 3779



July 2016

Page 16 of 40



Date Of Sampling

Values


27/72013

2/8/2013 7/8/2013 12/8/2013 17/8/2013 22/8/2013 27/8/2013 31/8/2013 5/9/2013 10/9/2013 16/9/2013 20/9/2013

pH 7.6 7.9 7.9 7.8 7.7 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.7 7.8 7.7 7.9

Turbidity (NTU) 1 1.58 2.63 3.65 4.27 2.7 4.03 4.63 1.45 1.93 0.11 0.48

Color(Cu) Colorless 1.98 4.25 7.65 9.6 12.2 12.5 17.7 3.8 21.7 0 1

COD (mg/ L) 8 28 64 86 33.6 16 0 0 10 0 0 36.8

DO (mg/L) 6.8 6.5 7.1 7.2 7.5

Chloride (mg/L) 288 252 216 236 222 222 230 238


CaCO3) 225 322 420 700 860 1092 1380 1540 2030 2191 2572 2392


as CaCO3) 120 205 290 610 648 832 1244 1364 1745 1933 2234 2196

Magnesium Hardness

(mg/L as CaCO3) 105 117 130 90 212 260 136 176 285 258 338 196


Sulphate (mg/L) 42 251 460 652 900 199 1194 1536 1411 1428 1397 1413

Potassium (mg/L) 0.6 7 7.3 9.2 8.7 10 11.7 16.7 19.02 18.1 20 21.1

Silica (mg/L) 0.8 8.7 9.2 11.5 11 12.6 14.6 20.91 24 22.6 25 26.4

Sodium (mg/L) 280 263 241 218 129 101 143 259 218 86.3 48 196

Lead (mg/L) Nil 0.622 1.419 1.73 0.73 0.523

Zinc (mg/L) Nil 17.3256 25.6064 25.6 18.06

copper (µg/L) Nil < 10 <10 <10 <10 <10


TDS (mg/L) 1080 1178 1248 1536 1483 1724 1989 2853 3239 3061 3392 3576



July 2016

Page 17 of 40


4.2 EXPERIMENTAL SET UP FOR RIVER MODEL

The study has been carried out to analyze the changes in the water quality which are likely to occur due to immersion of idols purchased from local market in three identified water bodies. This part of the study focuses on the variations in the water quality due to idol immersion in river. The river conditions have been simulated using specially fabricated river model as shown in Plate no 2. The dimensions of the model are given in the Table No. 9 which also provides information about the immersed idols.

Table no. 9: Size of Idols and Dimensions of River Model

Idol no. I II III Size of Idol (m) 0.145x0.095x0.

26 0.155x0.073x0

.29 0.125x0.07x0.

285 Weight of Idol (kg) 0.91 0.92 0.64

Dimensions of river model

2.2m (L) x 0.21m (W) x 0.3m (H)

In order to simulate the conditions in the river the water in the model was maintained in motion at a constant velocity of 0.3 m/sec by adjusting the flow rate. A head of 10 cm, which was sufficient to keep the idols submerged, was maintained in the river model.



July 2016

Page 18 of 40


4.2.1 Sampling Program For River Model

The water samples have been collected at regular intervals as per the sampling program, developed to monitor the changes in the water quality after the immersion of idols. On the daily basis, the water was allowed to flow in the river model submerging the idols as shown in Plate No 4 at 11 A.M.. Two water samples were collected at regular interval of 3 hours each i.e. at 2 P.M. and 5 P.M. starting from 25/06/2014 to 17/07/2014.

Plate no.5: Idols Immersed in Models of River

4.2.2 Water Quality Parameters Analysed For River Model

Considering the raw materials used in making of idols (both, with paint and without paint) and with reference to Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) guidelines for idol immersions, the samples have been analyzed for the identified water quality parameters are presented at Table no.10.



July 2016

Page 19 of 40


Table no. 10 : Water Quality Parameters Analyzed for River Model

Sr. No. Parameters 1 pH 2 Turbidity (NTU) 3 Color (CU) 4 COD (mg/L) 5 DO (mg/L) 6 Chloride (mg/L) 7 Total Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 8 Calcium Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 9 Magnesium Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3)

10 Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 11 Sulphate (mg/L) 12 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 13 Total Solids (mg/L) 14 Total Suspended Solids(mg/L) 15 Copper (µg/L) 16 Zinc (µg/L) 17 Chromium (µg/L)

4.2.3 Results of River Model

The samples have been analyzed by adopting the procedures prescribed by Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater published by APHA, AWWA and WER. The results obtained are presented in Table no. 11.

Heavy metal concentration in the samples has been determined by subjecting the samples to Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer – Perkin Elmer Model No. Analyst 400 at Gujarat Energy Research & Management Institute, Gandhinagar as the concentration of the same was expected to remain very low due to extremely small contact time between flowing water and immersed idol.



July 2016

Page 20 of 40


Table no 11: Results of analysis of Water Samples for River Model.

DATE 25/06/2014 26/06/2014 27/06/2014 30/06/2014 01-07-2014 02-07-2014

Parameters Raw water

Sample : 1

Sample : 2

Sample : 3

Sample : 4

Sample : 5

Sample : 6

Sample : 7

Sample : 8

Sample : 9

Sample : 10

Sample : 11

pH 7.2 7.2 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.4 7.3 7.2 Turbidity NTU 0 1.43 0.1 0 14.8 33.5 9.97 7.44 15.7 5.05 10.75 23.4 Color CU 0 0 0 0 9.5 10.7 2.3 0 1.8 0 0 9.4 COD mg/L 10 20 20 20 20 40 20 80 70 60 100 60 DO mg/L 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.5 7.4 7.3 7.5 7.3 7.2 7.1 7 7.2 Chloride mg/L 630 600 580 570 580 570 580 580 580 560 550 540 Total Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 250 300 250 250 300 300 250 200 250 250 250 200 Ca+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 200 150 150 150 200 200 150 150 150 150 150 150 Mg+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 50 200 100 100 100 100 100 50 100 100 100 50 Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 150 180 180 180 190 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 Sulphate mg/L 48 96 48 48 96 96 48 48 48 48 48 48 Potassium mg/L 13.4 13.8 13 15 13.8 13.5 13 13.07 13.6 12.6 12.5 12.5 Silica mg/L 20.1 22 19.4 19.2 20.7 20.2 19.5 19.6 20.4 19 18.7 18.8 Sodium mg/L 384 380 366 360 370 360 366 389 366 352 347 363 Measured TDS mg/L 1390 1300 1170 1180 1360 1320 1270 1210 1190 1150 1250 1210



July 2016

Page 21 of 40


Table no 11: Results of analysis of Water Samples for River Model. (cont’d)

DATE 03-07-2014 04-07-2014 05-07-2014 06-07-2014 08-07-2014

Parameters Sample : 12

Sample : 13

Sample : 14

Sample : 15

Sample : 16

Sample : 17

Sample : 18

Sample : 19

Sample : 20

Sample : 21

pH 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.2 7.4 Turbidity NTU 19.1 27.9 16.9 27.6 31.7 27.6 62.1 54.1 13.4 11.9 Color CU 2 31 1 2.8 7.9 5 12.3 4.4 3.7 4.3 COD mg/L 60 50 40 20 40 20 20 20 40 180 DO mg/L 7.3 7.2 7.4 7.4 7.2 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3 Chloride mg/L 550 570 530 560 570 570 510 500 500 490 Total Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 200 250 200 200 250 250 300 300 300 300 Ca+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 150 200 150 150 150 150 200 200 200 200 Mg+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 180 200 180 180 180 190 200 200 200 180 Sulphate mg/L 48 96 48 48 48 48 96 96 96 96 Potassium mg/L 12.6 13.8 14 12.7 12.8 13 13.8 13 12.6 12.2 Silica mg/L 18.9 20.8 20.8 19 19.2 19.5 20.7 19.5 19 18.3 Sodium mg/L 370 392 357 375 360 365 330 324 324 308 Measured TDS mg/L 1200 1380 1380 1350 1250 1290 1320 1370 1370 1300



July 2016

Page 22 of 40


Table no. 11: Results of analysis of Water Samples for River Model. (cont’d)

DATE 09-07-2014 10-07-2014 11-07-2014 15-07-2014 16-07-2014

Parameters Sample : 22

Sample : 23

Sample : 24

Sample : 25

Sample : 26

Sample : 27

Sample : 28

Sample : 29 Sample : 30

pH 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.4 7.3 Turbidity NTU 13.1 10.44 22.5 9.91 64.4 49.8 35.7 30.3 39.7 Color CU 1.9 1 6 5.4 16.8 20.5 14.6 12.3 15.2 COD mg/L 20 20 20 20 20 40 20 40 40 DO mg/L 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.4 Chloride mg/L 500 480 580 580 580 580 580 580 580 Total Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 Ca+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 200 200 250 200 200 200 200 200 200 Mg+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 100 100 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 200 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180 Sulphate mg/L 96 96 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 Potassium mg/L 12.6 12.4 14.8 14.8 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 Silica mg/L 19.6 18.6 22.3 22.3 22.1 22.1 22.1 22.1 22.1 Sodium mg/L 324 301 398 398 389 389 389 389 389 Measured TDS mg/L 1360 1290 1390 1400 1400 1390 1370 1380 1360



July 2016

Page 23 of 40


Table no. 11: Results of analysis of Water Samples for River Model. (cont’d)

DATE 09-07-2014 10-07-2014 11-07-2014 15/7/2014

Sampling time 2.00 PM

5.00 PM 2.00 PM 5.00

PM 2.00 PM

5.00 PM

2.00 PM

5.00 PM

Parameters pH 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.4 Turbidity NTU 13.1 10.44 22.5 9.91 64.4 49.8 35.7 30.3 Color CU 1.9 1 6 5.4 16.8 20.5 14.6 12.3 COD mg/L 20 20 20 20 20 40 20 40 DO mg/L 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.4 Chloride mg/L 500 480 580 580 580 580 580 580 Total Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 Ca+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 40 40 50 50 50 50 50 50 Mg+2 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 20 20 10 10 10 10 10 10 Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 200 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 Sulphate mg/L 105 105 135 135 135 135 135 135 Potassium mg/L 13.1 12.4 14.8 14.8 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 Silica mg/L 19.6 18.6 22.3 22.3 22.1 22.1 22.1 22.1 Sodium mg/L 439 416 504 504 495 495 495 495



July 2016

Page 24 of 40


4.3 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP FOR SEA MODEL

As discussed in Section 3, the study has been carried out with idol immersion in sea water collected from sea coast of city Jamnagar, Gujarat. The sea water was collected near sea shore where the idols are likely to be immersed/dumped. The other conditions namely to and fro movement of the water and the intensity of mixing could not be created although different options like using static mixers, creating waves using compressed air etc were evaluated but were found to be infeasible.

Idols of different sizes were immersed in sea water. Details of idols and tanks are shown at Plate no: 6.The water level in the tank was maintained by adding the sea water (collected from the same source) as it was observed that with passage of time, the water level was falling due to evaporation. This was done to determine the quality changes because of idol dissolution and not because of evaporation which would otherwise have increased the concentration

Plate no. 6: Idols Immersed in Models of Sea



July 2016

Page 25 of 40


4.3.1 Sampling Program For Sea Model

The water samples have been collected at regular intervals as per the sampling program, developed to monitor the changes in the water quality after the immersion of idols. The sampling program has been presented in Table no. 12.

Table no. 12 : The Water Sampling Program for Sea Model

Routine Parameters Routine Parameters & Heavy Metals

24/12/2014 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 29/12/2014 3/1/2015 3/1/2015 8/1/2015 8/1/2015 13/1/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 28/1/2015 2/2/2015 2/2/2015 7/2/2015 7/2/2015 12/2/2015 12/2/2015

4.3.2 Water Quality Parameters Analyzed For Sea Model

Considering the raw materials used in making of idols (both, with paint and without paint) and with reference to Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) guidelines for idol immersions, the samples have been analyzed for the identified water quality parameters are presented in Table no.13.



July 2016

Page 26 of 40


Table no. 13: Water Quality Parameters Analyzed for Sea Model

Sr. No. Parameters 1 pH 2 COD (mg/L) 3 DO (mg/L) 4 BOD (mg/L) 5 Oil and grease (mg/L) 6 Chloride (mg/L) 7 Total Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 8 Calcium Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 9 Magnesium Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3)

10 Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 11 Sulphate (mg/L) 12 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 13 Total Solids (mg/L) 14 Total Suspended Solids(mg/L) 15 Copper (µg/L) 16 Zinc (µg/L) 17 Chromium (µg/L) 18 Strontium (mg/L) 19 Sodium (mg/L) 20 Potassium (mg/L)

4.3.3 Results Of Sea Model:

The samples have been analyzed by adopting the procedures prescribed by Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater published by APHA, AWWA and WER. The results obtained are presented in Table no.14 through 17 .



July 2016

Page 27 of 40


Table no. 14: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-1 (2.8 Kg) of Sea Model Sr. No.

Parameters 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 03/01/2015 08/01/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 02/02/2015 07/2/2015 12/02/2015

1 pH 7.81 7.79 7.71 7.68 7.62 7.61 7.6 7.6 7.59 7.59 7.59

2 Total Solids (mg/L)

36360 37730 37790 37436 38310 38440 38590 38750 39130 39390 39860

3 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)

35320 36660 36700 36900 37100 37200 37300 37440 37780 38000 38470

4 Total Suspended Solids (mg/L)

1040 1070 1090 1036 1210 1240 1290 1310 1350 1390 1390

5 DO (mg/L) 5.1 5 5 4.9 4.9 4.9 5 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6

6 COD (mg/L)

1190 1211 1280 1323 1350 1370 1380 1360 1375 1390 1390

7 BOD (mg/L)

160 180 180 190 180 185 185 185 190 190 260

8 O & G (mg/L)

10 11 11.5 11.5 11.8 12 12 12 12 13.8 14

9 Chloride (mg/L)

21400 22010 22080 22110 22470 22560 22600 22620 22890 23000 23210

10 Sulphate (mg/L)

2800 2900 2910 2925 2940 2950 2956 2960 2980 3012 3020

11 Total Hardness AS CaCO3 (mg/L)

8340 8660 8670 8700 8760 8780 8800 8840 8928 8935 8960



July 2016

Page 28 of 40


Table no. 14: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-1 (2.8 Kg) of Sea Model ( continued..)

Sr. No.

Parameters 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 03/01/2015 08/01/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 02/02/2015 07/2/2015 12/02/2015

12 Calcium as Ca++ (mg/L)

488 510 515 520 525 528 530 532 533 536 536

13 Magnesium as Mg++ (mg/L)

1780 1850 1860 1870 1875 1880 1885 1886 1888 1891 1900

14 Stronsium as Sr++ (mg/L)

96 99 99.1 99.3 100 101 102 102.5 102.5 103 104

15 Copper (µg/L)

20 20.5 20.5 21 21 21.1 21.1 21.2 21.2 21.2 21.2

16 Chromium (µg/L)

5.45 5.55 5.6 5.66 5.67 5.66 5.66 5.66 5.68 5.67 5.68

17 Zinc (µg/L) 6.42 6.48 6.5 6.61 6.7 6.82 6.75 6.76 6.78 6.79 6.8 18 Total

Alklinity (mg/L)as CaCO3

160 160 155 153 168 169 170 170 172 171 174

19 Sodium (mg/L)

10625 11030 11050 11110 11160 11190 11220 11235 11340 11430 11480

20 Pottasium (mg/L)

390 400 410 415 418 420 410 418 418 419 430



July 2016

Page 29 of 40


Table no. 15: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-2 ( 3 Kg) of Sea Model Sr. No.

Parameters 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 3/01/2015 08/01/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 02/02/2015 07/02/2015 12/2/2015

1 pH 7.81 7.78 7.72 7.7 7.7 7.69 7.68 7.67 7.61 7.5 7.48


36360 37630 37970 37940 38170 38250 38370 38560 38910 37940 39590


35320 36540 36580 36770 36980 37030 37120 37250 37520 37800 38120


1040 1090 1120 1170 1190 1220 1250 1310 1390 1420 1470

5 DO (mg/L) 5.1 5.1 5 5 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.7

6 COD (mg/L)

1190 1280 1290 1310 1340 1380 1400 1400 1390 1395 1395

7 BOD (mg/L)

160 170 170 175 170 175 170 170 175 175 190

8 O & G (mg/L)

10 11 11 11.5 11 11 11 11 11 11 12

9 Chloride (mg/L)

21400 22130 22230 22280 22400 22430 22490 22570 22730 22900 23020

10 Sulphate (mg/L)

2800 2890 2920 2925 2931 2935 2942 2950 2960 2990 3020



July 2016

Page 30 of 40


11 Total Hardness as CaCO3 (mg/L)

8340 8625 8700 8720 8735 8740 8765 8795 8860 8925 8970

Table no. 15: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-2 ( 3 Kg) of Sea Model (continued…)

Sr. No.

Parameters 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 3/01/2015 08/01/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 02/02/2015 07/02/2015 12/2/2015

12 Calcium as Ca++ (mg/L)

481 495 500 570 515 518 519 522 526 530 550


1780 1840 1850 1860 1865 1867 1870 1880 1885 1890 1920


96 99 100 100.5 100.8 100.9 100 101 101 101 103

15 Copper (µg/L)

20 20.7 21 21.1 21.3 21.4 21.4 21.4 21.4 21.4 21.4

16 Chromium (µg/L)

6.1 6.3 6.35 6.38 6.4 6.42 6.45 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5

17 Zinc (µg/L) 6.7 6.9 6.92 6.99 7 7.1 7.11 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 18 Total

Alklinity (mg/L)as CaCO3

160 165 167 168 168 169 169 170 170 175 180

19 Sodium (mg/L)

10625 10990 11085 11095 11125 11140 11170 11205 11290 11370 11430

20 Pottasium (mg/L)

390 405 406 408 409 411 415 418 420 425 435



July 2016

Page 31 of 40


Table no. 16: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-3 (2.8 Kg) of Sea Model Sr. No.

Parameters 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 03/01/2015 08/01/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 02/02/2015 07/2/2015 12/2/2015

1 pH 7.81 7.79 7.72 7.67 7.61 7.6 7.6 6.9 6.8 6.6 6.35


36360 37710 37710 37930 38320 38420 38590 38728 39152 39490 39930


35320 36650 36690 36900 37110 37180 37300 37420 37800 38010 38160


1040 1060 1100 1030 1210 1240 1290 1308 1352 1380 1470

5 DO (mg/L) 5.1 5.1 5 5 4.9 4.8 4.9 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.5

6 COD (mg/L)

1190 1211 1280 1323 1350 1370 1380 1370 1360 1375 1375

7 BOD (mg/L)

160 180 185 190 195 200 210 220 230 240 250

8 O & G (mg/L)

10 11 11 12 12 12.5 13 13.5 13.5 14 14

9 Chloride (mg/L)

21400 22000 22230 22360 22480 22520 22600 22670 22900 23000 23120

10 Sulphate (mg/L)

2800 2900 2910 2925 2940 2947 2960 2966 2990 3000 3030



July 2016

Page 32 of 40


Table no. 16: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-3 (2.8 Kg) of Sea Model (continued..)

Sr. No.

Parameters

24/12/2014 29/12/2014 03/01/2015 08/01/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 02/02/2015 07/2/2015 12/2/2015 11 Total

Hardness as CaCO3 (mg/L)

8340 8650 8665 8710 8760 8780 8805 8835 8900 8920 8950

12 Calcium AS Ca++ (mg/L)

488 500 506 509 510 512 515 517 520 525 540


1780 1840 1851 1860 1870 1875 1880 1890 1905 1908 1910


96 99 99.2 99.4 99.3 99.3 99.4 99.4 99.9 102 105

15 Copper (µg/L)

20 20.7 20.75 20.8 20.81 20.88 20.83 20.83 21 21.1 21.3

16 Chromium (µg/L)

5.45 5.6 5.62 5.64 5.65 5.66 5.66 5.66 5.68 5.68 5.9

17 Zinc (µg/L) 6.42 6.6 6.61 6.62 6.64 6.66 6.65 6.65 6.66 6.68 6.7 18 Total

Alklinity (mg/L)

160 166 166 167 167 168 169 170 171 173 175

19 Sodium (mg/L)

10627 11020 11040 11102 11165 11190 11220 11260 11370 11395 11490

20 Pottasium (mg/L)

390 400 405 407 406 407 407 407 408 412 420



July 2016

Page 33 of 40


Table no. 17: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-4 (3 Kg) of Sea Model

Sr. No.

Parameters 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 3/1/2015 8/1/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 2/2/2015 7/2/2015 12/2/2015

1 pH 7.81 7.78 7.69 7.51 7.48 7.31 6.91 6.78 6.58 6.59 6.68 2 Total Solids

(mg/L) 36360 37690 36590 36770 36990 37040 37110 37240 37520 37800 38120


35320 36620 38330 39580 40800 41090 41510 42080 42800 43300 43700


1040 1070 1120 1170 1190 1310 1320 1340 1350 1370 1500

5 DO (mg/L) 5.1 5 4.9 4.9 5 5 4.9 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.5 6 COD (mg/L) 1190 1290 1290 1310 1340 1390 1410 1400 1410 1400 1410

7 BOD (mg/L) 160 170 175 175 180 180 200 210 220 240 260 8 O & G (mg/L) 10 11 12 12.5 13 14 14.5 15 15 15 15 9 Chloride(mg/L)

21400 21650 22170 22280 22410 22440 22480 22560 22740 22810 23000

10 Sulphate (mg/L) 2800 2830 2900 2915 2930 2940 2945 2950 2980 2990 3020

11 Total Hardness as CaCO3 (mg/L)

8340 8440 8640 8680 8730 8750 8760 8790 8800 8910 9000

12 Calcium as Ca++ (mg/L) 488 490 505 508 510 511 515 516 518 525 530

13 Magnesium as Mg++ (mg/L) 1780 1800 1840 1850 1865 1870 1875 1876 1890 1900 1920



July 2016

Page 34 of 40


Table no. 17: Results of Water Analysis for Tank-4 (3 Kg) of Sea Model (continued…)

Sr. No.

Parameters 24/12/2014 29/12/2014 3/1/2015 8/1/2015 13/1/2015 19/1/2015 23/1/2015 28/1/2015 2/2/2015 7/2/2015 12/2/2015

14 Stronsium as Sr++ (mg/L) 96 97 99 100 100 100 100 102 103 103 104

15 Copper (µg/L) 20 20.2 20.7 21 21.1 21.3 21.5 21.5 21.6 21.7 22

16 Chromium (µg/L) 5.6 5.64 5.65 5.66 5.67 5.68 5.69 5.9 5.92 5.95 6

17 Zinc (µg/L) 5.8 5.84 5.85 5.9 5.95 6 6.1 6.1 6.15 6.2 6.3 18 Total Alklinity

(mg/L) asCaCO3

160 161 162 164 165 166 168 168 169 170 170

19 Sodium (mg/L) 10725 10820 11150 11165 11230 11250 11270 11390 11410 11440 11510 20 Pottasium

(mg/L) 390 393 405 408 410 410 412 415 418 419 420



July 2016

Page 35 of 40


5.0 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS:

Based on the results presented at Section 4 and personal observations during the experimental period following observations and conclusions are drawn.

5.1 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS FOR LAKE:

I. The idols made up of POP are painted with different types of synthetic paints. The general

information collected from the idol makers indicate that most of the paints used are water

based. Except, in certain cases oil and acrylic paints are used.

II. The gradual change in apparent appearances of water was observed during the study period

primarily due to peeling of paints.

III. Apparently no change in the idol shape was observed during initial period of 30 days.

However perforations were observed in the idol, indicating disintegration.

IV. The results presented at Table no: 4 to 8 indicate that:

a) There is continuous increase in concentration of calcium and sulphate as anticipated

indicating the leaching of calcium and sulphate.

b) Calcium increased from 567 mg/L to 2325 mg/L in tank no:1, from 300 mg/L to 2249 mg/L

in tank no:2, from 280 mg/L to 2217 mg/L in tank no:3, from 268 mg/L to 2196 mg/L in

tank no:4,from 205 mg/L to 2234 mg/L in tank no:5 in 37 days.

c) Sulfate increased from 545 mg/L to 1712 mg/L tank no:1, from 228 mg/L to 1568 mg/L in

tank no:2,from 284 mg/L to 1444 mg/L in tank no:4, from 251 mg/L to 1536 mg/L in tank

no:5 in 30 days after which it decreased and then again increased up to 37 days.

d) Alkalinity varies slightly.

e) An increase in TDS was observed from 1582 mg/L to 3868 mg/L in tank no:1, 1022 mg/L to

3668 mg/L in tank no: 2, 1056 mg/L to 3814 mg/L in tank no:3, 1036 mg/L to 3779 mg/L in

tank no:4, 1178 mg/L to 3576 mg/L in tank no:5.

f) COD increased from;

i. 33 mg/L to 80 mg/L in 10 days then reduced to 0 to 30th day and again increased to 64.

mg/L till on 48th days in tank no: 1.

ii. Increased from 30 to 86.4 mg/L in 10 days reduced to 0 on 22nd day and again increased to

73.6 mg/L on 28th day in tank no:2.



July 2016

Page 36 of 40


iii. Increased from 28 mg/L to 72 mg/L in 5 days, reduced to 0 in 22nd day and again increased

to 82.8 mg/L on 48th day in tank no:3.

iv. Increased from 32 mg/L to 90 mg/L in 10days, reduced to 0 in 22nd day and again increased

to 50 mg/L on 37th day in tank no:4.

v. Increased from 28 mg/L to 86 mg/L in 10days, reduced to 0 in 25th day and again increased

to 36.8 mg/L on 48th day in tank no:5.

g) The increase in COD up to 10th day seems to release solvents from paints however the increase later on is due to the growth of algae.

h) Chloride concentration in the POP Powder analyzed was negligible. Hence the parameter has not been analyzed.

i) Heavy metals could be detected in water from 15th day onwards in all tanks. j) The concentration of zinc and lead indicated increase with passage of time however copper

and chromium were not observed.

5.2 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS FOR RIVER :


information collected from the idol makers indicate that most of the paints used are water based.

Except, in certain cases oil and acrylic paints are used.

II. The gradual change in apparent appearances of water was observed during the study period

primarily due to peeling of paints.

III. The colour of the idol started to peeling off on the 3rd day after immersion while considerable

amount of color was observed to be removed on 6th day. Most of the colour from all the idols

was peeled off after 11 days of immersion.

IV. A portion of idol was chipped off on 5th day of observation while break down of idol was

observed within 10 days.

V. The results presented at Table no: 11 indicate that:

Although the water quality parameter values increase in concentration with the passage of time,

however there is no consistency in the increase as is observed in case of Lake. This is expectedly

so as the contact time of water with idol is very very small and therefore the change in water

quality is dependent on the degree of the deterioration of the idol which is different on different

days.



July 2016

Page 37 of 40


a) Although the Sulfate concentration increases with the passage of time, however there is no

consistency in the increase which is expectedly true considering that the

leaching/deterioration of the idol is erratic. Maximum contribution to Sulfate concentration by

the immersed idols works out to be 144 – 48 = 96 mg/L. the maximum sulfate concentration

occurring on 13th day onwards.

b) There is no significant increase in Alkalinity.

c) The TDS value shows fluctuating trend increasing slightly up to 13th day then after it increases

by 10 mg/L.

d) Like other parameters COD also fluctuates on different days depending on the degree of

deterioration of the idol leading to removal of the color (peeling off of the paint) with

maximum value reaching 180 mg/L on 11th day. In between it also touches 80 mg/L and

100 mg/L on 4th and 6th day respectively.

e) Chloride concentration in the POP Powder analyzed was negligible. Hence the parameter has

not been analyzed.

f) Heavy metals could be detected in small concentrations. The Copper (from 0.112 to 0.301

mg/L) and Chromium (0.016 mg/L) were detected in small concentrations while the Zinc was

not observed.

5.3 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS FOR SEA:


information collected from the idol makers indicate that most of the paints used are water based.

Except, in certain cases oil and acrylic paints are used.

II. The gradual change in apparent appearances of water was observed during the study period.

However an oily layer was observed on water surface on 25th day onwards.

III. On the 5th day the colour was observed to be slightly peeling off.

IV.The results presented at Table no:14 to 17 indicate that:

a) There is continuous increase in concentration of calcium and sulphate as anticipated

indicating the leaching of calcium and sulphate.



July 2016

Page 38 of 40


b) Calcium increased from 488 mg/L to536 mg/L in tank no:1, from 481 mg/L to 550 mg/L in

tank no:2, from 488 mg/L to 540 mg/L in tank no:3, from 488 mg/L to 530 mg/L in tank no:4

in 56 days.

c) Sulfate increased from 2800 mg/L to 3020 mg/L tank no:1, from 2800 mg/L to 3020 mg/L in

tank no:2,from 2800 mg/L to 3030 mg/L in tank no:3, from 2800 mg/L to 3021 mg/L in tank

no:4 in 56 days.

d) Alkalinity varied slightly.

e) An increase in TDS was observed from 35320 mg/L to 38470 mg/L in tank no:1, 35320 to

38120 mg/L in tank no: 2, 35320 mg/L to 38160 mg/L in tank no:3, 35320 mg/L to 38120

mg/L in tank no:4 in 56 days.

f) COD increased from;

i. 1190 mg/L to 1490 mg/L in 56 days in tank no: 1.

ii. 1190 mg/L to 1460 mg/L in 56 days in tank no:2.

iii. 1190 mg/L to 1460 mg/L in 56 days in tank no:3.

iv. 1190 mg/L to 1480 mg/L in 56 days in tank no:4.

g) No significant change in COD was observed during the study period.

h) The presence of heavy metals has been observed in sea water itself. Heavy metals namely

copper, zinc and chromium have been analysed during the study period . The results indicate

that:

i. Zinc increased from 6.42 to 6.8 µg/L in tank 1, from 6.7 to 7.1 µg/L in tank 2 , from 6.42 to

6.7 µg/L in tank 3 and from 5.8 to 6.3 µg/L in tank 4 upto 50th day.

ii. Chromium increased from 5.45 µg/L to 5.68 µg/L in tank 1, from on 30th day and then after it

remained constant up to 56th day.

iii. Copper increased from 0.05 µg/L to 0.69 µg/L on 15th day and then after remained practically

constant.



July 2016

Page 39 of 40


6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

Based on observations presented at Section 5, following suggestions/recommendations have been arrived at:

[A] Observations: 1.It has been observed that water quality changes vary with the type of water body where idols

are immersed depending on the receiving water body quality as well as hydraulic conditions.

2.The disintegrations of the POP idols is faster in fresh water as compared to the sea water.

3.Significant changes as discussed at Section 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 , were observed in the simulated studies for lake and river for parameters Calcium, Sulphates, TDS and COD during initial period of immersion . However the changes in sea water quality for corresponding period were comparatively insignificant . For example, COD was observed to be four times than the original in case of lake water.

The river model behaved differently as sudden increase inCOD is observed on the 10th day. This may be attributed to the abrasion of the idols caused by the peeling off and sudden release of the paint in particular. However in case of sea water , COD increases gradually due to slow or retarded disintegration of the idols.This may be attributed to lower abrasion as well as due to chemical saturation.(High TDS).

[B] Recommendations: 1.If the immersed idols are removed within 24 hours of immersion , the water quality changes

can be prevented.

2.It is suggested to replace the use of paints and other chemicals with decorative cloth , removable and washable for beautification of idols.

3.In metropolitan cities where number of idols is more , it shall be the responsibility of local authority to construct artificial, temporary ponds with liner system for immersion of idols. The directions shall be given to local authority to remove all the idols within 3 days of immersion and disposed off suitably. The collected water in the ponds shall be discharged in to the public sewers leading to the Sewage Treatment Plant.



July 2016

Page 40 of 40


4.For rural areas , it is recommended that only idols with cloth shall be permitted for immersion with a condition that the clothes are removed prior to immersion. The local body shall be directed to remove idols within three days of immersion.

5.Steps shall be taken to develop market system whereby manufacturers themselves can buy back the idols maybe through auction(s) organized by local body.

Documents

1.0. INTRODUCTION - Gujarat